Abstract
Purpose of Review
Cancers of colorectal origin are the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the USA, and with the improvements in chemotherapy and other therapeutic modalities, there are more options for the management of metastatic disease. The liver is the most common site of colorectal metastasis, and treating the disease to the liver may lead to prolonged survival and possible cure. Our understanding of tumor biology and the refinement of surgical techniques have resulted in significantly improved outcomes. The treatment of colorectal liver metastasis is complex and thus requires a multidisciplinary approach.
Recent Findings
There is increasing body of literature that points towards more aggressively selective and personalized surgical treatment of colorectal cancer liver metastases. New techniques like hepatic artery infusion, liver chemoperfusion, operative and transcutaneous liver ablation with microwave, radiofrequency or irreversible electroporation have resulted in significantly improved outcomes.
Summary
There is significant progress in the surgical management of liver metastasis of colorectal origin, with improved outcomes in patients that otherwise would be candidates only for palliative chemotherapy. More and exciting research is underway in order to appreciate the impact of newer techniques.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Liver metastases pose a therapeutic challenge in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC), which is the third most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the USA, with an estimated 140,000 new cases and 51,000 deaths in 2018 [1]. About 21% of patients with CRC will present with distant metastases, and despite the favorable outcomes for localized and regional disease (89.8% and 71.1% 5-year survival respectively), the 5-year survival for metastatic disease is about 14% [2]. However, 50% of the patients with metastatic disease have liver only disease that may be amenable to therapeutic intervention. Historically, chemotherapy had been the mainstay of treatment of colorectal liver metastases, but in the past few years, it has been shown that resection or application of any other therapeutic modality (hepatic artery infusion pump, liver chemoperfusion, tumor ablation with radiofrequency/microwaves/cryoablation, tumor embolization, chemoembolization, radioembolization, and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT)) confers significant survival advantage. Liver resection has shown the best results, with 34–49% 5-year and 17–34% 10-year survival [3, 4•, 5]. In this review, we will elaborate on recent advances in the field of treatment of CRC liver metastasis.
Surgical Treatment Options: √
Modern chemotherapy has resulted in improved response rates, thus allowing patients who were otherwise unresectable an option for liver-directed therapy. These liver-directed therapies include surgical options (metastasectomies, hepatic artery infusion pump, liver chemoperfusion, and ablative techniques, such as radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, irreversible electroporation, and cryoablation), and non-surgical options (chemoembolization, radioembolization, and radiotherapy with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT)). It is obvious that a single technique or a combination of techniques may be used for the optimal result, thus the need for a multidisciplinary team approach.
Resection
Since the 1980s, it was understood that resection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer was able to improve patients outcomes. Initial studies reported that patients, who had their liver metastases resected, were able to achieve 5-year survival of up to 38% [6, 7]. Unfortunately, at that time, liver resection was neither widespread nor popular, because of the associated high morbidity and a mortality that was up to 13% in the 70s and 5% in the 80s. The improvement of anesthetic drugs (Propofol was approved for use in 1989) along with advancement in imaging for preoperative planning, including the evolution of CT liver volumetrics for the calculation of the future liver remnant volume (the algorithm was first described in 1986 [8]), has made liver surgery safer. Furthermore, development of enhanced surgical techniques and the need for negative margin resections [9], parenchyma-sparing resections, low central venous pressure surgery [10], advanced parenchyma transection techniques [11], two-stage hepatic resections, liver partition, and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) [12, 13]), have improved surgical outcomes.
The addition of neoadjuvant (conversion) chemotherapy, in the sense of converting unresectable cases to resectable [14], has expanded the pool of potential surgical candidates and helped achieve R0 resection rates up to 60% [15]. For purposes of downstaging, apart from conversion systemic chemotherapy, liver-directed chemotherapy with hepatic arterial infusional chemotherapy has shown promising results, albeit it is not widely available [16•]. With all these advances in cancer care, it is not surprising that the median overall survival for patients with colorectal liver metastasis has more than doubled from 14.2 months, in patient diagnosed between 1990 and 1997, to 29.3 months in patients that were diagnosed between 2004 and 2006 [17].
Preoperative Considerations
Patient selection is paramount for any surgical procedure, and in order to be able to achieve optimal results safely, tumor resectability and patient fitness have to be established. Because of improved perioperative services and minimally invasive procedures, treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer, including liver resection, can be safely offered in older patients although careful preoperative planning with a multidisciplinary approach is strongly recommended [18].
Due to the early poor results, patients with more than 4 liver metastases were not advised to undergo resection [19, 20], but newer data have demonstrated that the number of liver lesions does not preclude resectability, since median survival may reach up to 50 months in patients with 4 or fewer liver lesions, but can be up to 32 months for patient with multiple metastases [21], with 5-year survival range between 23 and 51% [22,23,24,25].
The question of resectability becomes less of a technical and more of a biological issue in the presence of extrahepatic disease. Similarly to disease confined to the liver, resection of liver metastasis in the presence of extrahepatic disease had initially shown poor results, to the extent it was contraindicated [26,27,28]. However, with improved understanding of the biology of the disease, and careful preoperative planning, such that all the disease can be excised, some patients may be candidates for therapeutic resection. Patients with two specific areas of extrahepatic colorectal metastases: peritoneal cavity and lungs are also potential surgical candidates. Attempts of resection of both hepatic and extrahepatic disease, regardless of the area of extrahepatic disease involvement (peritoneum, lung, local recurrence, distal and hepatic lymph nodes, ovaries, striatus muscle, adrenal, small bowel, surgical wound, pancreas), have shown promising results as a proof of principle for solitary or very low-volume lesions, with 5-year survival 28% for extrahepatic disease vs 34% liver only disease [29]. With the advent of peritoneal cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis, more studies are currently conducted to answer the question about the concurrent resection of liver and intraperitoneal colorectal metastases, but the ongoing results from case series and retrospective studies so far are encouraging, showing that, in principle, resectable low-volume hepatic disease in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal primary lesions should not be considered an absolute contraindication for CRS/HIPEC procedures. Although the survival benefit for patients with both liver involvement and peritoneal carcinomatosis is less prominent than the benefit for patients with liver disease alone, the median overall survival for these patients with resectable disease both in the liver and peritoneum can extend from 21.1 to 32.5 months, making such efforts meaningful [30,31,32,33]. Apparently, more prospective randomized studies will be required on this topic, but the results so far have been promising.
Similar results are observed in carefully selected patients with concomitant liver and lung colorectal metastases: With resection of disease at both liver and lung, with either order of resection (lung first, or liver first), the overall disease-specific survival can be up to 31% in 5 years and 19% in 10 years [34]. However, resection of liver lesions in the presence of subcentimeter lung lesions does not seem to impact the 3-year disease-specific survival (70% in the presence of subcentimeter lung nodule vs. 83% in the absence of suncentimeter lung nodule; p = 0.46) [35].
In terms of predicting long-term survival, several models have been proposed [36, 37], taking into account parameters like age, size of largest metastasis, CEA level; nodal status and stage of the primary tumor; disease-free interval; number of liver nodules; and resection margin, of primary, but their validation has been controversial [38]. Lately, there is an increasing body of literature that focuses on the biological features of the colorectal metastasis to the liver: it seems that patients with Kras and Braf mutations have a strong association with worse prognosis, which provides a good indicator in the selection of patients for resection of metastatic disease [39, 40].
Technical Considerations
Open resection is the current golden standard for colorectal liver metastasectomy, which can be achieved either through a midline or a right subcostal/hockey stick incision. Modern imaging modalities are very good in identifying extrahepatic disease, although it is not uncommon that some small extrahepatic disease may evade the detection threshold of preoperative imaging, although it has been shown that a diagnostic laparoscopy prior to the planned hepatectomy has a yield of 5% and the sensitivity 75% [41].
In terms of the presence of primary disease along with the liver metastasis of colorectal origin (synchronous liver metastasis), there are three operative options: either staged procedures, with hepatectomy first and primary tumor second, or the opposite, with primary tumor first and hepatectomy second, and lastly, as a single-stage operation. Although a staged operation can be favored in many cases (rectal cancer—to allow for neoadjuvant chemoradiation for the rectal primary [42], small future liver remnant—to allow for time for the future liver remnant to grow [12], downstaging neoadjuvant chemotherapy to allow for a smaller liver resection [14]), a single-stage operation seems to be gaining favor among both patients and surgeons [43•]. In terms of short-term outcomes, there are no significant differences among the three operative approaches [44], so the treatment may be tailored to each patient individually for the best desired outcome [45•].
The advent of minimally invasive techniques in surgery has also influenced liver surgery. Since the Louisville Statement in 2008, which involves guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery drafted by an expert panel [46], laparoscopic liver resections have been increasingly performed. Although there is a lack of randomized clinical trials, evidence from case series, or case–control studies show that laparoscopic surgery in resecting synchronous colorectal liver metastasis has not proven to be inferior to the open approach, having comparable postoperative time, morbidity, and long-term oncologic outcomes (overall and disease-free survival) [47,48,49].
Using the robotic platform and the newest technology, more and more surgeons are preforming complex hepatobiliary operations, including major hepatectomies. The robotic technique combines the benefits of laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery (less intraoperative blood loss, decreased postoperative pain, smaller wounds with similar long-term outcomes) with the greater visualization, using high-definition 3D, binocular vision with high magnification, enhanced dexterity, and greater precision that the robotic arms allow, having almost 360o degrees of movement [50]. Many centers are reporting feasibility of performing even the most complex liver resections robotically, with improvement in short-term outcomes compared with laparoscopic or open technique [51, 52, 53•, 54]. Since the robotic approach is still developing, being relatively new, there are no data regarding long-term outcomes, and more studies are required to validate it in comparison with laparoscopic and open approaches.
Hepatic Artery Infusion
The application of conversion chemotherapy has widened the patient selection criteria for resection of hepatic colorectal metastases. Hepatic artery infusion is a novel and effective way to deliver high-dose chemotherapy directly to the liver, while avoiding the burden of systemic chemotherapy side effects. Implantable arterial infusion pump systems were described in the early 1970s [55] and were first used for cancer treatment in 1980 [56]. Since then, several prospective randomized trials showed a higher response rate in the patients with liver metastases of colorectal cancer that received hepatic artery infusion therapy, compared with systemic chemotherapy [57, 58]. The response rate was so significant (73%) that many patients (47%) with extensive liver disease were able to have liver resection, with 3-year survival of 80% compared with 26% for those who could not undergo resection [59]. Importantly, in a single center’s experience, with 2368 consecutive patients who underwent complete resection of colorectal liver metastases, the patients who had received hepatic artery infusion therapy versus the ones who had not, had median overall survival 67 months versus 44 months, respectively, and overall survival 38% versus 23.8% in 10 years, respectively [60••]. These data were confirmed with another center that reported median overall survival for patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases, 32.8 months in patients who received hepatic artery chemotherapy with systemic chemotherapy compared with 15.3 months with systemic chemotherapy alone [61]. Additionally, the hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy for unresectable colorectal liver metastases showed better overall survival compared with selective internal radiation therapy with Yttrium-90 radioembolization, with overall survival 31.2 months versus 16.3 months, respectively [62].
Based on these impressive results, it is only natural to combine the short-term beneficial outcomes of the minimally invasive liver surgery with the long-term outcomes of the hepatic artery infusion pumps. Many investigators reported initially laparoscopic [63,64,65] and subsequently robotic [66,67,68] intrahepatic arterial pump placements, that are feasible and safe, with conversion to open rate 17% for the robotic, versus 67% for the laparoscopic cases.
Liver Chemoperfusion
Isolated hepatic perfusion for unresectable liver metastases has emerged as a second-line surgical option for patients who have failed other treatment modalities. It involves the intraoperative isolation and control of the liver inflow (hepatic artery via the gastroduodenal artery) and outflow (hepatic veins via the suprahepatic and infrahepatic vena cava), and the establishment of a venovenous bypass (typically femoral-jugular) via a pump. Subsequently, heated chemotherapy is infused through the liver and gets collected through the already controlled hepatic vena cava, whereas the blood return from the lower body is secured through the femoral-jugular bypass. The largest series of 120 patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases, using melphalan, tumor necrosis factor (TNF) or both as the perfusate, had an objective response rate of 61%, with median overall survival 17.4 months [69]. In a phase I trial of 12 patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases, using fixed-dose oxaliplatin with escalating 5-FU doses, and a median follow-up of 24 months, the median overall survival was not reached for that time [70]. Efforts have been made to minimize the invasiveness of the technique, using a percutaneous system [71], but more clinical trials are warranted to validate this modality.
Ablative Techniques
Initial data regarding resection versus any other tumor destructive technique for the treatment of hepatic colorectal metastases has been in favor of resection, as far as it concerns durable long-term outcomes: In a series of 418 patients, the ones who had undergone resection had 65% 4-year overall survival, versus 36% of the ones that received radiofrequency ablation combined with resection and 22% of the ones with radiofrequency ablation only. At 5 years, only patients that had undergone resection survived at 58% [72]. Similarly, a more recent study demonstrated that resection of colorectal liver metastases was superior than resection plus radiofrequency ablation, with median and 5-year overall survival 75.3 months and 58.7% for resection versus 41.8 months and 37.2% for resection plus radiofrequency ablation [73]. However, when the patients were stratified according to risk factors that were independently associated with decreased overall survival (namely, female gender, primary tumor nodal metastases, right-sided primary tumor, KRAS mutation, CEA ≥ 30 ng/mL, and number of ablative lesion ≥ 3), patients who had low risk (0–1 risk factors) and received resection with radiofrequency ablation had 52.7% 5-year overall survival, comparable with the resection only group, whereas none of the high-risk patients (2–3 risk factors) survive for 5 years. In that case, it is evident that it is the biology, apart from the therapeutic modality, that drives survival in such patients.
More recently though, there is an increased body of literature that claims equal results to resection for colorectal metastases, especially for tumors < 3 cm [74,75,76,77,78]. Additionally, although radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used technique, both operatively and percutaneously, there is increasing interest to microwave ablation, as this technique is less susceptible to the “heat-sink” phenomenon, especially next to large high flowing vessels. Furthermore, there is less charring, causing less heat dissipation, which helps ablate larger areas in less time. Currently, there is only one clinical randomized trial comparing microwave tumor ablation of multiple hepatic metastases from colorectal carcinoma (2–9 tumors) to resection, which showed no statistically significant difference (median survival 27 months in the microwave ablation group versus 25 months to the resection [79]; however, this study included patients that had large tumors (up to 8 cm) and up to 10 lesions. There is an ongoing clinical trial, the Colorectal Liver metastases: Surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION), a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial, for lesion < 3 cm, the results of which may change the field of treatment colorectal liver metastases [80].
Cryoablation has been used in thermal destruction of multiple solid malignancies, including colorectal liver metastases, with comparable with resection reported long-term outcomes, when combined with hepatic resection [81, 82]. When combined with resection, cryoablation has also been used to provide a “handle” to the resection of the frozen tumor, for better maneuverability of the liver parenchyma.
Irreversible electroporation (Nanoknife™) is a non-thermal ablation technique that is causing irreversible damage to the cell membrane with the application of short bursts of electric current, thus causing irreversible permeabilization of the biphospholipid cellular membrane, which leads to cell death [83]. The technique is feasible and safe in treating hepatic metastases of colorectal origin [84]; however, no long-term outcomes exist so far. Based on the success of the technique in other solid malignancies [85], it seems that there may be another tool in our armamentarium for successfully treating colorectal metastases to the liver.
Conclusions
In summary, there is significant progress in the surgical management of liver metastasis of colorectal origin. Resection, either simultaneously with the primary tumor, or staged, currently has the best prognosis, and with the improvement in technique and perioperative care, it can be offered to a larger subset of the patient population. However, newer modalities involving regional liver therapy (hepatic artery infusion pump, liver chemoperfusion, tumor ablation with radiofrequency or microwaves), or a combination of any number of modalities available, have improved outcomes in patients that otherwise would be candidates only for palliative chemotherapy. More and exciting research is underway in order to appreciate the impact of newer techniques.
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Jan;68(1):7–30. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21442.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fedewa SA, Ahnen DJ, Meester RGS, Barzi A, Jemal A. Colorectal cancer statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 May 6;67(3):177–193. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21395.
Tomlinson JS, Jarnagin WR, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, Kornprat P, Gonen M, et al. Actual 10-year survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases defines cure. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(29):4575–80.
• Engstrand J, et al. Colorectal cancer liver metastases - a population-based study on incidence, management and survival. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):78 Large population based registry study of the Swedish National Quality Registry demonstrating the pattern of metastases and survival from metastatic colorectal cancer.
de Jong MC, Pulitano C, Ribero D, Strub J, Mentha G, Schulick RD, et al. Rates and patterns of recurrence following curative intent surgery for colorectal liver metastasis: an international multi-institutional analysis of 1669 patients. Ann Surg. 2009;250(3):440–8.
Hughes KS, et al. Resection of the liver for colorectal carcinoma metastases: a multi-institutional study of patterns of recurrence. Surgery. 1986;100(2):278–84.
Scheele J, Stangl R, Altendorf-Hofmann A. Hepatic metastases from colorectal carcinoma: impact of surgical resection on the natural history. Br J Surg. 1990;77(11):1241–6.
Yang NC, Leichner PK, Fishman EK, Siegelman SS, Frenkel TL, Wallace JR, et al. CT volumetrics of primary liver cancers. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986;10(4):621–8.
Pawlik TM, Scoggins CR, Zorzi D, Abdalla EK, Andres A, Eng C, et al. Effect of surgical margin status on survival and site of recurrence after hepatic resection for colorectal metastases. Ann Surg. 2005;241(5):715–22 discussion 722-4.
Jones RM, Moulton CE, Hardy KJ. Central venous pressure and its effect on blood loss during liver resection. Br J Surg. 1998;85(8):1058–60.
Lesurtel M, Selzner M, Petrowsky H, McCormack L, Clavien PA. How should transection of the liver be performed?: a prospective randomized study in 100 consecutive patients: comparing four different transection strategies. Ann Surg. 2005;242(6):814–22 discussion 822-3.
Cavaness KM, Doyle MBM, Lin Y, Maynard E, Chapman WC. Using ALPPS to induce rapid liver hypertrophy in a patient with hepatic fibrosis and portal vein thrombosis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17(1):207–12.
Govil S. Rapid improvement in liver volume induced by portal vein ligation and staged hepatectomy: the ALPPS procedure. HPB (Oxford). 2012;14(12):874.
Adam R, et al. Rescue surgery for unresectable colorectal liver metastases downstaged by chemotherapy: a model to predict long-term survival. Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):644–57; discussion 657-8.
Jones RP, Hamann S, Malik HZ, Fenwick SW, Poston GJ, Folprecht G. Defined criteria for resectability improves rates of secondary resection after systemic therapy for liver limited metastatic colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(9):1590–601.
• D’Angelica MI, et al. Phase II trial of hepatic artery infusional and systemic chemotherapy for patients with unresectable hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: conversion to resection and long-term outcomes. Ann Surg. 2015;261(2):353–60 Results of Phase II trial of patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases treated at Memoral Sloan Kettering, with hepatic artery infusion (HAI). They report HAI was able to convert 47% of patients for complete resection. Furthermore, resected patients had a 3-year overall survival of 80%.
Kopetz S, Chang GJ, Overman MJ, Eng C, Sargent DJ, Larson DW, et al. Improved survival in metastatic colorectal cancer is associated with adoption of hepatic resection and improved chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(22):3677–83.
Dhir M, Smith LM, Ullrich F, Leiphrakpam PD, Ly QP, Sasson AR, et al. Pre-operative nomogram to predict risk of peri-operative mortality following liver resections for malignancy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14(11):1770–81.
Ekberg H, Tranberg KG, Andersson R, Lundstedt C, Hägerstrand I, Ranstam J, et al. Determinants of survival in liver resection for colorectal secondaries. Br J Surg. 1986;73(9):727–31.
Cady B, et al. Technical and biological factors in disease-free survival after hepatic resection for colorectal cancer metastases. Arch Surg. 1992;127(5):561–8 discussion 568-9.
D’Angelica M. Are patients with multiple hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer candidates for surgery? Nat Clin Pract Oncol. 2007;4(12):682–3.
Weber SM, Jarnagin WR, DeMatteo RP, Blumgart LH, Fong Y. Survival after resection of multiple hepatic colorectal metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7(9):643–50.
Pawlik TM, et al. Debunking dogma: surgery for four or more colorectal liver metastases is justified. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10(2):240–8.
Kornprat P, Jarnagin WR, Gonen M, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, Blumgart LH, et al. Outcome after hepatectomy for multiple (four or more) colorectal metastases in the era of effective chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(3):1151–60.
Malik HZ, Hamady ZZR, Adair R, Finch R, al-Mukhtar A, Toogood GJ, et al. Prognostic influence of multiple hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33(4):468–73.
Adson MA, van Heerden J, Adson MH, Wagner JS, Ilstrup DM. Resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Arch Surg. 1984;119(6):647–51.
Fortner JG, Silva JS, Golbey RB, Cox EB, Maclean BJ. Multivariate analysis of a personal series of 247 consecutive patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer I Treatment by hepatic resection. Ann Surg. 1984;199(3):306–16.
Cady B, McDermott WV. Major hepatic resection for metachronous metastases from colon cancer. Ann Surg. 1985;201(2):204–9.
Elias D, Liberale G, Vernerey D, Pocard M, Ducreux M, Boige V, et al. Hepatic and extrahepatic colorectal metastases: when resectable, their localization does not matter, but their total number has a prognostic effect. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(11):900–9.
Alzahrani N, Ung L, Valle SJ, Liauw W, Morris DL. Synchronous liver resection with cytoreductive surgery for the treatment of liver and peritoneal metastases from colon cancer: results from- an Australian Centre. ANZ J Surg. 2017;87(11):E167–72.
Randle RW, Doud AN, Levine EA, Clark CJ, Swett KR, Shen P, et al. Peritoneal surface disease with synchronous hepatic involvement treated with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(5):1634–8.
Mouw TJ, Lu J, Woody-Fowler M, Ashcraft J, Valentino J, DiPasco P, et al. Morbidity and mortality of synchronous hepatectomy with cytoreductive surgery/hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC). J Gastrointest Oncol. 2018;9(5):828–32.
Saxena A, Valle SJ, Liauw W, Morris DL. Limited synchronous hepatic resection does not compromise peri-operative outcomes or survival after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. J Surg Oncol. 2017;115(4):417–24.
Miller G, et al. Outcomes after resection of synchronous or metachronous hepatic and pulmonary colorectal metastases. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;205(2):231–8.
Maithel SK, Ginsberg MS, D’Amico F, DeMatteo RP, Allen PJ, Fong Y, et al. Natural history of patients with subcentimeter pulmonary nodules undergoing hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(1):31–8.
Fong Y, Fortner J, Sun RL, Brennan MF, Blumgart LH. Clinical score for predicting recurrence after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of 1001 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 1999;230(3):309–18 discussion 318-21.
Nordlinger B, Guiguet M, Vaillant JC, Balladur P, Boudjema K, Bachellier P, et al. Surgical resection of colorectal carcinoma metastases to the liver. A prognostic scoring system to improve case selection, based on 1568 patients. Association Francaise de Chirurgie. Cancer. 1996;77(7):1254–62.
Zakaria S, Donohue JH, Que FG, Farnell MB, Schleck CD, Ilstrup DM, et al. Hepatic resection for colorectal metastases: value for risk scoring systems? Ann Surg. 2007;246(2):183–91.
Wanebo HJ, LeGolvan M, Paty PB, Saha S, Zuber M, D’Angelica MI, et al. Meeting the biologic challenge of colorectal metastases. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2012;29(7):821–39.
Tsilimigras DI, Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I, Bagante F, Moris D, Cloyd J, Spartalis E, et al. Clinical significance and prognostic relevance of KRAS, BRAF, PI3K and TP53 genetic mutation analysis for resectable and unresectable colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review of the current evidence. Surg Oncol. 2018;27(2):280–8.
Bickenbach KA, DeMatteo RP, Fong Y, Peter Kingham T, Allen PJ, Jarnagin WR, et al. Risk of occult irresectable disease at liver resection for hepatic colorectal cancer metastases: a contemporary analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(6):2029–34.
Nierop, P.M.H., et al., The liver-first approach for locally advanced rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019;45(4):591–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2018.12.007.
• Abelson JS, Michelassi F, Sun T, Mao J, Milsom J, Samstein B, et al. Simultaneous resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastasis: the new standard of care? J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21(6):975–82 This report analyzes New York State health database and reports that simultaneous resections led to lower health care utilitization and was equally safe as compared with staged resections.
Hillingso JG, Wille-Jorgensen P. Staged or simultaneous resection of synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer--a systematic review. Color Dis. 2009;11(1):3–10.
• Ali SM, Pawlik TM, Rodriguez-Bigas MA, Monson JRT, Chang GJ, Larson DW. Timing of surgical resection for curative colorectal cancer with liver metastasis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(1):32–7 A review of the literature demonstrating the feasibility, safety and oncologic outcomes of concomitant colon and liver resections in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Buell JF, et al. The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: The Louisville Statement, 2008. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):825–30.
Moris D, Tsilimigras DI, Machairas N, Merath K, Cerullo M, Hasemaki N, et al. Laparoscopic synchronous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: a systematic review. J Surg Oncol. 2019;119(1):30–9.
Yan Y, Cai X, Geller DA. Laparoscopic liver resection: a review of current status. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017;27(5):481–6.
Castaing D, Vibert E, Ricca L, Azoulay D, Adam R, Gayet B. Oncologic results of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases in two specialized centers. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):849–55.
Marohn MR, Hanly EJ. Twenty-first century surgery using twenty-first century technology: surgical robotics. Curr Surg. 2004;61(5):466–73.
Fruscione, M., Pickens R., Baker E.H., Cochran A., Khan A., Ocuin L., Iannitti D.A., Vrochides D., Martinie J.B., Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic major liver resection: analysis of outcomes from a single center. HPB (Oxford). 2019;(18):34562–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2018.11.011.
Dwyer RH, Scheidt MJ, Marshall JS, Tsoraides SS. Safety and efficacy of synchronous robotic surgery for colorectal cancer with liver metastases. J Robot Surg. 2018;12(4):603–6.
• Kingham TP, Leung U, Kuk D, Gönen M, D’Angelica MI, Allen PJ, et al. Robotic liver resection: a case-matched comparison. World J Surg. 2016;40(6):1422–8 The authors’ report on the outcomes of patients undergoing robotics as compared with open liver resection. They note a decrease in the operative time, lower blood loss, and decreased hospital stay in the robotic hepatectomy cohort.
Tsung A, Geller DA, Sukato DC, Sabbaghian S, Tohme S, Steel J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: a matched comparison. Ann Surg. 2014;259(3):549–55.
Blackshear PJ, et al. The design and initial testing of an implantable infusion pump. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1972;134(1):51–6.
Buchwald H, Grage TB, Vassilopoulos PP, Rohde TD, Varco RL, Blackshear PJ. Intraarterial infusion chemotherapy for hepatic carcinoma using a totally implantable infusion pump. Cancer. 1980;45(5):866–9.
Kemeny N, Daly J, Reichman B, Geller N, Botet J, Oderman P. Intrahepatic or systemic infusion of fluorodeoxyuridine in patients with liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 1987;107(4):459–65.
Kemeny NE, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis DR, Lenz HJ, Warren RS, Naughton MJ, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion versus systemic therapy for hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: a randomized trial of efficacy, quality of life, and molecular markers (CALGB 9481). J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(9):1395–403.
Kemeny NE, Melendez FDH, Capanu M, Paty PB, Fong Y, Schwartz LH, et al. Conversion to resectability using hepatic artery infusion plus systemic chemotherapy for the treatment of unresectable liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(21):3465–71.
•• Groot Koerkamp B, Sadot E, Kemeny NE, Gönen M, Leal JN, Allen PJ, et al. Perioperative hepatic arterial infusion pump chemotherapy is associated with longer survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(17):1938–44 This study reports, although non-randomized, a 2-year survival advantage for patients with colorectal metastases receiving hepatic arterial infusion in combination with systemic therapy as compared with patients only receiving systemic chemotherapy.
Dhir M, Jones HL, Shuai Y, Clifford AK, Perkins S, Steve J, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion in combination with modern systemic chemotherapy is associated with improved survival compared with modern systemic chemotherapy alone in patients with isolated unresectable colorectal liver metastases: a case-control study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(1):150–8.
Dhir M, Zenati MS, Jones HL, Bartlett DL, Choudry MHA, Pingpank JF, et al. Effectiveness of hepatic artery infusion (HAI) versus selective internal radiation therapy (Y90) for pretreated isolated unresectable colorectal liver metastases (IU-CRCLM). Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(2):550–7.
Cheng J, Hong D, Zhu G, Swanstrom LL, Hansen PD. Laparoscopic placement of hepatic artery infusion pumps: technical considerations and early results. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11(6):589–97.
Franklin, M.E., Jr. And J.J. Gonzalez, Jr., Laparoscopic placement of hepatic artery catheter for regional chemotherapy infusion: technique, benefits, and complications. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech, 2002. 12(6): p. 398–407.
Urbach DR, Herron DM, Khajanchee YS, Swanström LL, Hansen PD. Laparoscopic hepatic artery infusion pump placement. Arch Surg. 2001;136(6):700–4.
Hellan M, Pigazzi A. Robotic-assisted placement of a hepatic artery infusion catheter for regional chemotherapy. Surg Endosc. 2008;22(2):548–51.
Dhir M, Zenati MS, Padussis JC, Jones HL, Perkins S, Clifford AK, et al. Robotic assisted placement of hepatic artery infusion pump is a safe and feasible approach. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114(3):342–7.
Qadan M, D’Angelica MI, Kemeny NE, Cercek A, Kingham TP. Robotic hepatic arterial infusion pump placement. HPB (Oxford). 2017;19(5):429–35.
Alexander HR Jr, Bartlett DL, Libutti SK, Pingpank JF, Fraker DL, Royal R, et al. Analysis of factors associated with outcome in patients undergoing isolated hepatic perfusion for unresectable liver metastases from colorectal center. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(7):1852–9.
Magge D, Zureikat AH, Bartlett DL, Holtzman MP, Choudry HA, Beumer JH, et al. A phase I trial of isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) using 5-FU and oxaliplatin in patients with unresectable isolated liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(7):2180–7.
Vogel A, et al. Chemosaturation percutaneous hepatic perfusion: a systematic review. Adv Ther. 2017;33(12):2122–38.
Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Ellis LM, Ellis V, Pollock R, Broglio KR, et al. Recurrence and outcomes following hepatic resection, radiofrequency ablation, and combined resection/ablation for colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg. 2004;239(6):818–25 discussion 825-7.
Sasaki K, Margonis GA, Andreatos N, Kim Y, Wilson A, Gani F, et al. Combined resection and RFA in colorectal liver metastases: stratification of long-term outcomes. J Surg Res. 2016;206(1):182–9.
Kim KH, Yoon YS, Yu CS, Kim TW, Kim HJ, Kim PN, et al. Comparative analysis of radiofrequency ablation and surgical resection for colorectal liver metastases. J Korean Surg Soc. 2011;81(1):25–34.
Hur H, Ko YT, Min BS, Kim KS, Choi JS, Sohn SK, et al. Comparative study of resection and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases. Am J Surg. 2009;197(6):728–36.
Otto G, Düber C, Hoppe-Lotichius M, König J, Heise M, Bernhard Pitton M. Radiofrequency ablation as first-line treatment in patients with early colorectal liver metastases amenable to surgery. Ann Surg. 2010;251(5):796–803.
Shady W, Petre EN, Gonen M, Erinjeri JP, Brown KT, Covey AM, et al. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of colorectal cancer liver metastases: factors affecting outcomes--a 10-year experience at a single center. Radiology. 2016;278(2):601–11.
Karanicolas PJ, Jarnagin WR, Gonen M, Tuorto S, Allen PJ, DeMatteo RP, et al. Long-term outcomes following tumor ablation for treatment of bilateral colorectal liver metastases. JAMA Surg. 2013;148(7):597–601.
Shibata T, Niinobu T, Ogata N, Takami M. Microwave coagulation therapy for multiple hepatic metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Cancer. 2000;89(2):276–84.
Puijk RS, et al. Colorectal liver metastases: surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION) - a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):821.
Seifert JK, Springer A, Baier P, Junginger T. Liver resection or cryotherapy for colorectal liver metastases: a prospective case control study. Int J Color Dis. 2005;20(6):507–20.
Ng KM, Chua TC, Saxena A, Zhao J, Chu F, Morris DL. Two decades of experience with hepatic cryotherapy for advanced colorectal metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(4):1276–83.
Scheffer HJ, Melenhorst MCAM, Echenique AM, Nielsen K, van Tilborg AAJM, van den Bos W, et al. Irreversible electroporation for colorectal liver metastases. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015;18(3):159–69.
Fruhling P, et al. Single-center nonrandomized clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of irreversible electroporation (IRE) ablation of liver tumors in humans: short to mid-term results. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017;43(4):751–7.
Scheffer HJ, Vroomen LGPH, de Jong MC, Melenhorst MCAM, Zonderhuis BM, Daams F, et al. Ablation of locally advanced pancreatic cancer with percutaneous irreversible electroporation: results of the phase I/II PANFIRE study. Radiology. 2017;282(2):585–97.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Georgios V. Georgakis and Iliya Goldberg each declare no potential conflicts of interest.
Aaron R. Sasson has received personal fees from Novartis.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Surgery and Surgical Innovations in Colorectal Cancer
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Georgakis, G.V., Goldberg, I. & Sasson, A.R. Current Trends in the Surgical Management of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases. Curr Colorectal Cancer Rep 15, 135–141 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-019-00440-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11888-019-00440-4