Pulmonary metastasectomy-is the extent of resection worth reconsidering?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kruger M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9745533 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Pulmonary metastasectomy-is the extent of resection worth reconsidering?
Krüger Marcus M Biancosino Christian C
Journal of thoracic disease 20221101 11
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPulmonary metastasectomy (PM) with curative intent has become a widely accepted treatment for lung metastases from solid tumours in selected patients, with low perioperative morbidity and mortality. In particular, PM is strongly recommended in selected patients with secondary lesions from colorectal cancer (CRC), due to its excellent postoperative prognosis. Nevertheless, the impact of the extent of PM on recurrence and survival remains controversial. This review aimed at assessing differences in short- and long-term postoperative outcomes depending on the extent of lung resection for lung metastases.MethodsA systematic literature review of studies comparing anatomical and non-anatomical resections of lung metastases was performed (Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews Registration: 254931). A literature search for articles published in English between the date of database inception and January 31, 2021 was performed in EMBASE (via Ovid), MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Cochrane CENTRAL. Retrospective studies, randomised and non-randomised controlled trials were included. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to determine the risk of bias for the primary outcome for included studies.ResultsOut of 432 papers, three retrospective non-randomised studies (1,342 patients) were selected for systematic reviewing. Although our search design did not exclude any primary tumour histology, all selected studies investigated surgical resection of lung metastases from CRC. Because of variations in the compared surgical approaches to pulmonary metastases, a meta-analysis proved unfeasible. There was a tendency to perform anatomical resections for larger metastases. Multivariate analyses revealed that anatomical resections were protective for recurrence-free survival (RFS), while the impact of such procedures on overall survival (OS) remained uncertain. A significantly higher incidence of resection-margin recurrences was observed in patients who underwent non-anatomical resections.DiscussionAnatomical resections of lung metastases from CRC seem to be associated with improved RFS. However, well-constructed comparative clinical trials focusing on the extent of PM are needed.
| S-EPMC9344403 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWe aimed to compare disease-free survival after pulmonary metastasectomy to that after hepatic metastasectomy, and to identify prognostic factors after pulmonary metastasectomy.ResultsBetween 2005 and 2015, 129 patients underwent resection of isolated metachronous lung metastases from colorectal cancer. Three-year DFS after pulmonary metastasectomy was similar to that after hepatic metastasectomy (50.7% vs. 45.5%, respectively; p=0.58). Rectal cancer (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-3.79; p=0.03) and ≥2 metastases (HR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.28-3.68; p=0.004) were independent adverse risk factors associated with disease-free survival after pulmonary metastasectomy on multivariate analysis. Three-year DFS for colon vs. rectal cancer patients was 72.5% vs. 42.6%, respectively (p=0.04). The number of lung metastases was an independent risk factor for DFS after pulmonary metastasectomy in rectal cancer patients.Patients and methodsPatients who underwent lung metastasectomy after curative resection of colorectal cancers were investigated. Disease-free survival (DFS) after pulmonary metastasectomy was compared to that after hepatic metastasectomy, which has a relatively well-known prognosis. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify clinical variables predictive of survival after pulmonary metastasectomy.ConclusionsDisease-free survival rates after resection of lung vs. liver metastases arising from colorectal cancers are similar. However, lung metastases specifically from rectal cancers produce poorer DFS rates. Primary tumor location must be considered for pulmonary metastasis treatment and follow-up in colorectal cancer patients.
| S-EPMC5482677 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lymph node (LN) removal during pulmonary metastasectomy is a prerequisite to achieve complete resection or at least collect prognostic information, but is not yet generally accepted. On average, the rate of unexpected lymph node involvement (LNI) is less than 10% in sarcoma, 20% in colorectal cancer (CRC) and 30% in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) when radical LN dissection is performed. LNI is a negative prognostic factor and presence of preoperative mediastinal disease usually leads to exclusion of the patient from metastasis surgery. Nonetheless, some authors found excellent prognoses even with mediastinal LNI in colorectal and RCC metastases when radical LN dissection was performed (median survival of 37 and 36 months, respectively). Multiple metastases, central location of the lesion followed by anatomical resections are associated with a higher LNI rate. The real prognostic influence of systematic LN dissection remains unclear. Two positive effects were described after radical lymphadenectomy: a trend for improved survival in RCC patients and a reduction of mediastinal recurrences from 23% to 0% in CRC patients. Unfortunately, there is a great number of studies that do not demonstrate any positive effect of lymphadenectomy during pulmonary metastasectomy except a pseudo stage migration effect. Future studies should not only focus on survival, but also on local and LN recurrence.
| S-EPMC8107571 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9641342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Metastasectomy is the most frequent surgical resection undertaken by thoracic surgeons, being the lung the second common site of metastases. The present oncological criteria for pulmonary metastasectomy are: (I) the primary cancer need to be controlled or controllable; (II) no extrathoracic metastasis-that is not controlled or controllable-exists; (III) all of the tumor must be resectable, with adequate pulmonary reserve; (IV) there are no alternative medical treatment options with lower morbidity. General favourable prognostic features in patients with pulmonary metastases are: (I) one or few metastases; (II) long disease free interval; (III) normal CEA levels in colorectal cancers. Negative predictive features in patients candidate to pulmonary metastasectomies are: (I) active primary cancer; (II) extrathoracic metastases; (III) inability to obtain surgical radicality; (IV) mediastinal lymphatic spread. The lack of controlled trials and studies limited by short follow-up and small cohorts did not allow to overcome some skepticism; moreover, the heterogeneity of these patients in terms of demographic, biologic and histologic characteristics represents a clear limit even in the largest series. On the basis of present knowledge, without results coming from on-going randomized trials, radical resection, histology, and disease free interval seem to be independent prognostic factors identifying a cohort of patients maximally benefitting from lung metastasectomy.
| S-EPMC5653506 | biostudies-other
Project description:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. It is estimated that 50% of all patients with CRC develop metastases, most commonly in the liver and the lung. Lung metastases are seen in approximately 10-15% of all patients with CRC. A large number of these patients with metastatic CRC can only receive palliative treatment due to invasion of other organs and disseminated disease. However, a subset of these patients present with potentially resectable metastases. Pulmonary metastasectomy is considered to be a potentially curative treatment for selected patients with resectable metastatic CRC. Current data suggest that patients that undergo pulmonary metastasectomy have 5-year survival rates of approximately 40%. However, the majority of data published regarding lung metastasectomy is based on small, retrospective case series. Due to this lack of prospective data, it is still unclear which subset of patients will benefit most from curative-intent surgery. Furthermore, there is also controversy regarding which prognostic and genetic factors are related to survival outcomes and whether there is a difference between open and thoracoscopic approaches in terms of overall and disease-free survival. In this review, we aim to summarize the latest data on prognostic factors and survival outcomes after pulmonary metastasectomy in patients with metastatic CRC.
| S-EPMC8107514 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Repeat surgical resection (redo) for pulmonary metastases is a questionable, albeit intriguing topic. We performed an extensive review of the literature, to specifically analyze results of redo pulmonary metastasectomies. We reviewed a total of 3,523 papers. Among these, 2,019 were excluded for redundancy and 1,105 because they were not completely retrievable. Out of 399 eligible papers, 183 had missing information or missing abstract, while 96 lacked data on survival. A total of 120 papers dated from 1991 onwards were finally included. Data regarding mortality, major morbidity, prognostic factors and long-term survivals of the first redo pulmonary metastasectomies were retrieved and analyzed. Homogeneity of data was affected by the lack of guidelines for redo pulmonary metastasectomy and the risks of bias when comparing different studies has to be considered. According to the histology sub-types, redo metastasectomies papers were grouped as: colorectal (n=42), sarcomas (n=36), others (n=20) and all histologies (n=22); the total number of patients was 3,015. Data about chemotherapy were reported in half of the papers, whereas targeted or immunotherapy in 9. None of these associated therapies, except chemotherapy in two records, did significantly modify outcomes. Disease-free interval before the redo procedure was the prevailing prognostic factor and nearly all papers showed a significant correlation between patients' comorbidities and prognosis. No perioperative mortality was reported, while perioperative major morbidity was overall quite low. Where available, overall survival after the first redo metastasectomy ranged from 10 to 72 months, with a 5-years survival of approximately 50%. The site of first recurrence after the redo procedure was mainly lung. Despite the data retrievable from literature are heterogeneous and confounding, we can state that redo lung metastasectomy is worthwhile when the lesions are resectable and the perioperative risk is low. At present, there are no "non-surgical" therapeutic options to replace redo pulmonary metastasectomies.
| S-EPMC8107525 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung metastases are a common site of spread for many malignant tumours. Pulmonary metastasectomy has been practiced for many years for sarcomas and is now becoming increasingly frequently advocated for patients with many other tumours, especially colorectal cancer. In this article we argue that this procedure is one framed by therapeutic opportunity and not supported by strong evidence. It is potentially harmful and may not be effective. Our argument is based on several important issues: (I) the vagueness of the concept of "oligometastases" and its biological implausibility; (II) the flaws in the often-cited observational evidence, especially selection bias; (III) the lack of any reliable randomised trial evidence of improved survival but evidence of harm; (IV) the failure of strategies to detect metastases earlier to influence overall survival. The introduction of stereotactic radiotherapy and image-guided thermal ablation have made the urge to treat lung metastases stronger but without any good evidence to justify their use. We acknowledge the problems of carrying out randomised trials when there is a clear lack of equipoise in the clinical teams involved but believe that there is an ethical need to do so. Many patients are probably being given false hope of cure or prolonged survival but are at risk of harm from pulmonary metastasectomy or ablation. It is possible that a few patients may benefit but without better evidence we do not know which, if any, do.
| S-EPMC8107549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPulmonary metastasectomy and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) are both guideline-recommended treatments for selected patients with oligometastatic colorectal pulmonary metastases. However, there is limited evidence comparing these local treatment modalities in similar patient groups.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed records of consecutive patients treated for colorectal pulmonary metastases with surgical metastasectomy or SABR from 2012 to 2019 at two Dutch referral hospitals that had different approaches toward the local treatment of colorectal pulmonary metastases, one preferring surgery, the other preferring SABR. Two comparable patient groups were identified based on tumor and treatment characteristics.ResultsThe metastasectomy group comprised 40 patients treated for 69 metastases, and the SABR group had 60 patients who were treated for 90 metastases. Median follow-up was 38 months (IQR: 26-67) in the surgery group and 46 months (IQR: 30-79) in the SABR group. Median OS was 58 months (CI: 20-94) in the metastasectomy group and 70 months (CI: 29-111) in the SABR group (p = 0.23). Five-year local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was 44% after metastasectomy and 30% after SABR (p = 0.16). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 15 months (CI: 3-26) in the metastasectomy group and 10 months (CI: 6-13) in the SABR group (p = 0.049). Local recurrence rate was 12.5/7.2% of patients/metastases respectively after metastasectomy and 38.3/31.1% after SABR (p < 0.001). Lower BED Gy10 was correlated with an increased likelihood of recurrence (p = 0.025). Clavien Dindo grade III-V complication rates were 2.5% after metastasectomy and 0% after SABR (p = 0.22).ConclusionIn this retrospective cohort study, pulmonary metastasectomy and SABR had comparable overall survival, local recurrence-free survival, and complication rates, despite patients in the SABR group having a significantly lower progression-free survival and local control rate. These data would support a randomized controlled trial comparing surgery and SABR in operable patients with radically resectable colorectal pulmonary metastases.
| S-EPMC10647532 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9840031 | biostudies-literature