Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Laparoscopic Versus Open Thermal Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis of Local Control of the Ablated Tumors

  • 54 Accesses

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic ablation (LA) of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) is frequently performed in combination with laparoscopic liver resection or as a stand-alone procedure. However, LA is technically demanding and whether the results are comparable with those of open ablation (OA) has not been determined to date. This study compared the effectiveness of LA and OA in achieving local tumor control of CRLMs.

Methods

Patients undergoing LA or OA of CRLMs at Ghent University Hospital between June 2007 and February 2018 were identified from a prospective database. Lesions treated by LA and OA were matched 1:1 using a propensity score based on lesions (liver segment, size, deepness, proximity to a vessel), patients, and procedural characteristics. Ablation sites were followed up with computed-tomography or magnetic resonance imaging to assess the completeness of the ablation and ablation-site recurrence (ASR). Analysis of ASR was performed with the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression.

Results

In this study, 163 patients underwent the surgical ablation (78 LA, 85 OA) of 333 CRLMs (143 LA, 190 OA). After matching, 220 lesions (110 LA, 110 OA) were analyzed. Ablation was complete in 93.7% (LA) and 97.3% (OA) of the sites (p = 0.195). No difference in ASR was observed (p = 0.351), with a cumulative risk of ASR at 12 months of 9.1% (LA) and 8.2% (OA). After multivariable analysis, ASR was confirmed to be independent of the surgical approach.

Conclusion

The findings showed that LA and OA achieve a comparable local control of CRLMs. This result further supports the adoption of a laparoscopic approach for the treatment of CRLMs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    Van Cutsem E, Cervantes A, Adam R, et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:1386–422. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw235.

  2. 2.

    Ruers T, Punt C, Van coevorden F, et al. Radiofrequency ablation combined with systemic treatment versus systemic treatment alone in patients with non-resectable colorectal liver metastases: a randomized EORTC intergroup phase 2 study (EORTC 40004). Ann Oncol. 2012;23:2619–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mds053.

  3. 3.

    Tanis E, Nordlinger B, Mauer M, et al. Local recurrence rates after radiofrequency ablation or resection of colorectal liver metastases: analysis of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer #40004 and #40983. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50:912–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2013.12.008.

  4. 4.

    Wong SL, Mangu PB, Choti MA, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2009 clinical evidence review on radiofrequency ablation of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:493–508. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.23.4450.

  5. 5.

    Stang A, Fischbach R, Teichmann W, Bokemeyer C, Braumann D. A systematic review on the clinical benefit and role of radiofrequency ablation as treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:1748–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2009.03.012.

  6. 6.

    Imai K, Allard MA, Castro Benitez C, et al. Long-term outcomes of radiofrequency ablation combined with hepatectomy compared with hepatectomy alone for colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg. 2017;104:570–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10447.

  7. 7.

    de Jong MC, van Vledder MG, Ribero D, et al. Therapeutic efficacy of combined intraoperative ablation and resection for colorectal liver metastases: an international, multi-institutional analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15:336–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-010-1391-8.

  8. 8.

    Van Amerongen MJ, Van Der Stok EP, Fütterer JJ, et al. Short-term and long-term results of patients with colorectal liver metastases undergoing surgery with or without radiofrequency ablation. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42:523–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.01.013.

  9. 9.

    Tomassini F, D’Asseler Y, Giglio MC, et al. Hemodynamic changes in ALPPS influence liver regeneration and function: results from a prospective study. HPB. 2019;21:557–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2018.09.005.

  10. 10.

    Faitot F, Faron M, Adam R, et al. Two-stage hepatectomy versus one-stage resection combined with radiofrequency for bilobar colorectal metastases: a case-matched analysis of surgical and oncological outcomes. Ann Surg. 2014;260:822–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000000976.

  11. 11.

    Evrard S, Poston G, Kissmeyer-Nielsen P, et al. Combined ablation and resection (CARe) as an effective parenchymal-sparing treatment for extensive colorectal liver metastases. PLoS One. 2014;9:e114404. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114404.

  12. 12.

    Aghayan DL, Pelanis E, Avdem Fretland Å, et al. Laparoscopic parenchyma-sparing liver resection for colorectal metastases. Radiol Oncol. 2018;52:36–41. https://doi.org/10.1515/raon-2017-0046.

  13. 13.

    Gillams A, Goldberg N, Ahmed M, et al. Thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases: a position paper by an international panel of ablation experts, the interventional oncology sans frontières meeting 2013. Eur Radiol. 2015;25:3438–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3779-z.

  14. 14.

    Santambrogio R, Bianchi P, Pasta A, Palmisano A, Montorsi M. Ultrasound-guided interventional procedures of the liver during laparoscopy: technical considerations. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. 2002;16:349–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640090082.

  15. 15.

    Fretland AA, Dagenborg VJ, Bjørnelv GMW, et al. Laparoscopic versus open resection for colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg. 2018;267:199–207. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002353.

  16. 16.

    Ahmed M, Solbiati L, Brace CL, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization ofterminology and reporting criteria: a 10-year update. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25:1691–705.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2014.08.027.

  17. 17.

    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e3181b13ca2.

  18. 18.

    Zakrison TL, Austin PC, McCredie VA. A systematic review of propensity score methods in the acute care surgery literature: avoiding the pitfalls and proposing a set of reporting guidelines. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2018;44:385–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-017-0786-6.

  19. 19.

    Austin PC, Grootendorst P, Anderson GM. A comparison of the ability of different propensity score models to balance measured variables between treated and untreated subjects: a Monte Carlo study. Stat Med. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2580.

  20. 20.

    Austin PC. Optimal caliper widths for propensity score-matching when estimating differences in means and differences in proportions in observational studies. Pharm Stat. 2011;10:150–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/pst.433.

  21. 21.

    Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivar Behav Res. 2011;46:399–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.568786.

  22. 22.

    Biondi-Zoccai G, Romagnoli E, Agostoni P, et al. Are propensity scores really superior to standard multivariable analysis? Contemp Clin Trials. 2011;32:731–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2011.05.006.

  23. 23.

    Odisio BC, Yamashita S, Huang SY, et al. Local tumour progression after percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases according to RAS mutation status. Br J Surg. 2017;104:760–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10490.

  24. 24.

    Thoemmes F. Propensity score-matching in SPSS. 2012. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1201/1201.6385.pdf.

  25. 25.

    Elm E Von, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche C, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85:867–72. https://doi.org/10.2471/blt.07.045120.

  26. 26.

    Machi J, Uchida S, Sumida K, et al. Ultrasound-guided radiofrequency thermal ablation of liver tumors: percutaneous, laparoscopic, and open surgical approaches. J Gastrointest Surg. 2001;5:477–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1091-255x(01)80085-8.

  27. 27.

    Tinguely P, Fusaglia M, Freedman J, et al. Laparoscopic image-based navigation for microwave ablation of liver tumors: a multi-center study. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:4315–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5458-4.

  28. 28.

    Siperstein A, Garland A, Engle K, et al. Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation of primary and metastatic liver tumors: technical considerations. Surg Endosc. 2000;14:400–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000067.

  29. 29.

    Paolucci I, Schwalbe M, Prevost GA, et al. An intraoperative ultrasound-based navigation approach for laparoscopic ablation of liver tumors. HPB. 2018;20:S452–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2018.06.2859.

  30. 30.

    Sindram D, McKillop IH, Martinie JB, Iannitti DA. Novel 3-D laparoscopic magnetic ultrasound image guidance for lesion targeting. HPB. 2010;12:709–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-2574.2010.00244.x.

  31. 31.

    Smith MK, Mutter D, Forbes LE, Mulier S, Marescaux J. The physiologic effect of the pneumoperitoneum on radiofrequency ablation. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech. 2004;18:35–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8235-2.

  32. 32.

    Yun D, Kim S, Song I, Chun K. Comparative analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgical radiofrequency ablation for malignant liver tumors. Korean J Hepato Biliary Pancreat Surg. 2014;18:122. https://doi.org/10.14701/kjhbps.2014.18.4.122.

  33. 33.

    Eisele RM, Neumann U, Neuhaus P, Schumacher G. Open surgical is superior to percutaneous access for radiofrequency ablation of hepatic metastases. World J Surg. 2009;33:804–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-008-9905-1.

  34. 34.

    Wong J, Lee KF, Yu SCH, et al. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus surgical radiofrequency ablation for malignant liver tumours: the long-term results. HPB. 2013;15:595–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/hpb.12014.

  35. 35.

    Groeschl RT, Pilgrim CHC, Hanna EM, et al. Microwave ablation for hepatic malignancies: a multiinstitutional analysis. Ann Surg. 2014;259:1195–200. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000000234.

  36. 36.

    Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Ellis LM, et al. Recurrence and outcomes following hepatic resection, radiofrequency ablation, and combined resection/ablation for colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg. 2004;239:818–27. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000128305.90650.71.

  37. 37.

    Navarra G, Ayav A, Weber JC, et al. Short- and long-term results of intraoperative radiofrequency ablation of liver metastases. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2005;20:521–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-005-0743-4.

  38. 38.

    Langella S, Ardito F, Russolillo N, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound staging for colorectal liver metastases in the era of liver-specific magnetic resonance imaging: is it still worthwhile? J Oncol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1369274.

  39. 39.

    Torzilli G, Procopio F, Botea F, et al. One-stage ultrasonographically guided hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal metastases: a feasible and effective alternative to the 2-stage approach. Surgery. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2009.02.017.

  40. 40.

    Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The bias due to incomplete matching. Matched SamplCausal Eff. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511810725.020.

  41. 41.

    Adamina M, Guller U, Weber WP, Oertli D. Propensity scores and the surgeon. Br J Surg. 2006;93:389–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.5265.

  42. 42.

    Ringe KI, Wacker F, Raatschen HJ. Is there a need for MRI within 24 hours after CT-guided percutaneous thermoablation of the liver? Acta radiol. 2015;56:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185114520858.

  43. 43.

    Sainani NI, Gervais DA, Mueller PR, Arellano RS. Imaging after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatic tumors: part 2, abnormal findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:194–204. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.12.8479.

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Correspondence to Roberto Ivan Troisi MD, MSc, PhD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

There are no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 23 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Giglio, M.C., Logghe, B., Garofalo, E. et al. Laparoscopic Versus Open Thermal Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Propensity Score-Based Analysis of Local Control of the Ablated Tumors. Ann Surg Oncol (2020). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-08243-w

Download citation