Management of the Hepatic Lymph Nodes during Resection of Liver Metastases from Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review
2008

Management of Hepatic Lymph Nodes during Liver Resection for Colorectal Cancer

Sample size: 926 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Gurusamy Kurinchi S., Imber Charles, Davidson Brian R.

Primary Institution: University Department of Surgery, UCL and Royal Free Hospital NHS Trust

Hypothesis

What is the role of lymphadenectomy in the resection of liver metastases from colorectal cancer?

Conclusion

There is currently no evidence of survival benefit for routine or selective lymphadenectomy in patients with colorectal liver metastases.

Supporting Evidence

  • The overall prevalence of positive lymph nodes was 16.0%.
  • 3-year survival rates were 11.3% for node-positive patients compared to 53.9% for node-negative patients.
  • 5-year survival rates were 1.5% for node-positive patients compared to 32.1% for node-negative patients.
  • Routine lymphadenectomy did not show a survival benefit in the studies reviewed.
  • Patients with positive lymph nodes had significantly lower odds of survival.

Takeaway

This study looked at whether removing lymph nodes during liver surgery for cancer helps patients live longer, and it found that it doesn't seem to make a difference.

Methodology

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on hepatic lymph node involvement in colorectal liver metastases.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to the lack of randomized controlled trials and varying surgical techniques.

Limitations

No randomized controlled trials were found comparing liver resection with or without lymphadenectomy.

Participant Demographics

The studies included a total of 926 patients with colorectal liver metastases.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.12 for 3-year survival, 0.08 for 5-year survival

Confidence Interval

95% CI 0.06 to 0.24 for 3-year survival, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22 for 5-year survival

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1155/2008/684150

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication