Surg Clin N Am 86 (2006) 1005–1022

Evolving Techniques in the Treatment

of Liver Colorectal Metastases:
Role of Laparoscopy, Radiofrequency
Ablation, Microwave Coagulation,
Hepatic Arterial Chemotherapy,
Indications and Contraindications for
Resection, Role of Transplantation,
and Timing of Chemotherapy
Bridget N. Fahy, MDa, William R. Jarnagin, MDb,*
a
Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center,
1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA
b
Hepatobiliary Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center,
1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the United

States. More than 140,000 patients were diagnosed with CRC in 2004 [1]. It
has been reported that between 16% and 25% of patients have liver metas-
tases at the time of exploration for their primary tumor [2]. Furthermore,
approximately one half eventually develops liver metastases [3]. Patients
who have untreated liver metastases from CRC rarely survive 5 years and
have a reported median survival of 6 to 13 months [4]. The 5-year overall
survival following resection of CRC liver metastases in current series is up
to 58% [5,6]. Unfortunately, most patients are not candidates for resection
because of the extent or distribution of disease [7]. Consequently, several
alternate methods are being used to treat hepatic metastases from CRC,
including microwave coagulation, radiofrequency ablation, and transplanta-
tion. Additionally, research regarding the route and timing of chemotherapy
for hepatic metastases is an area of active study. This article provides

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (W.R. Jarnagin).

0039-6109/06/$ - see front matter Ó 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.suc.2006.06.003 surgical.theclinics.com
1006 FAHY & JARNAGIN

a summary of the major studies that have been performed examining the
modalities used in the management of hepatic metastases.

Laparoscopy
A small proportion of patients that has hepatic metastases from CRC are
candidates for curative resection; therefore, accurate staging is paramount
in selecting patients for resection. No currently available preoperative imag-
ing modality is 100% sensitive and specific for the extent of hepatic disease
or the presence of extrahepatic metastases. Laparoscopy has been offered as
one means of evaluating the presence of extrahepatic intra-abdominal dis-
ease that would preclude curative resection. At least three studies have ad-
dressed the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in patients who have colorectal
liver metastases. A report by Rahusen and colleagues [8] included 50 consec-
utive patients who had colorectal metastases that were deemed resectable by
preoperative imaging, and subjected them to diagnostic laparoscopy and
laparoscopic ultrasonography. Of the 47 patients who were able to undergo
laparoscopy, 13% were found to be unresectable based upon findings at lap-
aroscopy, and 25% were found to be unresectable based upon findings on
laparoscopic ultrasound. They concluded that use of a combination of diag-
nostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic ultrasonography significantly improves
the selection of candidates for liver resection, and, thereby, spared 38% of
patients in their study an unnecessary laparotomy.
Two studies from the authors’ group evaluated the role of laparoscopy
before hepatic resection of colorectal metastases [9,10]. In the study by Jar-
nagin and colleagues [9], 103 patients who had potentially resectable colo-
rectal metastases underwent laparoscopy before a planned laparotomy
and partial hepatectomy. Laparoscopy identified 14 of 26 patients who
had unresectable disease; 10 of these patients were spared an unnecessary
laparotomy. Additional findings were seen at laparoscopy and changed
the planned resection in 4 patients. Conversely, laparoscopy was not helpful
in 68 patients, and 8 additional patients had unresectable disease that was
missed at laparoscopy. Furthermore, a clinical risk score (CRS; see later dis-
cussion under ‘‘Indications and contraindications for resection’’) was used
to stratify patients before laparoscopy [11]. In the CRS, one point is given
for each of the following factors: node-positive primary disease, disease-
free interval from primary disease to metastases of less than 12 months,
more than one hepatic tumor, largest hepatic tumor greater than 5 cm,
and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level greater than 200 ng/mL. When
patients were stratified into those with a CRS of up to 2 versus those with
a CRS of 2, it was found that 57 laparoscopic procedures could have
been avoided in low-risk patients. These findings were confirmed in a fol-
low-up study by Grobmyer and colleagues [10], in which 63 of 264 patients
(24%) had unresectable disease. Twenty-six (41%) of the patients who had
unresectable disease were identified during laparoscopy, 22 (35%) were not
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1007

identified during laparoscopy, and 15 (24%) had other procedures per-

formed during a laparotomy. Once again, the CRS was able to distinguish
those patients who were most likely to have unresectable disease found at
laparoscopy and they were able to avoid a laparotomy. No low-risk patient
(CRS % 1) had unresectable disease, 11% of patients with a CRS of 2 or 3
had unresectable disease, and 24% of patients with a CRS of 4 or 5 had un-
resectable disease. Additionally, the percentage of patients that underwent
a nontherapeutic laparotomy following laparoscopy that failed to identify
unresectable disease was 4% in patients with a CRS of 1 or less, 10% in pa-
tients with a CRS of 2 or 3, and 14% in patients with a CRS of 4 or 5.
A shortened interval to systemic chemotherapy in those who were found to
be unresectable at laparoscopy was another benefit in those who were spared
a nontherapeutic laparotomy. The authors advocate the selective use of lap-
aroscopy before planned hepatic resection for colorectal hepatic metastases.
There seems to be little role for this modality in patients with a low CRS,
whereas those with a CRS of 4 or 5 have the most to gain from laparoscopy.

Radiofrequency ablation
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) uses high-frequency alternating current
to produce heat that destroys tumors by denaturing proteins. RFA has
been applied for the treatment of colorectal hepatic metastases through
three approaches: during laparotomy, laparoscopically, and percutaneously.
Numerous reports have described the efficacy and safety of RFA in the
treatment of colorectal metastases; however, no prospective randomized
clinical trial has compared RFA with hepatic resection.
One of the largest series to date that described the use of RFA in CRC
metastases came from the group at M.D. Anderson [12]; it reported on
172 patients who underwent resection plus RFA for primary or metastatic
disease. Metastases from CRC was the most common histology treated,
and it accounted for 72% of the cases overall. The median number of tu-
mors resected per patient was two, whereas the median number of tumors
treated by RFA per patient was one. The median tumor size for all patients
in the study was 1.8 cm in largest dimension. The postoperative complica-
tion rate was 20%, with an operative mortality of 2.3%. No correlation
was found between the extent of liver resection or number of tumors treated
with RFA and the development of postoperative complications. Recurrence
was seen in 57% of patients at a median of 21 months of follow-up. The site
of first recurrence was the RFA site in 8%, non-RFA hepatic site in 39%,
non-RFA hepatic site plus distant in 32%, and distant only in 21%. The in-
vestigators pointed out that although the RFA site recurrence rate was 8%,
this translated into a recurrence rate of only 2% when considering that 350
tumors were ablated. The median time to recurrence was identical for each
pattern of recurrence. Of the 8 patients who developed recurrence at the
RFA site, 7 of 8 had CRC metastases. In this group of 7 patients, all but
1008 FAHY & JARNAGIN

1 patient had a single tumor treated. On univariate and multivariate analy-

sis, the total number of tumors treated was the only factor that affected the
time to recurrence significantly. The median actuarial survival in the subset
of patients that had colorectal metastases was 37 months compared with the
median survival of 59 months in patients who had noncolorectal metastases.
The investigators concluded that RFA is a safe and effective adjunct to re-
section, but it cannot be viewed as a replacement for resection. At M.D. An-
derson, RFA is used in conjunction with hepatic resection to increase the
number of patients that is eligible for complete removal or destruction of
their tumors. The four deaths in this series illustrate the risk for liver failure
and death in patients who undergo RFA and resection. Careful patient and
tumor selection is paramount to a favorable outcome in this combined ap-
proach to hepatic malignancies.
A follow-up study by the group at M.D. Anderson compared the recur-
rence and outcomes following hepatic resection alone, RFA alone, and re-
section plus RFA for colorectal liver metastases [6]. They reported on
a cohort of 358 consecutive patients that had CRC metastases and under-
went treatment with curative intent and 70 patients who had hepatic disease
only who were not candidates for curative treatment. For the combined
group of 428 patients, 45% underwent resection alone, 24% underwent
RFA plus resection, 14% underwent RFA only, and 17% had a laparotomy
with biopsy only or placement of a hepatic arterial infusion pump. Overall
recurrence was significantly more common after RFA (84%) compared with
resection alone (52%). Intrahepatic recurrence was significantly more com-
mon after RFA alone (44%) than after RFA plus resection (28%) or resec-
tion alone (11%). True local recurrence, recurrence at the site of resection or
RFA, was significantly more common following RFA alone (9%) compared
with resection alone (2%). Overall survival rate was highest after resection
(58% at 5 years), but it did not differ significantly at 3 and 4 years in patients
who were treated with RFA plus resection versus RFA alone. Patients who
underwent RFA as a component of their treatment were compared with the
70 patients who were not candidates for curative therapy. Survival was im-
proved significantly in patients who underwent RFA (in conjunction with
resection or alone) compared with those who did not receive RFA. Tumor
number was predictive of poor survival on multivariate analysis and survival
was impacted significantly by mode of therapy; treatment of solitary or mul-
tiple tumors by resection alone was superior to RFA or RFA plus resection.
The investigators concluded that hepatic resection is the treatment of choice
for colorectal liver metastases. Additionally, RFA alone or in combination
with resection for patients who do not have resectable disease does not pro-
vide survival that is comparable to resection, and provides survival that is
only slightly superior to nonsurgical treatment.
Bleicher and colleagues [13] reported their results of RFA in 153 patients
with 447 unresectable primary and metastatic liver lesions. Fifty-nine pa-
tients had metastases from CRC. Local recurrence at the RFA site occurred
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1009

in 21% of patients and in 11.6% of individual tumors ablated. Recurrence

was seen in 18% of colorectal metastases ablated. Tumor size and ablation
of one versus two or more tumors were the two factors that were related
most significantly to local recurrence. On univariate analysis, local recur-
rence also was noted to be higher following ablation of colorectal metastases
and hepatocellular carcinoma compared with breast and carcinoid metasta-
ses. The overall morbidity of the procedure was 12%; the most common
complications were abscess formation and biliary injury. Despite the risk
for local recurrence and procedure-related complications, the investigators
continue to endorse RFA as a palliative modality in selected patients.
In summary, RFA is associated with acceptable morbidity and mortality
compared with surgical resection. Local recurrence in the ablation bed oc-
curs in 8% to 18% of patients and 2% to 12% of tumors. The number
and size of tumors ablated are the factors that are associated most consis-
tently with local recurrence following RFA of colorectal metastases. It
also should be emphasized that tumors that are unresectable because of their
extent or location rarely are amenable to effective ablation. Conversely,
tumors that are amenable to ablation usually are amenable to resection.

Microwave coagulation
Microwave coagulation for hepatic metastases was introduced by Tabuse
in 1979. The microwave coagulator was designed to cut the liver and coag-
ulate the cut end simultaneously. Similar to RFA, this technique can be ap-
plied during laparotomy or percutaneously under ultrasound guidance, it is
less invasive than is surgical resection, and it can be applied to multiple tu-
mors of the liver while sparing normal hepatic tissues.
The feasibility, safety, and efficacy of percutaneous microwave coagula-
tion therapy for solitary metachronous hepatic metastases were studied by
Seki and colleagues in 15 patients who had CRC [14]. Microwave coagula-
tion successfully induced necrosis within the tumor as well as a margin of
normal hepatic parenchyma in 13 of 15 patients. Complications during
and following the procedure were minimal; 1 patient developed a right pleu-
ral effusion that was managed conservatively. No cancer cell seeding of the
tract site was noted. Almost half of the patients survived for at least 2 years
without recurrence. An additional 3 patients remained free of recurrence for
at least 17 months. The median survival for all patients was 24 months. Four
patients eventually died of disease, although none died as a result of recur-
rence at the previously treated microwave coagulation site. Successful appli-
cation of this technique, like that of other local ablative techniques, is
limited by anatomic constraints, such as proximity to the gallbladder or
large vessels.
A randomized controlled trial that compared microwave coagulation
with hepatic resection in patients who had multiple hepatic metastases
from CRC was performed by Shibata and colleagues [15]. A total of 30
1010 FAHY & JARNAGIN

patients was included in the trial: 14 in the microwave group and 16 in the
hepatectomy group. No recurrence was seen in the microwave group for at
least 3 months in patients whose tumors were considered completely coag-
ulated. The efficacy of microwave treatment was confirmed by a decrease
in CEA. No intra- or postoperative deaths occurred in either group. The fre-
quency of postoperative complications was not different between the two
groups. No statistically significant difference in cumulative survival was
seen; the mean survival in the microwave group was 27 months compared
with 25 months in the hepatectomy group. The mean disease-free interval
was 11 months in the microwave group and 13 months in the hepatectomy
group. For both groups, the main cause of death during follow-up was hepatic
failure; it was responsible for 6 of 9 deaths in the microwave group and 7 of 12
deaths in the hepatectomy group. The frequency of death due to hepatic fail-
ure was not correlated with the number or size of metastatic tumors. The in-
vestigators endorse microwave coagulation in patients who have multiple
hepatic metastases from CRC, citing its reduced surgical invasiveness and
comparable efficacy. Unfortunately, the investigators did not provide infor-
mation regarding local recurrence following microwave coagulation, which
is a major shortcoming in local ablative therapies when compared with surgi-
cal resection. Additionally, longer follow-up is needed to assess accurately the
therapeutic equivalency of microwave coagulation to resection.
Currently, experience with this technique is limited and its potential ad-
vantage over hepatic resection or RFA awaits the results of larger studies.

Hepatic arterial infusion therapy

Hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) therapy is a form of liver-directed ther-
apy that takes advantage of the fact that most of the vascular supply to co-
lorectal hepatic metastases is derived from the hepatic artery. Additionally,
HAI regional therapy, particularly with floxuridine, allows higher doses of
chemotherapy to be delivered locally than could be tolerated systemically.
There are two potential scenarios in which HAI can be applied to colorectal
hepatic metastases: ‘‘neoadjuvant,’’ before hepatic resection or in patients
who have unresectable liver metastases and no evidence of extrahepatic dis-
ease, and adjuvant, following complete hepatic resection.

Neoadjuvant
The initial trials that used HAI chemotherapy exclusive of systemic ther-
apy showed increased response rates and progression-free survival com-
pared with systemic chemotherapy (reviewed in [16]), and this served as
the impetus for exploring the potential role for HAI as neoadjuvant therapy.
A summary of the clinical trials that evaluated neoadjuvant HAI chemo-
therapy in patients who had unresectable colorectal hepatic metastases is
found in Table 1. Response rates in these trials ranged from 16% to 82%,
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1011

Table 1
Trials of neoadjuvant hepatic arterial infusional (HAI) chemotherapy in patients with unresect-
able hepatic metastases
Complete
resection
Investigators Treatment groups N Response rate (n [%])
Elias et al, 1995 [42] 5FU
mitomycin
239 NR 14 (5.8)
piraubicin
cisplatin
Link et al, 1999 [43] FUDR 168 42% 9 (5)
FUDR HAI þ IV 46%
5FU/LV 45%
MMF 66%
Meric et al, 2000 [44] FUDR, 5FU/LV þ 383 NR 13 (3.4)
mitomycin
Clavien et al, 2002 [45] FUDR 23 39% 6 (26)
Milandri et al, 2003 [46] 5FU/LV
mitomycin & 31 16% 4 (14)
IV 5FU
Ducreux et al, 2005 [47] Oxaliplatin þ IV 5FU/ 28 64% 4 (14)
LV
Noda et al, 2004 [48] 5FU þ IV uracil & 51 78% 24 (47)
tegafur
Leonard et al, 2004 [49] FUDR þ FOLFOX 44 82% 9 (20)
or IROX
Kemeny et al, 2005 [50] FUDR/Dex þ IV 21 90% 7 (33)
IROX 15 87% NR
FUDR/Dex þ
FOLFOX
Abbreviations: 5FU, 5 fluorouracil; Dex, dexamethasone; FOLFOX, oxaliplatin & infusional
5FU/LV; FUDR, floxuridine; IROX, oxaliplatin & irinotecan; IV, intravenous; LV, leucovorin;
MMF, mitoxantrone, mitomycin, 5FU/LV; NR, not recorded.

and demonstrated a conversion to resectability in 3% to 47%. The large var-

iability in these results is a reflection of the small sample sizes in many of
these trials and the variety of HAI and systemic chemotherapy regimens
used. Sufficiently large randomized trials that compare neoadjuvant HAI
with systemic chemotherapy in patients who have unresectable hepatic me-
tastases from CRC are required to determine the optimal treatment regimen
in this patient group. In particular, the advantage of adding liver-directed
chemotherapy to the best combination of systemic agents needs clarification.

Adjuvant
Despite the favorable long-term outcome following liver resection for co-
lorectal metastases, the most common site of failure after resection is within
the remnant liver. Consequently, additional therapy after liver resection, ei-
ther systemic or regional, may be an important adjunct to resection. There
have been eight trials that were designed to evaluate the role of adjuvant
HAI therapy following surgical resection of hepatic metastases (Table 2).
Most of these studies included a small number of patients and used a variety
1012 FAHY & JARNAGIN

Table 2
Trials of adjuvant hepatic arterial infusional chemotherapy following surgical resection of
hepatic metastases
Duration
Investigators Treatment groups N follow-up DFS OS
Lygidakis et al, Surgery þ 20 3y NR 20 mo
1995 [51] chemoimmunotherapy 20 11 mo P ! .05
vs surgery alone
Asahara et al, Surgery þ HAI chemo 10 NR NR 3-y: 100% 4-y:
1998 [52] vs surgery alone 28 100%
3-y: 60%;
4-y: 47%
P ! .05
Lorenz et al, Surgery þ HAI chemo 113 NR 14.2 mo 34.5 mo
1998 [53] vs surgery alone 113 13.7 mo 40.8 mo
NS NS
Rudroff et al, Surgery þ HAI chemo 14 5y 5-y: 15% 5-y: 25%
1999 [54] vs surgery alone 16 5-y: 23% 5-y: 31%
NS NS
Kemeny et al, Surgery þ HAI chemo þ 74 2y 2-y: 57% 2-y: 86%
1999 [55] IV chemo vs surgery þ 82 2-y: 42% 2-y: 72%
IV chemo NS P ¼ .03
Tono et al, Surg þ HAI chemo þ 9 62 mo 1-, 2-, 3-y: 78%, 1-, 2-, 3-y: 89%,
2000 [56] oral chemo vs surgery 10 78%, 67%, 78%, 78%,
þ oral chemo respectively respectively
1-, 2-, 3-y: 50%, 1-, 2-, 3-y:
30%, 20%, 100%, 50%,
respectively 50%,
P ¼ .05 respectively
NS
Kemeny et al, Surgery þ HAI chemo þ 53 NR 4-y: 46% 64 mo
2002 [57] IV chemo vs surgery 56 4-y: 25% 49 mo
alone P ¼ 0.04 NS
Kemeny et al, Surgery þ HAI chemo þ 96 26 mo 1-, 1.5-y: 69%, 1-, 2-y: 97%,
2003 [18] IV chemo 47%, 89%,
respectively respectively
Abbreviations: chemo, chemotherapy; IV, intravenous; OS, overall survival; NR, not re-
corded; NS, not significant.

of regional agents with or without systemic chemotherapy regimens. Be-

cause of the heterogeneity in therapy regimens among the trials, variability
in the percentage of patients who received the HAI treatment as prescribed,
and the number of patients who crossed over from the control to the treat-
ment arm, it is not possible to draw definite conclusions about the efficacy of
adjuvant HAI therapy following hepatic resection. The data do suggest
a general trend in support of adjuvant HAI therapy for disease-free survival
(DFS), however. This improvement in DFS has not translated into a signif-
icant improvement in overall survival, however. Kemeny and Gonen [17] re-
cently reported an update of their original study, now with a median follow-up
of 10.3 years. They found that overall progression-free survival was
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1013

significantly higher in the group that received HAI therapy (31.3 months)
compared with those who did not receive adjuvant HAI therapy (17.2
months, P ¼ .02). Median hepatic DFS was not reached yet in the group
that received HAI therapy, and it was 32.5 months in patients who did
not receive adjuvant HAI treatment (P ! .01). Ten-year survival was
41% in the group that received HAI therapy compared with 27% in patients
who did not receive adjuvant HAI therapy.
A significant limitation of the currently available trials of adjuvant HAI
therapy after hepatic resection is the use of what is now considered to be
suboptimal systemic chemotherapy. The potential benefit of combining ad-
juvant HAI therapy with the newer and more effective systemic chemother-
apeutic agents, such as oxaliplatin and irinotecan, is beginning to be
explored. A phase I/II study of HAI in combination with systemic irinote-
can following hepatic resection was reported by Kemeny and colleagues
[18]; these findings are summarized in Table 3. Randomized phase III trials
are needed to address the usefulness of adjuvant HAI therapy after hepatic
resection in this era of more effective systemic chemotherapy.

Indications and contraindications for resection

Despite the improved response rates that are associated with systemic
chemotherapy regimens that contain oxaliplatin or irinotecan, surgical re-
section continues to be the most effective modality for treating CRC hepatic

Table 3
Adjuvant hepatic arterial infusional floxuridine/dexamethasone þ systemic irinotecan versus
hepatic arterial infusional floxuridine/dexamethasone þ systemic 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin fol-
lowing hepatic resection
HAI þ irinotecan HAI þ 5FU/LV
Variable (N [%]) (N[%])
Primary tumor
Colon 76 (79) 55 (74)
Rectum 20 (21) 19 (26)
Synchronous metastases 38 (40) 26 (35)
# hepatic lesions
!4 84 (87) 60 (81)
R4 12 (13) 14 (19)
Disease-free interval !12 mo 71 (74) 57 (77)
Previous chemotherapy 72 (75) 39 (53)
Preoperative CEA (median) 17.5 ng/mL 11.5 ng/mL
1-year disease-free survival 69% 82%a
1-year hepatic disease–free survival 92% 98%a
1-year overall survival 97% 98%a
a
Determined from survival curves provided in [58].
Data from Kemeny N, Jarnagin W, Yonen M, et al. Phase I/II study of hepatic arterial ther-
apy with floxuridine and dexamethasone in combination with intravenous irinotecan as adju-
vant treatment after resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol
2003;21:3303–9.
1014 FAHY & JARNAGIN

metastases. The 5-year survival following resection of colorectal hepatic me-

tastases is 20% to 37%, with a median survival of 24 to 40 months [19]. Cure
following hepatic resection has been reported in a significant proportion of
cases, and 10-year survival following resection has been reported by several
investigators [5,11,20,21].
The morbidity and mortality that are associated with hepatic resections
for metastatic CRC have been shown to be within acceptable limits; at ma-
jor centers, mortality following major resections is uniformly less than 5%
[11,19,22,23]. The major causes of perioperative death are liver failure or
hemorrhage; these complications occur in 1% to 5% of patients. Hepatic re-
section continues to be associated with a high complication rate, however
(20%–50%). The most common complication following hepatic resection
is a perihepatic collection that results from a biliary leak; this complication
is seen in 3% to 5% of patients.
The favorable outcome following liver resection for colorectal metastases
is predicated, in part, on careful preoperative evaluation and patient selection.
Based upon a review of 1001 liver resections for metastatic CRC, the authors’
group was able to identify seven factors that were significant and independent
predictors of poor long-term outcome on multivariate analysis [11]. They are
positive hepatic margin, extrahepatic disease, node-positive primary disease,
disease-free interval from primary disease to metastases of less than
12 months, more than one hepatic tumor, largest hepatic tumor greater than
5 cm, and CEA level greater than 200 ng/mL. The last five criteria were incor-
porated into a preoperative scoring system, a CRS, in which one point was
given to each criterion. The total score was found to be highly predictive of
outcome. An analysis of outcome based upon the CRS revealed that no pa-
tient with a score of 5 was a long-term survivor, and patients with up to
two criteria can have a favorable outcome. The investigators recommended
that patients with a CRS of 3 to 5 should not necessarily be denied resection,
but may benefit from aggressive neoadjuvant or postresection chemotherapy.
A study of 226 patients who had colorectal hepatic metastases was re-
ported recently by the group from Johns Hopkins that evaluated long-
term survival following hepatic resection [5]. They reported a median overall
survival of 46 months and a DFS of 63% at 1 year and 28% at 5 years. Pre-
dictors of overall survival were CEA of less than 100 ng/mL and negative
microscopic hepatic margins. Predictors of recurrence included more than
three metastases, positive microscopic hepatic margin, and a preoperative
CEA of greater than 100 ng/mL. They noted an increase in survival in pa-
tients who underwent hepatic resection for colorectal metastases from 1993
to 1999 compared with those who underwent resection between 1984 and
1992. The investigators hypothesized that improved patient selection
through better pre- and intraoperative imaging, improvements in surgical
technique, increased pre- and postoperative use of systemic chemotherapy,
and increased use of salvage surgical resections following hepatic recurrence
may have contributed to this increase in overall survival and DFS.
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1015

The timing of hepatic resection for patients who have synchronous colo-
rectal metastases is an area of controversy. Synchronous liver metastases are
defined as tumors that occur within 12 months of diagnosis of the colorectal
primary. Synchronous metastases are found in 13% to 25% of patients who
have metastatic CRC [24,25]. Martin and colleagues [26] studied the safety of
synchronous resection in CRC with liver metastases. The investigators found
that simultaneous resection could be performed safely, and that the overall
complication rate was higher in the group that underwent staged resection.
Additionally, on multivariate analysis, staged resection was an independent
predictor of overall complications. The increase in complications that was
seen in the group that underwent staged resection was attributable to the
need for two laparotomies and the complications that were associated with
laparotomy itself. Procedure-specific complications that were associated
with the resection of the colon or liver did not differ in either group. Overall
survival, DFS, and hepatic recurrence-free survival following synchronous or
staged resection of colorectal hepatic metastases are equivalent [27,28].
Close follow-up is warranted in patients who undergo resection of colo-
rectal metastases, because recurrence occurs in up to two thirds of patients
and effective therapies can be given to treat these recurrences. A study by To-
pal and colleagues [29] examined the pattern of recurrence following curative
resection of colorectal hepatic metastases. In their study, 74 (70%) patients
developed recurrent disease during the mean follow-up period of 32 months.
Forty-five patients developed a hepatic recurrence, 63 patients developed an
extrahepatic recurrence, and 34 patients recurred in the liver and an extrahe-
patic site. Early recurrence (within 18 months of hepatic resection) occurred
in 48 patients; the liver was the only site of recurrence in 44% and it occurred
in combination with extrahepatic metastases in 23%. The investigators
found that hepatic recurrence after 2 years was uncommon, whereas extra-
hepatic metastases continued to develop throughout the course of follow-
up. No factor independently predicted the risk for liver recurrence, whereas
elevated CEA, satellitosis, bilateral liver metastases, lymph node involve-
ment of the primary colorectal tumor, intraoperative complications, high
American Society of Anaesthesiology score, and female gender were associ-
ated significantly with poor extrahepatic DFS. The high rate of early hepatic
and extrahepatic metastases following curative hepatic resection reflects the
imprecision of our current preoperative staging modalities, and highlights
the need for improved methods to detect occult metastases, both intra and
extrahepatic, before planned hepatic resection.
The role of repeat hepatic resection for recurrent hepatic metastases from
CRC has been the focus of several reports as liver resection has become
safer. The operative morbidity and mortality of repeat hepatic resection is
comparable to that of initial resection (19%–32% and 0%–2%, respec-
tively), and is associated with a median survival of 32 to 46 months (reviewed
in [30]). A bi-institutional review of second liver resections for recurrent he-
patic metastases was performed by the authors’ group in conjunction with
1016 FAHY & JARNAGIN

the University of Frankfurt [31]. In this study of 126 patients, the operative
mortality was 1.6% and the operative morbidity was 28%. The actuarial sur-
vival rates following the second hepatic resection were 86%, 51%, and 34%
for 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Survival was significantly better in patients
with solitary lesions or when the largest lesion was smaller than 5 cm. Eight-
y-four patients developed recurrent metastatic disease following second he-
patic resection. Liver-only recurrence occurred in 36%, liver plus other
recurrence occurred in 31%, and extrahepatic recurrence only occurred in
33%. Independent factors that were associated significantly with a poorer
outcome included the presence of multiple hepatic lesions and at least one
lesion that was larger than 5 cm at the second resection. The most important
factors in selecting patients for second liver resection seem to be medical fit-
ness, small solitary tumors, ability to clear all disease, and, possibly, disease-
free interval between the first and second hepatic resections.

Role of transplantation
Little has been written about the feasibility or efficacy of orthotopic liver
transplantation for colorectal hepatic metastases. In general, liver metasta-
ses are considered an absolute contraindication to cadaveric liver transplan-
tation [32]. A small retrospective study by Muhlbacher and colleagues [33]
explored the feasibility of orthotopic liver transplantation for secondary
liver malignancies. Their study cohort included 17 patients who had CRC
metastases and 2 patients who had resected neuroendocrine tumors of the
pancreas. The median survival for the transplanted group was 13.1 months,
compared with 7.2 months in patients who received no specific therapy and
18 months in those who were treated with locoregional intra-arterial chemo-
therapy. The longest documented disease-free survivors were in the trans-
plant group, with three patients surviving for 7,4, and 2 years. No patient
in the group that received intra-arterial chemotherapy lived beyond 3 years.
Optimal selection of patients for transplantation is paramount; unfortu-
nately, the investigators did not specify how their patients were chosen for
transplant, except to note that the primary lesion was resected successfully
and extrahepatic tumors had been excluded.
Recently, Honore and colleagues [34] reported a patient who underwent
liver transplantation as salvage therapy for acute liver failure after liver re-
section for isolated hepatic metastases from colon cancer. The patient devel-
oped isolated 5-cm liver metastases 3 years after a sigmoid colon resection
for adenocarcinoma. The patient did not receive any posttransplant chemo-
therapy, and reportedly was cancer-free 10 years following his transplanta-
tion. Although this is a single case and definitive conclusions cannot be
drawn based upon this one case, it does raise the question of whether liver
transplantation might be an option for highly selected patients who have co-
lon metastases that are limited to the liver. There is no role for transplanta-
tion in this setting outside a well-conceived clinical trial.
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1017

Timing of chemotherapy
The past 10 years have seen a dramatic change in systemic chemotherapy
for metastatic CRC. The switch from bolus to infusional 5-fluorouracil
(5FU) was the first major shift, and it has been associated with higher re-
sponse rates and significantly longer progression-free survival [35]. In the
1990s, irinotecan and oxaliplatin emerged as effective agents against meta-
static CRC. Compared with the 33% response rates that were seen with in-
fusional 5FU/leucovorin alone, the addition of irinotecan or oxaliplatin is
associated with response rates of up to 50% (reviewed in [36]). Systemic che-
motherapy for hepatic metastases from CRC can be given in two settings:
adjuvant therapy following hepatic resection and in the neoadjuvant setting,
in patients who have unresectable liver disease.

Neoadjuvant
The concept of rendering unresectable hepatic metastases from CRC
resectable through the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy was described first
by Bismuth and colleagues [37]. Of 330 patients who disease initially was
considered to be unresectable, 53 patients (16%) responded to chemother-
apy to the point that curative resection was considered possible. Patients
received chronomodulated chemotherapy with 5FU, folinic acid, and
oxaliplatin. In addition, patients underwent a variety of pre- and intraoper-
ative techniques that was aimed at achieving a curative resection, including
preoperative portal vein embolization and intraoperative cryotherapy and
alcohol ablation. Twenty-three patients (43%) died with hepatic recurrence,
and 36% were without evidence of disease at the time of last follow-up. The
1-, 3-, and 4-year overall survival rates were 91%, 54%, and 40%, respec-
tively. This study showed that down-staging of unresectable hepatic metas-
tases is possible, and it is associated with overall survival rates that are
comparable to patients whose liver metastases initially were considered to
be resectable. These findings were confirmed in a larger trial by the same
investigators in which 95 of 701 patients, whose disease was considered
initially to be unresectable, were rendered candidates for curative resection
following neoadjuvant chemotherapy with a combination of 5FU, folinic
acid, and oxaliplatin [38]. Results from more recent trials showed that the
conversion from unresectable disease to resectable disease may approach
35% (reviewed in [36]). The most important lesson learned from this early
experience with neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients who had initially un-
resectable hepatic metastases is that chemotherapy can render a measurable
proportion of cases resectable. Therefore, these patients should be moni-
tored closely for this possibility, because resection continues to offer the
best opportunity for long-term survival and possible cure.
The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients who have resectable
liver metastases was the focus of a recent study by the authors’ group [39].
1018 FAHY & JARNAGIN

One hundred and sixty-seven patients who had clinically resectable synchro-
nous hepatic metastases from CRC were evaluated; 61 patients had a com-
bined colon/liver resection, whereas 106 patients had a staged resection. Of
these 106 patients, 54 received no preoperative chemotherapy and 52 received
neoadjuvant chemotherapy that consisted of 5FU-based chemotherapy that
was given in conjunction with leucovorin, irinotecan, or oxaliplatin. The
two groups were well-matched with regard to their primary tumors and extent
of liver metastases. Two factors were associated significantly with improved
disease-specific survival: the ability to undergo complete hepatic resection
and lack of disease progression while on neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Al-
though no survival advantage was seen in patients who received neoadjuvant
chemotherapy compared with those who did not, a survival advantage was ev-
ident among patients who received neoadjuvant therapy and showed stabili-
zation or regression of disease. Additionally, no patient who received
neoadjuvant chemotherapy became unresectable while on therapy. In pa-
tients who have synchronous CRC with hepatic metastases, the authors advo-
cate considering these patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy because
response to treatment may provide important prognostic information and
can help to guide future therapeutic interventions.

Adjuvant
Numerous investigators have shown that hepatic and extrahepatic recur-
rence is common following curative resection of hepatic metastases from
CRC [29,31,40]. Therefore, adjuvant therapies that are designed to reduce
the risk for local and distant recurrence are needed. The use of HAI therapy
to reduce hepatic recurrences following curative resection was reviewed
above. The role of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy following hepatic resec-
tion is unclear; there is little data to guide practitioners who care for patients
in this setting. The primary data that are used to support adjuvant chemo-
therapy in this group of patients comes from extrapolation of data that sup-
port the use of chemotherapy after resection of node-positive CRCs. A
handful of retrospective studies have explored the potential benefit of che-
motherapy (Table 4). The largest study, by Figueras and colleagues [41],
compared 81 patients who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy after he-
patic resection with 99 patients who received various systemic chemotherapy
regimens following resection. The groups were well-matched with respect to
number of liver metastases, presence of extrahepatic disease, preoperative
CEA level, type of resection, and presence of positive margins. Patients
who received adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly younger, were less
likely to have received previous chemotherapy, and had more synchronous
metastases compared with patients who did not receive adjuvant chemother-
apy. Adjuvant chemotherapy had a protective effect and improved the prog-
nosis of patients who received the therapy, independent of the presence of
more synchronous metastases and previous treatment with chemotherapy.
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1019

Table 4
Summary of studies of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy following resection of colorectal
hepatic metastases
Duration
Investigators Treatment groups N follow-up Outcome Benefit
Donato et al, Observation 40 Median 28 mo 3-y DFS, OS: 29, Yes
1994 [59] 5FU based 62 43.5 mo, respectively
3-y DFS, OS: 22, 47
mo, respectively
O’Connell et al, Observation vs 26 NR 5-y survival: 25% vs No
1985 [60] 5FU þ semustine 26 15%
Butler et al, Observation 51 NR NR No
1986 [61] 5FU based 11
a
Iwatsuki et al, Observation 38 Median 3 y 3-y OS: 45% Yes
1986 [62] 5FU 22 3-y OS: 62%
Kokudo et al, Observation vs 40 NR 5-y DFS, OS: 37%, Yes
1998 [63] regional chemo 38 19%, respectively
vs systemic 37 5-y DFS, OS: 49%,
chemo 26%, respectively
5-y DFS, OS: 51%,
33%, respectively
Figueras et al, Observation vs 81 Median 20 mo 5-y OS: 25% Yes
2001 [41] 5FU/LV 99 5-y OS: 53%
Abbreviation: NR, not recorded.
a
Variables extrapolated from published figures.

The precise role for adjuvant chemotherapy following hepatic resection

continues to await the results from randomized clinical trials using current
chemotherapy regimens.

Summary
The management of patients who have hepatic metastases from CRC has
become increasingly complex as the number of modalities that is available to
treat these tumors has increased. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of
treatment, when possible, and may become an option in an increasing pro-
portion of patients that has advanced disease and previously were consid-
ered unresectable when treated with a combination of neoadjuvant
systemic or hepatic arterial chemotherapy. The role of microwave coagula-
tion and RFA can be considered only complementary to surgical resection
at this point, but they may represent the best option in highly selected pa-
tients, such as those who are at high risk for extrahepatic recurrence or
who are poor surgical candidates.

References
[1] Jemal A, Murray T, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2005. CA Cancer J Clin 2005;55(1):
10–30.
1020 FAHY & JARNAGIN

[2] Bengtsson G, Carlsson G, Hafstrom L, et al. Natural history of patients with untreated liver
metastases from colorectal cancer. Am J Surg 1981;141(5):586–9.
[3] Taylor I, Mullee M, Campbell M. Prognostic index for the development of liver metastases in
patients with colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 1990;77(5):499–501.
[4] McCarter M, Fong Y. Metastatic liver tumors. Semin Surg Oncol 2000;19:177–88.
[5] Choti MA, Sitzmann JV, Tiburi MF, et al. Trends in long-term survival following liver re-
section for hepatic colorectal metastases. Ann Surg 2002;235(6):759–66.
[6] Abdalla E, Vauthey J, Ellis L, et al. Recurrence and outcomes following hepatic resection,
radiofrequency ablation, and combined resection/ablation for colorectal liver metastases.
Ann Surg 2004;239(6):818–27.
[7] Steele G, Ravikumar T. Resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. Biologic
perspective. Ann Surg 1989;210:127–38.
[8] Rahusen F, Cuesta M, Borgstein P, et al. Selection of patients for resection of colorectal me-
tastases to the liver using diagnostic laparoscopy and laparoscopic ultrasonography. Ann
Surg 1999;230(1):31–7.
[9] Jarnagin W, Conlon K, Bodniewicz J, et al. A clinical scoring system predicts the yield of di-
agnostic laparoscopy in patients with potentially resectable hepatic colorectal metastases.
Cancer 2001;91(6):1121–8.
[10] Grobmyer S, Fong Y, D’Angelica M, et al. Diagnostic laparoscopy prior to planned hepatic
resection for colorectal metastases. Arch Surg 2004;139:1326–30.
[11] Fong Y, Fortner J, Sun R, et al. Clinical score for predicting recurrence after hepatic resec-
tion for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of 1001 consecutive cases. Ann Surg 1999;
230(3):309–18.
[12] Pawlik T, Izzo F, Cohen D, et al. Combined resection and radiofrequency ablation for
advanced hepatic malignancies: results in 172 patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10(9):
1059–69.
[13] Bleicher RJ, Allegra DP, Nora DT, et al. Radiofrequency ablation in 447 complex unresect-
able liver tumors: lessons learned. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10(1):52–8.
[14] Seki T, Wakabayashi M, Nakagawa T, et al. Percutaneous microwave coagulation therapy
for solitary metastatic liver tumors from colorectal cancer: a pilot clinical study. Am J Gas-
troenterol 1999;94:322–7.
[15] Shibata T, Niinobu T, Ogata N, et al. Microwave coagulation therapy for multiple hepatic
metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Cancer 2000;89:276–84.
[16] Kemeny N, Ron I. Hepatic arterial chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal patients. Semin
Oncol 1999;26(5):524–35.
[17] Kemeny NE, Gonen M. Hepatic arterial infusion after liver resection. N Engl J Med 2005;
352(7):734–5.
[18] Kemeny N, Jarnagin W, Gonen M, et al. Phase I/II study of hepatic arterial therapy with
floxuridine and dexamethasone in combination with intravenous irinotecan as adjuvant
treatment after resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2003;
21:3303–9.
[19] Fong Y, Salo J. Surgical therapy of hepatic colorectal metastases. Semin Oncol 1999;26(5):
514–23.
[20] Scheele J, Stang R, Altendorf-Hofmann A, et al. Resection of colorectal liver metastases.
World J Surg 1995;19(1):59–71.
[21] Jamison R, Donohue J, Nagorney D, et al. Hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer
results in cure for some patients. Arch Surg 1997;132(5):505–10.
[22] Jarnagin WR, Gonen M, Fong Y, et al. Improvement in perioperative outcome after hepatic
resection: analysis of 1,803 consecutive cases over the past decade. Ann Surg 2002;236(4):
397–406.
[23] Belghiti J, Hiramatsu K, Benoist S, et al. Seven hundred forty-seven hepatectomies in the
1990s: an update to evaluate the actual risk of liver resection. J Am Coll Surg 2000;191(1):
38–46.
 TREATMENT OF LIVER COLORECTAL METASTASES 1021

[24] Blumgart L, Allison D. Resection and embolization in the management of secondary hepatic
tumors. World J Surg 1982;6(1):32–45.
[25] Cady B, Monson D, Swinton N. Survival of patients after colonic resection for carcinoma
with simultaneous liver metastases. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1970;131(4):697–700.
[26] Martin R, Paty P, Fong Y, et al. Simultaneous liver and colorectal resections are safe for syn-
chronous colorectal liver metastasis. J Am Coll Surg 2003;197(2):233–41 [discussion 241–2].
[27] Weber J, Bachellier P, Oussoultzoglou E, et al. Simultaneous resection of colorectal primary
tumour and synchronous liver metastases. Br J Surg 2003;90(8):956–62.
[28] Chua H, Sondenaa K, Tsiotos G, et al. Concurrent vs. staged colectomy and hepatectomy
for primary colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases. Dis Colon Rectum
2004;47(8):1310–6.
[29] Topal B, Kaufman L, Aerts R, et al. Patterns of failure following curative resection of colo-
rectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol 2003;29(3):248–53.
[30] Bentrem DJ, Dematteo RP, Blumgart LH. Surgical therapy for metastatic disease to the
liver. Annu Rev Med 2005;56:139–56.
[31] Petrowsky H, Gonen M, Jarnagin W, et al. Second liver resections are safe and effective treat-
ment for recurrent hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: a bi-institutional analysis. Ann
Surg 2002;235(6):863–71.
[32] Detry O, DeRoover A, Delwaide J, et al. Absolute and relative contraindications to liver
transplantation. A perpetually moving frontier. Acta Gastroenterol Belg 2002;65:133.
[33] Muhlbacher F, Huk I, Steininger R, et al. Is orthotopic liver transplantation a feasible treat-
ment for secondary cancer of the liver? Transplant Proc 1991;23(1):1567–8.
[34] Honore C, Detry O, DeRoover A, et al. Liver transplantation for metastatic colon adenocar-
cinoma: report of a case with 10 years of follow-up without recurrence. Transpl Int 2003;16:
692–3.
[35] de Gramont A, Bosset J, Milan C, et al. Randomized trial comparing monthly low-dose leu-
covorin and fluorouracil bolus with bimonthly high-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus
plus infusion for advanced colorectal cancer: a French intergroup study. J Clin Oncol 1997;
15(2):808–15.
[36] Leonard G, Brenner B, Kemeny N. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy before liver resection for pa-
tients with unresectable liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:
2038–48.
[37] Bismuth H, Adam R, Levi F, et al. Resection of nonresectable liver metastases from colorec-
tal cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg 1996;224(4):509–20 [discussion 520–2].
[38] Adam R, Avisar E, Ariche A, et al. Five-year survival following hepatic resection after neo-
adjuvant therapy for nonresectable colorectal. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8(4):347–53.
[39] Allen PJ, Kemeny N, Jarnagin W, et al. Importance of response to neoadjuvant chemother-
apy in patients undergoing resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases. J Gastroint-
est Surg 2003;7(1):109–15 [discussion 116–7].
[40] Fong Y, Cohen A, Fortner J. Liver resection for colorectal metastases. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:
938–46.
[41] Figueras J, Vallas C, Rafecas A, et al. Resection rate and effect of postoperative chemother-
apy on survival after surgery for colorectal liver metastases. Br J Surg 2001;88(7):980–5.
[42] Elias D, Lasser P, Rougier P, et al. Frequency, technical aspects, results, and indications of
major hepatectomy after prolonged intra-arterial hepatic chemotherapy for initially unre-
sectable hepatic tumors. J Am Coll Surg 1995;180(2):213–9.
[43] Link K, Pillasch J, Formentini E, et al. Down staging by regional chemotherapy of non-
resectable isolated colorectal liver metastases. Eur J Surg Oncol 1999;25:381–8.
[44] Meric F, Patt Y, Curley S, et al. Surgery after downstaging of unresectable hepatic tumors
with intra-arterial chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7(7):490–5.
[45] Clavien P, Selzner N, Morse M, et al. Downstaging of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver
metastases from colorectal cancer by selective intra-arterial chemotherapy. Surgery 2002;
131(4):433–42.
1022 FAHY & JARNAGIN

[46] Milandri C, Calazolari F, Giampalma E. Combined treatment of inoperable liver metastases

from colorectal cancer. Tumori 2003;89(Suppl):112–4.
[47] Ducreux M, Ychou M, Laplanche A, et al. Intra-arterial hepatic chemotherapy (IAHC) with
oxaliplatin (O) combined with intravenous treatment with 5FU þ folinic acid (FA) in hepatic
metastases of colorectal cancer. Presented at the 2003 American Society of Clinical Oncology
Annual Meeting. Chicago, May 31–June 3, 2003.
[48] Noda M, Yanagi H, Yoshikawa R, et al. Second-look hepatectomy after pharmacokinetic
modulating chemotherapy (PMC) combination with hepatic arterial 5FU infusion and
oral UFT in patients with unresectable hepatic colorectal metastases. Presented at the
2004 American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting. New Orleans, June 5–8, 2004.
[49] Leonard G, Fong Y, Jarnagin W, et al. Liver resection after hepatic arterial infusion (HAI)
plus systemic oxaliplatin (Oxal) combinations in pretreated patients with extensive unresect-
able colorectal liver metastases. Presented at the 2004 American Society of Clinical Oncology
Annual Meeting. New Orleans, June 5–8, 2004.
[50] Kemeny N, Eid A, Stockman J, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion of floxuridine and dexameth-
asone plus high-dose mitomycin C for patients with unresectable hepatic metastases from co-
lorectal carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 2005;91(2):97–101.
[51] Lygidakis N, Ziras N, Parissis J. Resection versus resection combined with adjuvant pre- and
post-operative chemotherapydimmunotherapy for metastatic colorectal liver cancer. A new
look at an old problem. Hepatogastroenterology 1995;42(2):155–61.
[52] Asahara T, Kikkawa M, Okajima M, et al. Studies of postoperative transarterial infusion
chemotherapy for liver metastasis of colorectal carcinoma after hepatectomy. Hepatogas-
troenterology 1998;45(21):805–11.
[53] Lorenz M, Muller H, Schramm H, et al. Randomized trial of surgery versus surgery followed
by adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid for liver metastases
of colorectal cancer. German Cooperative on Liver Metastases. Ann Surg 1998;228(6):
756–62.
[54] Rudroff C, Altendorf-Hoffmann A, Stangl R, et al. Prospective randomised trial on adjuvant
hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy after R0 resection of colorectal liver metastases. Lan-
genbecks Arch Surg 1999;384(3):243–9.
[55] Kemeny N, Huang Y, Cohen AM, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion of chemotherapy after re-
section of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1999;341(27):2039–48.
[56] Tono T, Hasuike Y, Ohzato H, et al. Limited by definite efficacy of prophylactic hepatic ar-
terial infusion chemotherapy after curative resection of colorectal liver metastases: a random-
ized study. Cancer 2000;88(7):1549–56.
[57] Kemeny MM, Adak S, Gray B, et al. Combined-modality treatment for resectable metastatic
colorectal carcinoma to the liver: surgical resection of hepatic metastases in combination
with continuous infusion of chemotherapydan intergroup study. J Clin Oncol 2002;20(6):
1499–505.
[58] Kemeny N, Huang Y, Cohen A, et al. Hepatic arterial infusion of chemotherapy after resec-
tion of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1999;341:2039–48.
[59] Donato N, Dario C, Giovanni S, et al. Retrospective study on adjuvant chemotherapy after
surgical resection of colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver. Eur J Surg Oncol 1994;20(4):
454–60.
[60] O’Connell M, Adson M, Schutt A, et al. Clinical trial of adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical
resection of colorectal cancer metastatic to the liver. Mayo Clin Proc 1985;60(8):517–20.
[61] Butler J, Attiyeh F, Daly J. Hepatic resection for metastases of the colon and rectum. Surg
Gynecol Obstet 1986;162(2):109–13.
[62] Iwatsuki S, Esquivel C, Gordon R, et al. Liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Sur-
gery 1986;100(4):804–10.
[63] Kokudo N, Seki M, Ohta H, et al. Effects of systemic and regional chemotherapy after he-
patic resection for colorectal metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 1998;5(8):706–12.