Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases: The Third Hepatectomy

Open access
Adam, René, Pascal, Gérard, Azoulay, Daniel, Tanaka, Kuniya, Castaing, Denis, Bismuth, Henri·2003·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk, the benefit, and the main factors of prognosis of third liver resections for recurrent colorectal metastases. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Recurrence following liver resection is frequent after a first as after a second hepatectomy. Second liver resections yield a similar survival to that obtained with first liver resection, but little is known about third hepatectomy. METHODS: This study reports a retrospective analysis of 60 patients who underwent a third liver resection for colorectal metastases in a 16-year experience (1984-2000). Patients were identified from a prospective database that collected 615 consecutive patients who cumulated 883 hepatectomies (615 first, 199 second, 60 thirds, and 9 fourths). Third hepatic resections were compared with first and second procedures, in terms of risk and benefit for the patient. Prognostic factors of survival after third hepatic resection were determined by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A third hepatic resection was attempted in 68 of 115 of liver recurrences following a second hepatectomy (59%) and achieved in 88% of the cases (60 of 68). There was no intraoperative mortality or postoperative deaths within the 2 months. Fifteen patients developed postoperative complications (25%), a rate similar to that of first and second hepatectomies. Overall 5-year survival was 32% and disease-free survival was 17% after the third resection. Survival compared favorably to that of patients with recurrence following a second hepatectomy who could not be operated (5% at 3 years) or who failed to be resected (15% at 2 years, P = 0.0001). It also compared favorably to that of patients who underwent only two hepatectomies (5-year survival, 27%). When estimated from the time of first hepatectomy, survival was 65% at 5 years for the 60 patients who underwent three hepatic resections. Concomitant extrahepatic tumor was treated in 16 patients (27%) by 11 abdominal procedures and 5 pulmonary resections. By multivariate analysis, tumor size > 30 mm for first liver metastases, presence of extrahepatic tumor at second hepatectomy, and noncurative pattern of third liver resection were independent prognostic factors of reduced survival. CONCLUSIONS: Third hepatectomy is safe and provides an additional benefit of survival similar to that of first and second liver resections. It is worthwhile when curative and integrated into an intended multimodal strategy of tumoral eradication.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.sla.0000098112.04758.4e

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
Adam, R., Pascal, G., Azoulay, D., Tanaka, K., Castaing, D., & Bismuth, H.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2003-12
Volume
238
Issue
6
Pages
871-884
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004507999
Cited by
406
References
0
FWCI
7.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases: The Third Hepatectomy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000098112.04758.4e
The paper
Adam, R., Pascal, G., Azoulay, D., Tanaka, K., Castaing, D., & Bismuth, H. (2003). Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases: The Third Hepatectomy. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000098112.04758.4e

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.