Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,101

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effect of Surgical Margin Status on Survival and Site of Recurrence After Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Metastases

Open access
Pawlik, Timothy M., Scoggins, Charles R., Zorzi, Daria, Abdalla, Eddie K., Andres, Axel, Eng, Cathy, Curley, Steven A., Loyer, Evelyne M., Muratore, Andrea, Mentha, Gilles, Capussotti, Lorenzo, Vauthey, Jean-Nicolas·2005·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of surgical margin status on survival and site of recurrence in patients treated with hepatic resection for colorectal metastases. METHODS: Using a multicenter database, 557 patients who underwent hepatic resection for colorectal metastases were identified. Demographics, operative data, pathologic margin status, site of recurrence (margin, other intrahepatic site, extrahepatic), and long-term survival data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: On final pathologic analysis, margin status was positive in 45 patients, and negative by 1 to 4 mm in 129, 5 to 9 mm in 85, and > or =1 cm in 298. At a median follow-up of 29 months, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 97%, 74%, and 58%; median survival was 74 months. Tumor size > or =5 cm, >3 tumor nodules, and carcinoembryonic antigen level >200 ng/mL predicted poor survival (all P < 0.05). Median survival was 49 months in patients with positive margins and not yet reached in patients with negative margins (P = 0.01). After hepatic resection, 225 (40.4%) patients had recurrence: 21 at the surgical margin, 56 at another intrahepatic site, 82 at an extrahepatic site, and 66 at both intrahepatic and extrahepatic sites. Patients with negative margins of 1 to 4 mm, 5 to 9 mm, and > or =1 cm had similar overall recurrence rates (P > 0.05). Patients with positive margins were more likely to have surgical margin recurrence (P = 0.003). Adverse preoperative biologic factors including tumor number greater than 3 (P = 0.01) and a preoperative CEA level greater than 200 ng/mL (P = 0.04) were associated with an increased risk of positive surgical margin. CONCLUSIONS: A positive margin after resection of hepatic colorectal metastases is associated with adverse biologic factors and increased risk of surgical-margin recurrence. The width of a negative surgical margin does not affect survival, recurrence risk, or site of recurrence. A predicted margin of <1 cm after resection of hepatic colorectal metastases should not be used as an exclusion criterion for resection.

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.0000160703.75808.7d

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 1,101

Metadata

Authors
Pawlik, T. M., Scoggins, C. R., Zorzi, D., Abdalla, E. K., Andres, A., Eng, C., Curley, S. A., Loyer, E. M., Muratore, A., Mentha, G., Capussotti, L., & Vauthey, J.-N.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2005-05
Volume
241
Issue
5
Pages
715-724
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2011890969
Cited by
1,101
References
0
FWCI
22.19
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: Effect of Surgical Margin Status on Survival and Site of Recurrence After Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Metastases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000160703.75808.7d
The paper
Pawlik, T. M., Scoggins, C. R., Zorzi, D., Abdalla, E. K., Andres, A., Eng, C., Curley, S. A., Loyer, E. M., Muratore, A., Mentha, G., Capussotti, L., & Vauthey, J.-N. (2005). Effect of Surgical Margin Status on Survival and Site of Recurrence After Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Metastases. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000160703.75808.7d

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.