SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

H. R. Roh, K. S. Suh, H. J. Lee, H. K. Yang, K. J. Choe and K. U. Lee, “Outcome of Hepatic Resection for Metastatic Gastric Cancer,” The American Surgeon, Vol. 71, No. 2, 2005, pp. 95-99.

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Surgical Treatment of Liver Metastases from Gastric Cancer

    AUTHORS: Daniel Vasilev Kostov, Georgi Leonidov Kobakov, Daniel Veselov Yankov

    KEYWORDS: Gastric Cancer; Liver Metastases; Hepatectomy; Survival; Prognostic Factors; Univariate Analysis; Multivariate Analysis

    JOURNAL NAME: Surgical Science, Vol.4 No.9, September 10, 2013

    ABSTRACT: Background: Hepatectomy for gastric metastases remains controversial. We aimed at assessing the surgical results, clinicopathological features of gastric cancer liver metastases (GCLM) and prognostic factors. Methods: The outcome of 28 consecutive patients with synchronous (n = 24) or metachronous (n = 4) GCLM was retrospectively analyzed. Curatively, initial hepatectomies such as segmentectomy and hemihepatectomy or non-anatomical limited liver resection less extensive than segmentectomy followed complete primary gastric cancer (GC) resections. Results: Median survival time was 16 months (range, 5 - 66 months). The actuarial overall 12-, 36-, and 60-month survival rates after hepatectomy were 67.8% (n = 19), 39.2% (n = 11), and 28.5% (n = 8), respectively. In multivariate analysis, absent GC serosal invasion-hazard ratio (HR) 1; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 - 9.9; P = 0.020; solitary LM-HR 1; 95% CI 1.6 - 16.0; P = 0.005, andcurative liver resection with negative resection margin (R0)-HR 1, 95% CI 2.2 - 18.0; P = 0.001 were independent prognostic factors. Conclusions: Surgery of GCLM is a good indication in well-selected patients with an absent serosal invasion of primary tumour, single GCLM and attainment of R0 liver resection. For most GCLM patients, however, there are no other therapeutic modalities. Thus systemic chemotherapy remains the best hope for a longer patient’s survival and an improved individual quality of life.