Portal Vein Embolization (PVE) Versus PVE with Haematopoietic Stem Cell Application in Patients with Primarily Non-resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases
Language English Country Greece Media print
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article
PubMed
30194213
DOI
10.21873/anticanres.12888
PII: 38/9/5531
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- Colorectal liver metastases, future liver remnant volume, portal vein embolization, stem cells,
- MeSH
- Time Factors MeSH
- Kaplan-Meier Estimate MeSH
- Colorectal Neoplasms mortality pathology MeSH
- Combined Modality Therapy MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Liver Neoplasms mortality secondary therapy MeSH
- Disease-Free Survival MeSH
- Liver Regeneration * MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Risk Factors MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Embolization, Therapeutic adverse effects methods MeSH
- Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation * adverse effects mortality MeSH
- Mesenchymal Stem Cell Transplantation * adverse effects mortality MeSH
- Portal Vein * MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
BACKGROUND: Portal vein embolization (PVE) and PVE with autologous mesenchymal stem cell application (PVE-MSC) increases future liver remnant volume (FLRV). The aim of this study was to compare both methods from the aspect of FLRV growth, progression of colorectal liver metastases (CLM), CLM resectability and long-term results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-five patients with CLM and insufficient FLRV were included in the study. FLVR growth and CLM volume were evaluated using computed tomography. Liver resection was performed in patients with FLVR >30% of total liver volume. RESULTS: In the PVE (N=27) group, FLRV growth was observed in 23 patients (85.2%) and in 100% of patients in the PVE-MSC (N=28) group (p<0.05). The rapidity of FLRV and CLM growth did not differ between groups. R0 resection was performed in 14 (51.8%) and 24 (85.7%) patients from the PVE and PVE-MSC (p<0.02) groups, respectively. The 3-year overall and progression-free survival rates were 85.75% and 9.3% in the PVE group and 68.7% and 17.1% in the PVE-MSC group, respectively (p<0.67 and p<0.84, respectively). CONCLUSION: PVE-MSC allows for more effective growth of FLRV and resectability of CLM compared to PVE. The two methods do not differ in their long-term results.
Department of Hemato oncology University Hospital Faculty of Medicine Pilsen Czech Republic
Department of Immunochemistry University Hospital Faculty of Medicine Pilsen Czech Republic
Department of Radiology University Hospital Faculty of Medicine Pilsen Czech Republic
Department of Surgery University Hospital Faculty of Medicine Pilsen Czech Republic
References provided by Crossref.org
