TY - JOUR
T1 - The Importance of Optimal Thermal Ablation Margins in Colorectal Liver Metastases
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 21 Studies
AU - Chlorogiannis, David Dimitris
AU - Sotirchos, Vlasios S.
AU - Georgiades, Christos
AU - Filippiadis, Dimitrios
AU - Arellano, Ronald S.
AU - Gonen, Mithat
AU - Makris, Gregory C.
AU - Garg, Tushar
AU - Sofocleous, Constantinos T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 by the authors.
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in the US. Thermal ablation (TA) can be a comparable alternative to partial hepatectomy for selected cases when eradication of all visible tumor with an ablative margin of greater than 5 mm is achieved. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to encapsulate the current clinical evidence concerning the optimal TA margin for local cure in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the CENTRAL databases were systematically searched from inception until 1 May 2023, in accordance with the PRISMA Guidelines. Measure of effect included the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model. Results: Overall, 21 studies were included, comprising 2005 participants and 2873 ablated CLMs. TA with margins less than 5 mm were associated with a 3.6 times higher risk for LTP (n = 21 studies, RR: 3.60; 95% CI: 2.58–5.03; p-value < 0.001). When margins less than 5 mm were additionally confirmed by using 3D software, a 5.1 times higher risk for LTP (n = 4 studies, RR: 5.10; 95% CI: 1.45–17.90; p-value < 0.001) was recorded. Moreover, a thermal ablation margin of less than 10 mm but over 5 mm remained significantly associated with 3.64 times higher risk for LTP vs. minimal margin larger than 10 mm (n = 7 studies, RR: 3.64; 95% CI: 1.31–10.10; p-value < 0.001). Conclusions: This meta-analysis solidifies that a minimal ablation margin over 5 mm is the minimum critical endpoint required, whereas a minimal margin of at least 10 mm yields optimal local tumor control after TA of CLMs.
AB - Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths in the US. Thermal ablation (TA) can be a comparable alternative to partial hepatectomy for selected cases when eradication of all visible tumor with an ablative margin of greater than 5 mm is achieved. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to encapsulate the current clinical evidence concerning the optimal TA margin for local cure in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the CENTRAL databases were systematically searched from inception until 1 May 2023, in accordance with the PRISMA Guidelines. Measure of effect included the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model. Results: Overall, 21 studies were included, comprising 2005 participants and 2873 ablated CLMs. TA with margins less than 5 mm were associated with a 3.6 times higher risk for LTP (n = 21 studies, RR: 3.60; 95% CI: 2.58–5.03; p-value < 0.001). When margins less than 5 mm were additionally confirmed by using 3D software, a 5.1 times higher risk for LTP (n = 4 studies, RR: 5.10; 95% CI: 1.45–17.90; p-value < 0.001) was recorded. Moreover, a thermal ablation margin of less than 10 mm but over 5 mm remained significantly associated with 3.64 times higher risk for LTP vs. minimal margin larger than 10 mm (n = 7 studies, RR: 3.64; 95% CI: 1.31–10.10; p-value < 0.001). Conclusions: This meta-analysis solidifies that a minimal ablation margin over 5 mm is the minimum critical endpoint required, whereas a minimal margin of at least 10 mm yields optimal local tumor control after TA of CLMs.
KW - colorectal cancer
KW - interventional oncology
KW - liver metastases
KW - margin
KW - systematic review
KW - thermal ablation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85180721073&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85180721073&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/cancers15245806
DO - 10.3390/cancers15245806
M3 - Review article
C2 - 38136351
AN - SCOPUS:85180721073
SN - 2072-6694
VL - 15
JO - Cancers
JF - Cancers
IS - 24
M1 - 5806
ER -