Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Opinion
  • Published:

The evolution of cancer surgery and future perspectives

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology volume 12, pages 115–124 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Surgery is the oldest oncological discipline, dating back thousands of years. Prior to the advent of anaesthesia and antisepsis 150 years ago, only the brave, desperate, or ill-advised patient underwent surgery because cure rates were low, and morbidity and mortality high. However, since then, cancer surgery has flourished, driven by relentless technical innovation and research. Historically, the mantra of the cancer surgeon was that increasingly radical surgery would enhance cure rates. The past 50 years have seen a paradigm shift, with the realization that multimodal therapy, technological advances, and minimally invasive techniques can reduce the need for, or the detrimental effects of, radical surgery. Preservation of form, function, and quality of life, without compromising survival, is the new mantra. Today's surgeons, no longer the uneducated technicians of history, are highly trained medical professionals and together with oncologists, radiologists, scientists, anaesthetists and nurses, have made cancer surgeries routine, safe, and highly effective. This article will review the major advances that have underpinned this evolution.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Timeline of landmark developments in breast cancer surgery.
Figure 2: Timeline of landmark developments in minimally invasive surgery.
Figure 3: Intraoperative photograph of open application of a radiofrequency ablation probe to a metastatic deposit of colorectal cancer in the liver.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cancer Research UK. Cancer statistics; key facts: all cancers combined [online], (2014).

  2. Philip, J. F. Results of treatment of breast cancer at Aberdeen Royal Infirmary 1940–1955. Br. Med. J. 1, 323–331 (1967).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Floyd, C. E., Stirling, C. T. & Cohn, I. Jr. Cancer of the colon, rectum and anus: review of 1,687 cases. Ann. Surg. 163, 829–837 (1966).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Clarke, D. N., Jones, P. F. & Needham, C. D. Outcome in colorectal carcinoma: seven-year study of a population. Br. Med. J. 280, 431–435 (1980).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Brachet Contul, R. et al. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for extraperitoneal rectal cancer: long-term results of a 18-year single-centre experience. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 18, 796–807 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Langreth, R. & Waldholz, M. New era of personalized medicine: targeting drugs for each unique genetic profile. Oncologist 4, 426–427 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Breasted, J. H. The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus Vol. 3, 405 (The University of Chicago Press, 1930).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Thariat, J., Hannoun-Levi, J. M., Sun Myint, A., Vuong, T. & Gerard, J. P. Past, present, and future of radiotherapy for the benefit of patients. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 10, 52–60 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Peeters, F., Verbeeten, B. Jr & Venema, H. W. Nobel Prize for medicine and physiology 1979 for A. M. Cormack and G. N. Hounsfield [Dutch]. Ned. Tijdschr. Geneeskd 123, 2192–2193 (1979).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Halsted, W. S. The results of operations for the cure of cancer of the breast performed at the John's Hopkins Hospital from June 1889, to January, 1894. Ann. Surg. 20, 497–555 (1894).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hamashima, C. et al. The Japanese guidelines for gastric cancer screening. Jpn J. Clin. Oncol. 38, 259–267 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lane, J. A. et al. Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy, or radiotherapy for localised prostate cancer: study design and diagnostic and baseline results of the ProtecT randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 15, 1109–1118 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Steele, R. J. et al. Clinical outcomes using a faecal immunochemical test for haemoglobin as a first-line test in a national programme constrained by colonoscopy capacity. United European Gastroenterol. J. 1, 198–205 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Shapiro, S. Periodic screening for breast cancer: the HIP Randomized Controlled Trial. Health Insurance Plan. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 22, 27–30 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nystrom, L. et al. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 359, 909–919 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tabar, L. et al. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet 361, 1405–1410 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Alexander, F. E. et al. 14 years of follow-up from the Edinburgh randomised trial of breast-cancer screening. Lancet 353, 1903–1908 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marmot, M. G. et al. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br. J. Cancer 108, 2205–2240 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Jørgensen, K. J. & Gøtzsche, P. C. Overdiagnosis in publicly organised mammography screening programmes: systematic review of incidence trends. BMJ 339, b2587 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. The NHS Information Centre. National mastectomy and breast reconstruction audit, fourth annual report 2011 [online], (2011).

  21. Association of Breast Surgeons and NHS Breast Screening Programme. An audit of screen detected breast cancers for the year of screening April 2011 to March 2012 [online], (2013).

  22. ISRCTN Register. Surgery versus Active Monitoring for Low Risk Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS) [online], (2014).

  23. Brenner, H., Stock, C. & Hoffmeister, M. Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. BMJ 348, g2467 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Hewitson, P., Glasziou, P., Irwig, L., Towler, B. & Watson, E. Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD001216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001216.pub2 (2007).

  25. Sajid, M. S. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials comparing the effectiveness of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and radical resection in the management of early rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 16, 2–14 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Valsdottir, E. B., Yarandi, S. S., Marks, J. H. & Marks, G. J. Quality of life and fecal incontinence after transanal endoscopic microsurgery for benign and malignant rectal lesions. Surg. Endosc. 28, 193–202 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schwenk, W., Haase, O., Neudecker, J. & Muller, J. M. Short term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD003145 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003145.pub2 (2005).

  28. Lee, A. J. et al. BOADICEA breast cancer risk prediction model: updates to cancer incidences, tumour pathology and web interface. Br. J. Cancer 110, 535–545 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vasen, H. F., Watson, P., Mecklin, J. P. & Lynch, H. T. New clinical criteria for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC, Lynch syndrome) proposed by the International Collaborative group on HNPCC. Gastroenterology 116, 1453–1456 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Apostolou, P. & Fostira, F. Hereditary breast cancer: the era of new susceptibility genes. Biomed. Res. Int. 2013, 747318 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Evans, D. G. et al. Risk reducing mastectomy: outcomes in 10 European centres. J. Med. Genet. 46, 254–258 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ingham, S. L. et al. Risk-reducing surgery increases survival in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers unaffected at time of family referral. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 142, 611–618 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hooker, G. W. et al. Long-term satisfaction and quality of life following risk reducing surgery in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. Hered. Cancer Clin. Pract. 12, 9 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Desmedt, C., Voet, T., Sotiriou, C. & Campbell, P. J. Next-generation sequencing in breast cancer: first take home messages. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 24, 597–604 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Michailidou, K. et al. Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nat. Genet. 45, 353–361 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Tudyka, V. N. & Clark, S. K. Surgical treatment in familial adenomatous polyposis. Ann. Gastroenterol. 25, 201–206 (2012).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Mastoraki, A. et al. Prophylactic total gastrectomy for hereditary diffuse gastric cancer. Review of the literature. Surg. Oncol. 20, e223–e226 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hyung, W. J. et al. Changes in treatment outcomes of gastric cancer surgery over 45 years at a single institution. Yonsei Med. J. 49, 409–415 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Msika, S., Benhamiche, A. M., Tazi, M. A., Rat, P. & Faivre, J. Improvement of operative mortality after curative resection for gastric cancer: population-based study. World J. Surg. 24, 1137–1142 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Osaki, T. et al. Results of surgical treatment for primary lung cancer; time trends of survival and clinicopathologic features [Japanese]. J. UOEH 23, 277–283 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Evans, M. D. et al. A comparative study of colorectal surgical outcome in a national audit separated by 15 years. Colorectal Dis. 15, 608–612 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Hatzinger, M. et al. Hans Christian Jacobaeus: inventor of human laparoscopy and thoracoscopy. J. Endourol. 20, 848–850 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Spaner, S. J. & Warnock, G. L. A brief history of endoscopy, laparoscopy, and laparoscopic surgery. J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. A 7, 369–373 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Murphy, D., Challacombe, B., Khan, M. S. & Dasgupta, P. Robotic technology in urology. Postgrad. Med. J. 82, 743–747 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Shaw, J. P. et al. Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: state of the art and future directions. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 85, S705–S709 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Jayne, D. G. et al. Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br. J. Surg. 97, 1638–1645 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Murray, A. et al. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: systematic reviews and economic evaluation. Health Technol. Assess. 10, 1–141, iii–iv (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lee, W. J., Wang, W., Chen, T. C., Chen, J. C. & Ser, K. H. Totally laparoscopic radical BII gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer: a comparison with open surgery. Surg. Laparosc. Endosc. Percutan. Tech. 18, 369–374 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Francescutti, V., Choy, I., Biertho, L., Goldsmith, C. H. & Anvari, M. Gastrectomy and esophagogastrectomy for proximal and distal gastric lesions: a comparison of open and laparoscopic procedures. Surg. Innov. 16, 134–139 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Moran, P. S. et al. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Urol. 20, 312–321 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Woods, M. E., Wiklund, P. & Castle, E. P. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: recent advances and review of the literature. Curr. Opin. Urol. 20, 125–129 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Gkegkes, I. D. & Iavazzo, C. Single incision laparoscopic hepatectomy: a systematic review. J. Minim. Access Surg. 10, 107–112 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Lee, S. H. et al. Minimally invasive RAMPS in well-selected left-sided pancreatic cancer within Yonsei criteria: long-term (>median 3 years) oncologic outcomes. Surg. Endosc. 28, 2848–2855 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Fisher, S. B. & Kooby, D. A. Laparoscopic pancreatectomy for malignancy. J. Surg. Oncol. 107, 39–50 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Nguyen, N. T. et al. Laparoscopic surgery is associated with a lower incidence of venous thromboembolism compared with open surgery. Ann. Surg. 246, 1021–1027 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Narita, S. et al. Comparison of surgical stress in patients undergoing open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by measuring perioperative serum cytokine levels. J. Laparoendosc. Adv. Surg. Tech. A 23, 33–37 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Kim, Y. W. et al. Improved quality of life outcomes after laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. Ann. Surg. 248, 721–727 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Alimoglu, O., Atak, I., Orhun, K. & Eren, T. Robot-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Minerva Chir. 68, 471–478 (2013).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Tyson, M. D. & Humphreys, M. R. Urological applications of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Nat. Rev. Urol. 11, 324–332 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kim, S. J., Choi, B. J. & Lee, S. C. Overview of single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancers: past, present, and the future. World J. Gastroenterol. 20, 997–1004 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Mirnezami, A. H. et al. Robotic colorectal surgery: hype or new hope? A systematic review of robotics in colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. 12, 1084–1093 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Trastulli, S. et al. Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis. 14, e134–e156 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Winslet, M. C., Mohsen, Y. M., Powell, J., Allum, W. H. & Fielding, J. W. The influence of age on the surgical management of carcinoma of the stomach. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 22, 220–224 (1996).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Coniglio, A. et al. Surgical treatment for gastric carcinoma in the elderly. J. Surg. Oncol. 88, 201–205 (2004).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Wexner, S. D. et al. The current status of robotic pelvic surgery: results of a multinational interdisciplinary consensus conference. Surg. Endosc. 23, 438–443 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Raga, F., Sanz-Cortes, M., Bonilla, F., Casan, E. M. & Bonilla-Musoles, F. Reducing blood loss at myomectomy with use of a gelatin–thrombin matrix hemostatic sealant. Fertil. Steril. 92, 356–360 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Ding, H. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of application of fibrin sealant after liver resection. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 29, 387–394 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Kearns, S. R., Connolly, E. M., McNally, S., McNamara, D. A. & Deasy, J. Randomized clinical trial of diathermy versus scalpel incision in elective midline laparotomy. Br. J. Surg. 88, 41–44 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Rodd, C. D., Velchuru, V. R., Holly-Archer, F., Clark, A. & Pereira, J. H. Randomized clinical trial comparing two mastectomy techniques. World J. Surg. 31, 1164–1168 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Macario, A., Dexter, F., Sypal, J., Cosgriff, N. & Heniford, B. T. Operative time and other outcomes of the electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing system (LigaSure) versus other methods for surgical hemostasis: a meta-analysis. Surg. Innov. 15, 284–291 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Adamina, M., Champagne, B. J., Hoffman, L., Ermlich, M. B. & Delaney, C. P. Randomized clinical trial comparing the cost and effectiveness of bipolar vessel sealers versus clips and vascular staplers for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Br. J. Surg. 98, 1703–1712 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Havenga, K. et al. Improved survival and local control after total mesorectal excision or D3 lymphadenectomy in the treatment of primary rectal cancer: an international analysis of 1411 patients. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 25, 368–374 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Gruen, R. L. et al. The effect of provider case volume on cancer mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. CA Cancer J. Clin. 59, 192–211 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Smith, J. K. et al. National outcomes after gastric resection for neoplasm. Arch. Surg. 142, 387–393 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Skipworth, R. J. et al. The relationship between hospital volume and post-operative mortality rates for upper gastrointestinal cancer resections: Scotland 1982–2003. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 36, 141–147 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Begg, C. B., Cramer, L. D., Hoskins, W. J. & Brennan, M. F. Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA 280, 1747–1751 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Michelassi, F. 2010 SSO presidential address: subspecialty certificate in advanced surgical oncology. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 17, 3094–3103 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. van de Velde, C. J. et al. EURECCA colorectal: multidisciplinary mission statement on better care for patients with colon and rectal cancer in Europe. Eur. J. Cancer 49, 2784–2790 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Songun, I., Putter, H., Kranenbarg, E. M., Sasako, M. & van de Velde, C. J. Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 11, 439–449 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Krijnen, P., den Dulk, M., Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg, E., Jansen-Landheer, M. L. & van de Velde, C. J. Improved survival after resectable non-cardia gastric cancer in the Netherlands: the importance of surgical training and quality control. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 35, 715–720 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Kodera, Y., Schwarz, R. E. & Nakao, A. Extended lymph node dissection in gastric carcinoma: where do we stand after the Dutch and British randomized trials? J. Am. Coll. Surg. 195, 855–864 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Bonenkamp, J. J., Hermans, J., Sasako, M. & van De Velde, C. J. Quality control of lymph node dissection in the Dutch randomized trial of D1 and D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 1, 152–159 (1998).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. van Gijn, W. et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-year follow-up of the multicentre, randomised controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol. 12, 575–582 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. den Dulk, M. & van de Velde, C. J. Quality assurance in surgical oncology: the tale of the Dutch rectal cancer TME trial. J. Surg. Oncol. 97, 5–7 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Quirke, P. et al. Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet 373, 821–828 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. van Leersum, N. J., Kolfschoten, N. E., Klinkenbijl, J. H., Tollenaar, R. A. & Wouters, M. W. 'Clinical auditing', a novel tool for quality assessment in surgical oncology [Dutch]. Ned. Tijdschr. Geneeskd 155, A4136 (2011).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Jakobsen, E. et al. Nationwide quality improvement in lung cancer care: the role of the Danish Lung Cancer Group and Registry. J. Thorac. Oncol. 8, 1238–1247 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Van Leersum, N. J. et al. The Dutch surgical colorectal audit. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 39, 1063–1070 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Sauven, P. et al. The National Health Service Breast Screening Programme and British Association of Surgical Oncology audit of quality assurance in breast screening 1996–2001. Br. J. Surg. 90, 82–87 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Mansel, R. E. et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 98, 599–609 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Fleissig, A. et al. Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. Results of the ALMANAC randomised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 95, 279–293 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Paul, S., Isaacs, A. J., Treasure, T., Altorki, N. K. & Sedrakyan, A. Long term survival with thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy: propensity matched comparative analysis using SEER-Medicare database. BMJ 349, g5575 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Wong, Y. N. et al. Survival associated with treatment vs observation of localized prostate cancer in elderly men. JAMA 296, 2683–2693 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Rosenberg, S. A. et al. Prospective randomized evaluation of the role of limb-sparing surgery, radiation therapy, and adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in the treatment of adult soft-tissue sarcomas. Surgery 84, 62–69 (1978).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Fisher, B. & Redmond, C. Lumpectomy for breast cancer: an update of the NSABP experience. National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 11, 7–13 (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  96. Veronesi, U. et al. Breast conservation is the treatment of choice in small breast cancer: long-term results of a randomized trial. Eur. J. Cancer 26, 668–670 (1990).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials. Lancet 378, 1707–1716 (2011).

  98. Clough, K. B., Kaufman, G. J., Nos, C., Buccimazza, I. & Sarfati, I. M. Improving breast cancer surgery: a classification and quadrant per quadrant atlas for oncoplastic surgery. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 17, 1375–1391 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Losken, A., Dugal, C. S., Styblo, T. M. & Carlson, G. W. A meta-analysis comparing breast conservation therapy alone to the oncoplastic technique. Ann. Plast. Surg. 72, 145–149 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Rozen, W. M., Rajkomar, A. K., Anavekar, N. S. & Ashton, M. W. Post-mastectomy breast reconstruction: a history in evolution. Clin. Breast Cancer 9, 145–154 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Myers, G. J., Abudu, A. T., Carter, S. R., Tillman, R. M. & Grimer, R. J. Endoprosthetic replacement of the distal femur for bone tumours: long-term results. J. Bone Joint Surg. Br. 89, 521–526 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. McAnena, O. J., Heald, R. J. & Lockhart-Mummery, H. E. Operative and functional results of total mesorectal excision with ultra-low anterior resection in the management of carcinoma of the lower one-third of the rectum. Surg. Gynecol. Obstet. 170, 517–521 (1990).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Maurer, C. A. Urinary and sexual function after total mesorectal excision. Recent Results Cancer Res. 165, 196–204 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Brown, S. R. & Seow-Choen, F. Preservation of rectal function after low anterior resection with formation of a neorectum. Semin. Surg. Oncol. 19, 376–385 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Gouvas, N., Tan, E., Windsor, A., Xynos, E. & Tekkis, P. P. Fast-track vs standard care in colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis update. Int. J. Colorectal Dis. 24, 1119–1131 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Sorensen, J. et al. EuroOOPS: an international, multicentre study to implement nutritional risk screening and evaluate clinical outcome. Clin. Nutr. 27, 340–349 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Minig, L. et al. Reduction of postoperative complication rate with the use of early oral feeding in gynecologic oncologic patients undergoing a major surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 16, 3101–3110 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Wu, M. H., Lin, M. T. & Chen, W. J. Effect of perioperative parenteral nutritional support for gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy. Hepatogastroenterology 55, 799–802 (2008).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Beattie, W. S., Badner, N. H. & Choi, P. Epidural analgesia reduces postoperative myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Anesth. Analg. 93, 853–858 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Rodgers, A. et al. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ 321, 1493 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Kesson, E. M., Allardice, G. M., George, W. D., Burns, H. J. & Morrison, D. S. Effects of multidisciplinary team working on breast cancer survival: retrospective, comparative, interventional cohort study of 13,722 women. BMJ 344, e2718 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Baselga, J. et al. Lapatinib with trastuzumab for HER2-positive early breast cancer (NeoALTTO): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet 379, 633–640 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Cunningham, D. et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 11–20 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Ronellenfitsch, U. et al. Perioperative chemo(radio)therapy versus primary surgery for resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach, gastroesophageal junction, and lower esophagus. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 5. Art. No.: CD008107 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008107.pub2 (2013).

  115. Wong, R. K., Tandan, V., De Silva, S. & Figueredo, A. Pre-operative radiotherapy and curative surgery for the management of localized rectal carcinoma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD002102 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002102.pub2 (2007).

  116. Ataseven, B. et al. Impact of multifocal or multicentric disease on surgery and locoregional, distant and overall survival of 6,134 breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4122-7 (2014).

  117. Dixon, J. M., Renshaw, L., Dixon, J. & Thomas, J. Invasive lobular carcinoma: response to neoadjuvant letrozole therapy. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 130, 871–877 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Willett, C. G. Sphincter preservation in rectal cancer. Curr. Treat. Options Oncol. 1, 399–405 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Weiser, M. R. et al. Sphincter preservation in low rectal cancer is facilitated by preoperative chemoradiation and intersphincteric dissection. Ann. Surg. 249, 236–242 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Castoro, C. et al. Complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for squamous cell cancer of the thoracic oesophagus: is surgery always necessary? J. Gastrointest. Surg. 17, 1375–1381 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Vaidya, J. S. et al. Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy for breast cancer (TARGIT-A trial): an international, prospective, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial. Lancet 376, 91–102 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Alberts, S. R. & Poston, G. J. Treatment advances in liver-limited metastatic colorectal cancer. Clin. Colorectal Cancer 10, 258–265 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Chua, T. C. et al. Early- and long-term outcome data of patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei from appendiceal origin treated by a strategy of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 2449–2456 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Treasure, T. & Utley, M. Surgical removal of asymptomatic pulmonary metastases: time for better evidence. BMJ 346, f824 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Neumann, U. P., Seehofer, D. & Neuhaus, P. The surgical treatment of hepatic metastases in colorectal carcinoma. Dtsch Arztebl. Int. 107, 335–342 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  126. Eastley, N., Newey, M. & Ashford, R. U. Skeletal metastases—the role of the orthopaedic and spinal surgeon. Surg. Oncol. 21, 216–222 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Stattner, S. et al. Microwave ablation with or without resection for colorectal liver metastases. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 39, 844–849 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Glazer, E. S., Hornbrook, M. C. & Krouse, R. S. A meta-analysis of randomized trials: immediate stent placement vs. surgical bypass in the palliative management of malignant biliary obstruction. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 47, 307–314 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Barber, T. W. et al. 18F-FDG PET/CT has a high impact on patient management and provides powerful prognostic stratification in the primary staging of esophageal cancer: a prospective study with mature survival data. J. Nucl. Med. 53, 864–871 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Taylor, F. G. et al. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging assessment of circumferential resection margin predicts disease-free survival and local recurrence: 5-year follow-up results of the MERCURY study. J. Clin. Oncol. 32, 34–43 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Kneeshaw, P. J., Turnbull, L. W., Smith, A. & Drew, P. J. Dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging aids the surgical management of invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 29, 32–37 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Feng, K. & Ma, K. S. Value of radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. World J. Gastroenterol. 20, 5987–5998 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  133. Shindoh, J. et al. Portal vein embolization improves rate of resection of extensive colorectal liver metastases without worsening survival. Br. J. Surg. 100, 1777–1783 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. Schwartz, M. J., Smith, E. B., Trost, D. W. & Vaughan, E. D. Jr. Renal artery embolization: clinical indications and experience from over 100 cases. BJU Int. 99, 881–886 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Kalman, D. & Varenhorst, E. The role of arterial embolization in renal cell carcinoma. Scand. J. Urol. Nephrol. 33, 162–170 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Scalo, J. F. & Rascati, K. L. Trends and issues in oncology costs. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 14, 35–44 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Chi, C. et al. Intraoperative imaging-guided cancer surgery: from current fluorescence molecular imaging methods to future multi-modality imaging technology. Theranostics 4, 1072–1084 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  138. Barone, D. G., Lawrie, T. A. & Hart, M. G. Image guided surgery for the resection of brain tumours. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD009685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009685.pub2 (2014).

  139. Vahrmeijer, A. L., Hutteman, M., van der Vorst, J. R., van de Velde, C. J. & Frangioni, J. V. Image-guided cancer surgery using near-infrared fluorescence. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 10, 507–518 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oncology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, University of Sheffield, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S10 2RX, UK

    Lynda Wyld

  2. Department of Surgery, St Helens Teaching Hospital, University of Liverpool, St Helens, WA9 3DA, Merseyside, UK

    Riccardo A. Audisio

  3. Department of Surgery, Aintree University Hospital, Longmoor Lane, Liverpool, L9 7AL, Merseyside, UK

    Graeme J. Poston

Authors
  1. Lynda Wyld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Riccardo A. Audisio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Graeme J. Poston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

L.W. researched the data for the article and wrote the manuscript. L.W., R.A.A. and G.J.P. made substantial contributions to discussion of content, and all authors reviewed and edited the manuscript before submission.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lynda Wyld.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wyld, L., Audisio, R. & Poston, G. The evolution of cancer surgery and future perspectives. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 12, 115–124 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.191

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.191

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer