Liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma commonly form nodular lesions in the liverparenchyma. We report a case of liver metastasis from rectal adenocarcinoma that extendedpredominantly into the bile duct. A 62-year-old Japanese man underwent low anteriorresection for rectal adenocarcinoma 9 years ago. Approximately 3 years later, he underwentradiofrequency ablation therapy for a metastatic liver tumor. Nine years after surgery, atumor in liver segment III exhibiting intrabiliary extension was discovered; it wasunclear if this was a metastatic liver tumor or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Accordingly, we performed a left hepatectomy with lymph node dissection. The tumor wasnegative for cytokeratins 7 and 20, and was histologically similar to the primary rectaladenocarcinoma; it was diagnosed as rectal carcinoma metastasis. The patient has survivedfor 3 years after the hepatic surgery, for 9 years after radiofrequency ablation therapy,and for 12 years after the primary surgery. This case shows that liver metastasis fromcolorectal carcinoma can present as a predominantly intrabiliary growth that mimicsintrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma on imaging. Moreover, our case provides evidence for thesuperiority of anatomical hepatectomy over partial hepatectomy for metastatic liver tumorswith intrabiliary growth arising from rectal adenocarcinomas.

Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy between original drugs and generic products.  Candidate drugs included two types of hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, simvastatin and pravastatin, because of their importance at reducing the health expenditure for hyperlipidemia.
Design: We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy (total cholesterol, triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein and high-density lipoprotein levels), safety (biochemical parameters), and medication adherence based on patient data.  We set the follow-up period at 6 months before and after substitution.  Data were analyzed by paired-sample t-tests (statistical significance level of 0.05).
Methods: The subjects included in this study were ambulatory patients visiting Nakajima Hospital for dyslipidemia treatment.  Selected patients included those taking both the original drug and the generic product; i.e., patients who had substituted the original drug Lipovas® for the generic product Simvastatin OHARA, or those who had substituted the original drug Mevalotin® for the generic drug Pravatin®.
Results: A total of 118 patients in the simvastatin study and 43 patients in the pravastatin study were candidates for the present study.  We found that there were no significant differences before and after substitution.  Even though there were differences in some of the biochemical parameters, the range remained within normal levels.  With regard to medication adherence, we found no significant differences.
Conclusion: In this study, we found no significant differences before and after substituting medications with generic drugs.  Additionally, we found no subjective symptom changes after substitution.  To develop clinical information on generic products and to store such information, it is important that pharmaceutical products be used appropriately.