Hello Arthur62,

                         l well remember the joys of a 60% liver resection, but l now live to appreciate having had it done.l think l would be asking firstly why the first option is to go for resection. l suspect this will be the one that promises the best prospect of a long term cure,short sweet and decisive.Chemo and radio options come loaded with a potential range of long term side issues,and offer a more variable success rate,so question the type and how it would respond to these treatments.Of course should neither prove successful,you are back to the surgery route,just further down the line,with l suppose the potential of losing this option in the case of rapid spread, l only just sqeaked in to getting mine.That leads me to the question l would be asking concerning the likelyhood and speed of spread.The information suggests that Liver cancers can be difficult to treat,so is thiswhy surgery would be a favoured option whenever possible?

                                                                              At the end of the day if l were being told that other treatments have the potential to cure,where surgery would cure,l would always plump for the certainty than the hopeful halfway house.Having had pre op chemo and radiation,-- surgery -- post op chemo,l can say l had a week of heavy pain after surgery,months of devastation from chemo/radio, and life changing consequences from radio/chemo.So if l could have chose l would instantly swop a week or so of purgatory with surgery for the ongoing aftereffects of chemo/radio.

Not much of choice choosing between pain and more pain l know,but you are not going to be in a position to dodge both.Just be sure to run through all your options and the pro's and con's of them all,

                                      Good luck,

                                                          David