Background
Management of neuroendocrine tumor liver metastasis (NELM) remains controversial, with some advocating an aggressive surgical approach while others have adopted a more conservative ...strategy. We sought to define the efficacy of the surgical management of NELM in a large multicenter international cohort of patients.
Methods
We identified 339 patients who underwent surgical management for NELM from 1985 to 2009 from an international database of eight major hepatobiliary centers. Relevant clinicopathologic data were assessed using Kaplan–Meier and Cox regression models.
Results
Most patients had a pancreatic (40%) or small bowel (25%) neuroendocrine tumor (NET) primary. The majority of patients (60%) had bilateral liver disease. At surgery, 78% of patients underwent hepatic resection, 3% ablation alone, and 19% resection + ablation. Major hepatectomy was performed in 45% of patients, and 14% underwent a second liver operation. Carcinoid was the most common NET histological subtype (53%). Median survival was 125 months, with overall 5- and 10-year survival of 74%, and 51%, respectively. Disease recurred in 94% of patients at 5 years. Patients with hormonally functional NET who had R0/R1 resection benefited the most from surgery (
P
= 0.01). On multivariate analyses, synchronous disease hazard ratio (HR) = 1.9, nonfunctional NET hormonal status (HR = 2.0), and extrahepatic disease (HR = 3.0) remained predictive of worse survival (all
P
< 0.05).
Conclusions
Liver-directed surgery for NELM is associated with prolonged survival; however, the majority of patients will develop recurrent disease. Patients with hormonally functional hepatic metastasis without prior extrahepatic or synchronous disease derive the greatest survival benefit from surgical management.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Abstract Background The first International conference on Minimally Invasive Pancreas Resection was arranged in conjunction with the annual meeting of the International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary ...Association (IHPBA), in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 19th 2016. The presented evidence and outcomes resulting from the session for minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is summarized and addressed perioperative outcome, the outcome for cancer and patient selection for the procedure. Methods A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to compare MIDP and open distal pancreatectomy. Patient selection was discussed based on plenary talks, panel discussions and a worldwide survey on MIDP. Results Of 582 studies, 52 (40 observational and 12 case-matched) were included in the assessment for outcome for LDP (n = 5023) vs. ODP (n = 16,306) whereas 16 observational comparative studies were identified for cancer outcome. No randomized trials were identified. MIDP resulted in similar outcome to ODP with a tendency for lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay in the MIDP group. Discussion Available evidence for comparison of MIDP to ODP is weak, although the number of studies is high. Observed outcomes of MIDP are promising. In the absence of randomized control trials, an international registry should be established.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
IMPORTANCE: Pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs) harbor malignant potential, and current guidelines recommend resection. However, data are limited on preoperative risk factors for malignancy ...(adenocarcinoma or high-grade dysplasia) occurring in the setting of an MCN. OBJECTIVES: To examine the preoperative risk factors for malignancy in resected MCNs and to assess outcomes of MCN-associated adenocarcinoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent pancreatic resection of MCNs at the 8 academic centers of the Central Pancreas Consortium from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2014, were retrospectively identified. Preoperative factors of patients with and without malignant tumors were compared. Survival analyses were conducted for patients with adenocarcinoma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Binary logistic regression models were used to determine the association of preoperative factors with the presence of MCN-associated malignancy. RESULTS: A total of 1667 patients underwent resection of pancreatic cystic lesions, and 349 (20.9%) had an MCN (310 women 88.8%; mean (SD) age, 53.3 14.7 years). Male sex (odds ratio OR, 3.72; 95% CI, 1.21-11.44; P = .02), pancreatic head and neck location (OR, 3.93; 95% CI, 1.43-10.81; P = .01), increased radiographic size of the MCN (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.08-1.27; P < .001), presence of a solid component or mural nodule (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 1.95-10.57; P < .001), and duct dilation (OR, 4.17; 95% CI, 1.63-10.64; P = .003) were independently associated with malignancy. Malignancy was not associated with presence of radiographic septations or preoperative cyst fluid analysis (carcinoembryonic antigen, amylase, or mucin presence). The median serum CA19-9 level for patients with malignant neoplasms was 210 vs 15 U/mL for those without (P = .001). In the 44 patients with adenocarcinoma, 41 (93.2%) had lymph nodes harvested, with nodal metastases in only 14 (34.1%). Median follow-up for patients with adenocarcinoma was 27 months. Adenocarcinoma recurred in 11 patients (25%), with a 64% recurrence-free survival and 59% overall survival at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Adenocarcinoma or high-grade dysplasia is present in 14.9% of resected pancreatic MCNs for which risks include male sex, pancreatic head and neck location, larger MCN, solid component or mural nodule, and duct dilation. Mucinous cystic neoplasm–associated adenocarcinoma appears to have decreased nodal involvement at the time of resection and increased survival compared with typical pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Indications for resection of MCNs should be revisited.
Esophagectomy is an important, but potentially morbid, operation used to treat benign and malignant conditions that may significantly impact patient quality of life (QOL). Patient-reported outcomes ...(PROs) are measures of QOL that come directly from patient self-report. This study characterizes patterns of change and recovery in PROs in the first year after esophagectomy.
Longitudinal QOL scores measuring physical function, pain, and dyspnea were obtained from esophagectomy patients during all clinic visits. PRO scores were obtained using the National Institutes of Health–sponsored Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System from April 2018 to February 2021. Mean PRO scores over 100 days after surgery were compared with baseline PRO scores using mixed-effects modeling with compound symmetry correlational structure.
One hundred three patients with PRO results were identified. Reasons for esophagectomy were malignancy (87.4%), achalasia (5.8%), stricture (5.8%), and dysplasia (1.0%). When comparing mean PRO scores at visits ≤ 50 days after surgery with preoperative PRO scores, physical function scores declined by 27.3% (P < .001), whereas dyspnea severity and pain interference scores had increased by 24.5% (P < .001) and 17.1% (P < .001), respectively. Although recovery occurred over the course of the 100 days after surgery, mean physical function scores and dyspnea scores were still 12.7% (P = .02) and 26.4% (P = .001) worse, respectively, than mean preoperative levels.
Despite declines in QOL scores immediately after esophagectomy, recovery back toward baseline was observed during the first 100 days. These findings are of considerable importance when counseling patients regarding esophagectomy, tracking recovery, and implementing quality improvement initiatives. Further long-term follow-up is needed to determine recovery beyond 100 days.
Background The value of routine primary (intraoperative) drain placement after major hepatectomy remains unclear. We sought to determine if primary drainage led to decreased rates of complications, ...specifically, intra-abdominal biloma or infection requiring a secondary (postoperative) drainage procedure. Study Design All patients who underwent major hepatectomy (≥3 hepatic segments) at 3 institutions, from 2000 to 2012, were identified. Patients with biliary anastomoses were excluded. Primary outcomes were any complication, rate of secondary drainage procedures, bile leak, and 30-day readmission. Results There were 1,041 patients who underwent major hepatectomy without biliary anastomosis; 564 (54%) had primary drains placed at the surgeon's discretion. Primary drain placement was associated with increased complications (56% vs 44%; p < 0.001), bile leaks (7.3% vs 4.2%; p = 0.048), and 30-day readmissions (16.4% vs 8.0%; p < 0.001), but was not associated with a decrease in secondary drainage procedures (8.0% vs 5.9%; p = 0.23). Patients with primary drains demonstrated higher American Society of Anesthesioloigsts (ASA) class, greater blood loss, more transfusions, and larger resections. After accounting for these significant clinicopathologic variables on multivariate analysis, primary drain placement was not associated with increased risk of any complications. Primary drainage was, however, independently associated with increased risk of bile leak (hazard ratio HR 2.04; 95% CI1.02 to 4.09; p = 0.044) and 30-day readmission (HR 1.79; 95% CI1.14 to 2.80; p = 0.011). There still was no reduction in the need for secondary drainage procedures (HR 0.98; p = 0.96). Conclusions Primary intraoperative drain placement after major hepatectomy does not decrease the need for secondary drainage procedures and may be associated with increased bile leaks and 30-day readmissions. Routine drain placement is not warranted.
Hepatic Cysts Armutlu, Ayse; Quigley, Brian; Choi, Hegyong ...
The American journal of surgical pathology,
09/2022, Volume:
46, Issue:
9
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
The literature on liver cysts is highly conflicting, mostly owing to definitional variations. Two hundred and fifty-eight ≥1 cm cysts evaluated pathologically using updated criteria were classifiable ...as: I. Ductal plate malformation related (63%); that is, cystic bile duct hamartoma or not otherwise specified-type benign biliary cyst (35 with polycystic liver disease). These were female predominant (F/M=2.4), large (10 cm), often multifocal with degenerative/inflammatory changes and frequently misclassified as “hepatobiliary cystadenoma.” II. Neoplastic (13%); 27 (10.5%) had ovarian-type stroma (OTS) and qualified as mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) per World Health Organization (WHO). These were female, solitary, mean age 52, mean size 11 cm, and 2 were associated with carcinoma (1 in situ and 1 microinvasive). There were 3 intraductal papillary neoplasms, 1 intraductal oncocytic papillary neoplasm, 1 cystic cholangiocarcinoma, and 2 cystic metastasis. III. Infectious/inflammatory (12%). These included 23 hydatid cysts (including 2
Echinococcus alveolaris
both misdiagnosed preoperatively as cancer), nonspecific inflammatory cysts (abscesses, inflammatory cysts: 3.4%). IV. Congenital (7%). Mostly small (<3 cm); choledochal cyst (5%), foregut cyst (2%). V. Miscellaneous (4%). In conclusion, hepatic cysts occur predominantly in women (3/1), are mostly (90%) non-neoplastic, and seldom (<2%) malignant. Cystic bile duct hamartomas and their relative not otherwise specified-type benign biliary cysts are frequently multifocal and often misdiagnosed as “cystadenoma/carcinoma.” Defined by OTS, MCNs (the true “hepatobiliary cystadenoma/carcinoma”) are solitary, constitute only 10.5% of hepatic cysts, and have a significantly different profile than the impression in the literature in that essentially all are perimenopausal females, and rarely associated with carcinoma (7%). Since MCNs can only be diagnosed by demonstration of OTS through complete microscopic examination, it is advisable to avoid the term “cystadenoma/cystadenocarcinoma” solely based on radiologic examination, and the following simplified terminology would be preferable in preoperative evaluation to avoid conflicts with the final pathologic diagnosis: (1) noncomplex (favor benign), (2) complex (in 3 subsets, as favor benign, cannot rule out malignancy, or favor malignancy), (3) malignant features.
Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pancNETs) are rare neoplasms that comprise 2% to 4% of all clinically detected pancreatic tumors. They are usually indolent, and their malignant potential is often ...underestimated. The management of this disease poses a challenge because of the heterogeneous clinical presentation and varying degree of aggressiveness. Treatment decisions for this clinical entity are still patient- and/or physician-specific. Optimal clinical management of pancNETs requires a multidisciplinary approach. The only potentially curative treatment option, especially in the early stage disease, remains surgical resection; however, as many as 75% of patients present with advanced disease (nodal and/or distant metastases).
IMPORTANCE: The current recommendation is to perform re-resection for select patients with incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer. The optimal time interval for re-resection for both patient ...selection and long-term survival is not known. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of time interval from the initial cholecystectomy to reoperation with overall survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2014 at 10 US academic institutions. A total of 207 patients with incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer who underwent reoperation and had available data on the date of their initial cholecystectomy were included. EXPOSURES: Time interval from the initial cholecystectomy to reoperation: group A: less than 4 weeks; group B: 4 to 8 weeks; and group C: greater than 8 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: Of 449 patients with gallbladder cancer, 207 cases (46%) were discovered incidentally and underwent reoperation at 3 different time intervals from the date of the original cholecystectomy: group A: less than 4 weeks (25 patients, 12%); B: 4 to 8 weeks (91 patients, 44%); C: more than 8 weeks (91 patients, 44%). The mean (SD) ages of patients in groups A, B, and C were 65 (9), 64 (11), and 66 (12) years, respectively. All groups were similar for baseline demographics, extent of resection, presence of residual disease, T stage, resection margin status, lymph node involvement, and postoperative complications. Patients who underwent reoperation between 4 and 8 weeks had the longest median overall survival (group B: 40.4 months) compared with those who underwent early (group A: 17.4 months) or late (group C: 22.4 months) reoperation (log-rank P = .03). Group A and C time intervals (vs group B), presence of residual disease, an R2 resection, advanced T stage, and lymph node involvement were associated with decreased overall survival on univariable Cox regression. Only group A (hazard ratio, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.25-5.54) and group C (hazard ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.17-3.66) time intervals (vs group B), R2 resection (hazard ratio, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.27-5.69), and advanced Tstage (hazard ratio, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.11-3.08) persisted on multivariable Cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The optimal time interval for re-resection for incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer appears to be between 4 and 8 weeks after the initial cholecystectomy.
IMPORTANCE: Although margin-negative (R0) resection is the gold standard for surgical management of localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), the question of how to manage the patient with a ...microscopically positive intraoperative neck margin (IONM) during pancreaticoduodenectomy remains controversial. OBSERVATIONS: In the absence of randomized clinical trials, we critically evaluated high-quality retrospective studies examining the oncologic utility of re-resecting positive IONMs during pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC (2000-2019). Several studies have concluded that additional pancreatic resection to achieve an R0 margin in IONM-positive cases does not influence survival. The largest is a multi-institutional study of 1399 patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, which demonstrated that in comparison with patients undergoing R0 resection (n = 1196; median survival, 21 months), those with either final R1 resections (n = 131) or undergoing margin conversion from IONM-positive to R0 resection on permanent section (n = 72) demonstrated similar median survival times (13.7 and 11.9 months, respectively). Conversely, recent reports suggest that the conversion of IONM to R0 resection with additional resection or even total pancreatectomy may be associated with improved survival. The discordance between these conflicting studies could be explained in part by the influence of biologic and physiologic selection on the association of IONM re-resection and survival. Since most studies did not include patients receiving modern combination chemotherapy regimens, the intersection between margin status, tumor biology, and chemoresponsiveness remains unclear. Furthermore, there are no dedicated data to guide surgical management in IONM-positive pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although data regarding the oncologic utility of additional resection to achieve a tumor-free margin following initial IONM positivity during pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC are conflicting, they suggest that IONM positivity may be a surrogate for biologic aggressiveness that is unlikely to be mitigated by the extent of surgical resection. The complex relationship between margin status and chemoresponsiveness warrants exploration in studies including patients receiving increasingly effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
PDF
