Survey of surgical resections for neuroendocrine liver metastases: A project study of the Japan Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (JNETS)

Liver transplantation for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine liver metastasis: optimal patient selection and perioperative management in the era of multimodal treatments

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NET) often metastasize to the liver. Although curative liver resection provides a favorable prognosis for patients with neuroendocrine liver metastasis (NELM), with a 5-year survival rate of 70-80%, recurrence is almost inevitable, mainly in the remnant liver. In Western countries, liver transplantation (LT) has been performed in patients with NELM, with the objective of complete removal of macro- and micro-NELMs. However, prognosis had been unsatisfactory, with 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival rates of approximately 50 and 30%, respectively. In 2007, the Milan criteria were proposed as indications for LT for NELM. The criteria included: (1) confirmed histology of NET-G1 or G2; (2) a primary tumor drained by the portal system and all extrahepatic diseases removed with curative resection before LT; (3) liver involvement ≤50%; (4) good response or stable disease for at least 6 months before LT; (5) age ≤ 55 years. A subsequent report demonstrated outstanding LT outcomes for NELM within the Milan criteria, with 5-year overall survival and recurrence rates of 97 and 13%, respectively. In Japan, living donor LT (LDLT) for NELM has been performed sporadically in only 16 patients by 2021 in Japan; however, no consensus has been reached on the indications or perioperative management of LDLT. This article presents the outcomes of these 16 patients who underwent LDLT in Japan and reviews the literature to clarify optimal indications and perioperative management of LDLT for NELM in the era of novel multimodal treatments.

Distinct clinicopathological features of neuroendocrine liver metastases originating from the pancreas and rectum

INTRODUCTION

Survival comparisons among patients with liver metastases from pancreatic and rectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) were limited, and the efficacy of observation rules in patients undergoing hepatectomy for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELMs) was unknown. This study aims to distinguish these characteristics and clarify the effects of the observation rules on NELMs.

METHODS

Clinical data were separately collected from patients with pancreatic and rectal NELMs at medical centers in both Japan and China. The Japanese cohort followed the observation rules for the resection of NELMs. A comparative analysis was conducted on clinical characteristics and prognosis features such as overall survival time (OS) and disease-free survival interval (DFS-I).

RESULTS

Enrollment included 47 and 34 patients from Japan and China, respectively. Of these, 69 and 12 patients had tumors originating from the pancreas and rectum, respectively. The OS time in patients undergoing primary tumor resection was significantly longer; however, the OS time between the patients undergoing and not undergoing radical resection of liver metastasis was the same. In asynchronous NELMs, patients with rectal (R)-NELMs showed a significantly higher proportion of type III NELMs. Additionally, the median DFS-I of asynchronous R-NELMs was longer than the recommended follow-up time, with 71.4% of them classified as G2. In the Japanese cohort, patients who adhered to the observation rules exhibited a longer median DFS after hepatectomy for NELMs compared with their counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Although curative surgery is crucial for primary lesions, personalized approaches are required to manage NELMs. Extended overall follow-ups and shortened follow-up intervals are recommended for G2 stage rectal NETs. The observation rules for NELMs require further validation with a larger sample size.

Liver transplantation as an alternative for the treatment of neuroendocrine liver metastasis: Appraisal of the current evidence

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) for neuroendocrine liver metastases (NELM) is still in debate. Studies comparing LT with liver resection (LR) for NELM are scarce, as patient selection is heterogeneous and experience is limited. The goal of this review was to provide a critical analysis of the evidence on LT versus LR in the treatment of NELM.

DATA SOURCES

A scoping literature search on LT and LR for NELM was performed with PubMed, including English articles up to March 2023.

RESULTS

International guidelines recommend LR for NELM in resectable, well-differentiated tumors in the absence of extrahepatic metastatic disease with superior results of LR compared to systemic or liver-directed therapies. Advanced liver surgery has extended resectability criteria whilst entailing increased perioperative risk and short disease-free survival. In highly selected patients (based on the Milan criteria) with unresectable NELM, oncologic results of LT are promising. Prognostic factors include tumor biology (G1/G2) and burden, waiting time for LT, patient age and extrahepatic spread. Based on low-level evidence, LT for low-grade NELM within the Milan criteria resulted in improved disease-free survival and overall survival compared to LR. The benefits of LT were lost in patients beyond the Milan NELM-criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

With adherence to strict selection criteria especially tumor biology, LT for NELM is becoming a valuable option providing oncologic benefits compared to LR. Recent evidence suggests even stricter selection criteria with regard to tumor biology.

Impact of primary tumor resection and metastasectomy among gastroentero-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors with liver metastases only on survival

BACKGROUND

Despite recommendations for primary tumor resection (PTR) with or without liver resection (LR) in the patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) and isolated liver metastases, there are conflicting data for their impact on overall survival (OS).

METHODS

2320 patients with GEP-NETs and isolated liver metastases were identified from NCDB. Multiple imputations were used to accommodate missing data, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was conducted to minimize bias.

RESULTS

Patients with PTR had a greater OS than those without PTR (3-year rate of 88.6% vs. 69.9%, P < 0.001), which was preserved in the adjusted analysis (IPTW-adjusted HR = 0.387, 95% CI: 0.264-0.567; P < 0.001). Patients with LR had a greater OS than those without LR (3-year rate 87.7% vs. 75.2%, P = 0.003), which was also preserved in adjusted analysis (IPTW-adjusted HR = 0.450, 95% CI: 0.229-0.885; P = 0.021). Patients undergoing both PTR and LR had the greatest survival advantage than those with other surgical interventions (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Either PTR or LR is associated with improved survival for GEP-NET patients with isolated liver metastases. However, there remains significant selection bias in the current study, and caution should be exercised when selecting patients for resection.

Chinese expert consensus on multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine liver metastases

Many management strategies are available for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms with liver metastases. However, a lack of biological, molecular, and genomic information and an absence of data from rigorous trials limit the validity of these strategies. This review presents the viewpoints from an international conference consisting of several expert working groups. The working groups reviewed a series of questions of particular interest to clinicians taking care of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms with liver metastases by reviewing the existing management strategies and literature, evaluating the evidence on which management decisions were based, developing internationally acceptable recommendations for clinical practice, and making recommendations for clinical and research endeavors. The review for each question will be followed by recommendations from the panel.

Robotic Right Posterior Sectionectomy by Intrafascial Approach for Pancreas Neuroendocrine Liver Metastasis

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is indicated for resectable liver metastases of neuroendocrine tumors.1 Minimally invasive liver resection offers decreased blood loss, reduces pain, reduces postoperative complications, and reduces time to functional recovery.2 However, access to posterior section remains difficult with conventional laparoscopic tools. The robotic approach could overcome these limitations.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A 46-year-old woman had a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor with synchronous liver metastases (18 mm in segment 6, 29 mm in segment 7, and 31 mm in segment 8). Due to stable disease after 2 years of somatostatin analog treatment, surgical management was decided. The first step was robotic distal pancreatectomy. Two months later, we performed a posterior sectionectomy associated with a wedge resection in segment 8.

RESULTS

Da Vinci X robot was used. Surgery was conducted with a second surgeon located between the patient's legs using suction/irrigation device and ultrasonic dissector through laparoscopic ports. The posterior sectorial branches of the hepatic artery and portal vein were controlled via an intra-fascial approach. Robotic parenchymal dissection was performed by a four-hands method,3 with laparoscopic ultrasonic dissector and robotic irrigated bipolar guided by indocyanine green. Transection was led on the right side of right hepatic vein without clamping. Operative duration was 330 min, and estimated blood loss was 50 ml. Postoperative course was complicated by grade B biliary fistula. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 10.

CONCLUSIONS

This case illustrates the feasibility and safety of a robotic approach for right posterior liver sectionectomy, which can improve the dexterity of the surgeon and thus the possibility of difficult minimally invasive liver resection.

A calcitonin-producing pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm treated with distal pancreatectomy a lengthy time after a left trisectionectomy for liver metastases: a case report

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin-producing pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs) are extremely rare. There have been no reports of a patient in whom liver metastases were the presenting finding, and a calcitonin-producing PanNEN was subsequently detected after a lengthy period.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 53-year-old man had diarrhea for several years. Computed tomography (CT) revealed multiple liver tumors. We performed a left trisectionectomy with a bile duct resection. The histologic examination showed neuroendocrine tumors G1. Immunohistochemistry was positive for calcitonin and the serum calcitonin level was elevated. Neuroendocrine neoplasms of hepatic origin are extremely rare, so a systemic exploration was performed, but no tumor was detected. CT showed a 4-mm calcification in the pancreatic body, but no contrast-enhanced mass was noted. Although the liver tumors were resected, the diarrhea and high serum calcitonin level persisted. Serial examinations were performed for 6 years, but no tumor was identified; however, 6.5 years after the hepatectomy the serum calcitonin level increased. CT showed a 10-mm contrast-enhanced mass in the calcified area of the pancreatic body. A distal pancreatectomy was performed. The histologic examination showed a neuroendocrine tumor G1, which mimicked the liver tumors. Immunohistochemistry was positive for calcitonin. After the distal pancreatectomy, the serum calcitonin level decreased and diarrhea resolved. The calcitonin-producing neuroendocrine neoplasm was considered the pancreatic primary and the hepatic tumors were metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Calcitonin-producing PanNENs may be initially recognized as liver tumors and may become evident after a lengthy period, thus long-term observation is recommended. Aggressive surgeries may contribute to long-term survival.

Treatment strategies for neuroendocrine liver metastases: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are often diagnosed when metastatic. The liver is the main site of metastases. Unfortunately, optimal management of neuroendocrine liver metastases remains a topic of debate. The aim of this study was to make a systematic review of the current literature about the results of the different treatments of neuroendocrine liver metastases.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted for English language publications from 1995 to 2021. Outcomes were analyzed according to survival, disease-free survival, and in the case of systemic therapies, progression-free survival.

RESULTS

5509 patients were analyzed in the review. 67% of patients underwent surgery achieving 5 years overall survival despite only 30% percent without a recurrence. 60% of patients that had received a transplant reached 5 years survival with a low disease-free survival rate (20%). Five-year survival rate was 36.2% for patients undergoing loco-regional therapies.

CONCLUSION

Surgical resection is the best treatment when metastases are resectable, with the highest rate of survival, although liver transplantation shows good results for patients not eligible for surgery. Loco-regional therapies may be useful when surgical resection is contraindicated, or selectively used as a bridge to surgery or transplantation. Systemic therapies are indicated in patients for whom curative treatment cannot be obtained.

Parenchyma-Sparing Liver Resection or Regenerative Liver Surgery: Which Way to Go?

Liver resection for malignant tumors should respect oncological margins while ensuring safety and improving the quality of life, therefore tumor staging, underlying liver disease and performance status should all be attentively assessed in the decision process. The concept of parenchyma-sparing liver surgery is nowadays used as an alternative to major hepatectomies to address deeply located lesions with intricate topography by means of complex multiplanar parenchyma-sparing liver resections, preferably under the guidance of intraoperative ultrasound. Regenerative liver surgery evolved as a liver growth induction method to increase resectability by stimulating the hypertrophy of the parenchyma intended to remain after resection (referred to as future liver remnant), achievable by portal vein embolization and liver venous deprivation as interventional approaches, and portal vein ligation and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy as surgical techniques. Interestingly, although both strategies have the same conceptual origin, they eventually became caught in the never-ending parenchyma-sparing liver surgery vs. regenerative liver surgery debate. However, these strategies are both valid and must both be mastered and used to increase resectability. In our opinion, we consider parenchyma-sparing liver surgery along with techniques of complex liver resection and intraoperative ultrasound guidance the preferred strategy to treat liver tumors. In addition, liver volume-manipulating regenerative surgery should be employed when resectability needs to be extended beyond the possibilities of parenchyma-sparing liver surgery.