The effects of staging laparoscopy on trocar site and peritoneal recurrence of pancreatic cancer

Predicting positive peritoneal cytology in pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Positive cytology from peritoneal washings obtained prior to potential resection of pancreatic cancer is associated with grim prognosis, equivalent to M1 disease. We examine our experience with pancreatic cancer patients who underwent pre-resection lavage in an attempt to predict who would have malignant cells on peritoneal cytology.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at a tertiary care institution from 1995 to 2019 and had pre-resection lavage performed. Demographic and clinicopathologic data were collected. Logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of positive cytology.

RESULTS

Three hundred ninety-nine patients underwent pancreatic resection and had lavage performed. Forty-three (10.8%) had positive peritoneal cytology. Those with positive cytology had higher median Ca19-9 value than those with negative cytology at diagnosis (368.5 vs 200 U/mL, p = 0.007) and after neoadjuvant therapy (100.3 vs 43 U/mL, p = 0.013). After controlling for preoperative therapy received, an initial Ca19-9 greater than 1220 U/mL (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.07-6.89, p = 0.035), locally advanced disease (OR 4.86, 95% CI 1.31-18.09, p = 0.018), and BMI ≥ 25 kg/m² (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.04-6.97, p = 0.042) were associated with positive cytology in multivariate logistic regression model. The associated ROC curve had an AUC of 0.7507, suggesting adequate discrimination of those with positive peritoneal cytology.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic laparoscopy remains an important adjunct to the workup, diagnosis, and staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Patients with locally advanced disease, significantly elevated serum Ca19-9 at diagnosis, and BMI ≥ 25 kg/m² may be at higher risk for positive peritoneal cytology, regardless of whether neoadjuvant therapy is administered.

Pancreatic cancer seeding of percutaneous needle tract

A 65-year old African-American female presents with biliary ductal dilatation due to an obstructive pancreatic head mass. Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiogram performed and biliary drainage catheter placement for decompression of the biliary system. The patient had a Whipple procedure performed several months later. On follow up CT imaging, there was interval development and enlargement of a subcutaneous lesion by the right oblique muscles. Biopsy of this lesion revealed pancreatic adenocarcinoma from percutaneous seeding of the transhepatic needle tract.

Diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancer. A considerable proportion of patients undergo unnecessary laparotomy because of underestimation of the extent of the cancer on computed tomography (CT) scanning. Laparoscopy can detect metastases not visualised on CT scanning, enabling better assessment of the spread of cancer (staging of cancer). This is an update to a previous Cochrane Review published in 2013 evaluating the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in assessing the resectability with curative intent in people with pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy performed as an add-on test to CT scanning in the assessment of curative resectability in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via OvidSP (from inception to 15 May 2016), and Science Citation Index Expanded (from 1980 to 15 May 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies of diagnostic laparoscopy in people with potentially resectable pancreatic and periampullary cancer on CT scan, where confirmation of liver or peritoneal involvement was by histopathological examination of suspicious (liver or peritoneal) lesions obtained at diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy. We accepted any criteria of resectability used in the studies. We included studies irrespective of language, publication status, or study design (prospective or retrospective). We excluded case-control studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. The specificity of diagnostic laparoscopy in all studies was 1 because there were no false positives since laparoscopy and the reference standard are one and the same if histological examination after diagnostic laparoscopy is positive. The sensitivities were therefore meta-analysed using a univariate random-effects logistic regression model. The probability of unresectability in people who had a negative laparoscopy (post-test probability for people with a negative test result) was calculated using the median probability of unresectability (pre-test probability) from the included studies, and the negative likelihood ratio derived from the model (specificity of 1 assumed). The difference between the pre-test and post-test probabilities gave the overall added value of diagnostic laparoscopy compared to the standard practice of CT scan staging alone.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies with a total of 1146 participants in the meta-analysis. Only one study including 52 participants had a low risk of bias and low applicability concern in the patient selection domain. The median pre-test probability of unresectable disease after CT scanning across studies was 41.4% (that is 41 out of 100 participants who had resectable cancer after CT scan were found to have unresectable disease on laparotomy). The summary sensitivity of diagnostic laparoscopy was 64.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 50.1% to 76.6%). Assuming a pre-test probability of 41.4%, the post-test probability of unresectable disease for participants with a negative test result was 0.20 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.27). This indicates that if a person is said to have resectable disease after diagnostic laparoscopy and CT scan, there is a 20% probability that their cancer will be unresectable compared to a 41% probability for those receiving CT alone.A subgroup analysis of people with pancreatic cancer gave a summary sensitivity of 67.9% (95% CI 41.1% to 86.5%). The post-test probability of unresectable disease after being considered resectable on both CT and diagnostic laparoscopy was 18% compared to 40.0% for those receiving CT alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic laparoscopy may decrease the rate of unnecessary laparotomy in people with pancreatic and periampullary cancer found to have resectable disease on CT scan. On average, using diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy and histopathological confirmation of suspicious lesions prior to laparotomy would avoid 21 unnecessary laparotomies in 100 people in whom resection of cancer with curative intent is planned.

Novel imaging strategies for upper gastrointestinal tract cancers

Accurate pretherapeutic imaging is the cornerstone of all cancer treatment. Unfortunately, modern imaging modalities have several unsolved problems and limitations. The differentiation between inflammation and cancer infiltration, false positive and false negative findings as well as lack of confirming biopsies in suspected metastases may have serious negative consequences in cancer patients. This review describes some of these problems and challenges the use of conventional imaging by suggesting new combined strategies that include selective use of confirming biopsies and complementary methods to detect microscopic cancer dissemination.

Diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancer. A considerable proportion of patients undergo unnecessary laparotomy because of underestimation of the extent of the cancer on computed tomography (CT) scanning. Laparoscopy can detect metastases not visualised on CT scanning, enabling better assessment of the spread of cancer (staging of cancer). There has been no systematic review or meta-analysis assessing the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in assessing the resectability with curative intent in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy performed as an add-on test to CT scanning in the assessment of curative resectability in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via OvidSP (from inception to 13 September 2012), and Science Citation Index Expanded (from 1980 to 13 September 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies of diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with potentially resectable pancreatic and periampullary cancer on CT scan, where confirmation of liver or peritoneal involvement was by histopathological examination of suspicious (liver or peritoneal) lesions obtained at diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy. We accepted any criteria of resectability used in the studies. We included studies irrespective of language, publication status, or study design (prospective or retrospective). We excluded case-control studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. The specificity of diagnostic laparoscopy in all studies was 1 because there were no false positives since laparoscopy and the reference standard are one and the same if histological examination after diagnostic laparoscopy is positive. Therefore, the sensitivities were meta-analysed using a univariate random-effects logistic regression model. The probability of unresectability in patients who had a negative laparoscopy (post-test probability for patients with a negative test result) was calculated using the median probability of unresectability (pre-test probability) from the included studies and the negative likelihood ratio derived from the model (specificity of 1 assumed). The difference between the pre-test and post-test probabilities gave the overall added value of diagnostic laparoscopy compared to the standard practice of CT scan staging alone.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies with a total of 1015 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Only one study including 52 patients had a low risk of bias and low applicability concern in the patient selection domain. The median pre-test probability of unresectable disease after CT scanning across studies was 40.3% (that is 40 out of 100 patients who had resectable cancer after CT scan were found to have unresectable disease on laparotomy). The summary sensitivity of diagnostic laparoscopy was 68.7% (95% CI 54.3% to 80.2%). Assuming a pre-test probability of 40.3%, the post-test probability of unresectable disease for patients with a negative test result was 0.17 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.24). This indicates that if a patient is said to have resectable disease after diagnostic laparoscopy and CT scan, there is a 17% probability that their cancer will be unresectable compared to a 40% probability for those receiving CT alone.A subgroup analysis of patients with pancreatic cancer gave a summary sensitivity of 67.9% (95% CI 41.1% to 86.5%). The post-test probability of unresectable disease after being considered resectable on both CT and diagnostic laparoscopy was 18% compared to 40% for those receiving CT alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic laparoscopy may decrease the rate of unnecessary laparotomy in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer found to have resectable disease on CT scan. On average, using diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy and histopathological confirmation of suspicious lesions prior to laparotomy would avoid 23 unnecessary laparotomies in 100 patients in whom resection of cancer with curative intent is planned.

Role of staging laparoscopy in peri-pancreatic and hepatobiliary malignancy

Even after extensive preoperative assessment, staging laparoscopy may allow avoidance of non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with radiographically occult metastatic or locally unresectable disease. Staging laparoscopy is associated with decreased postoperative pain, a shorter hospital stay and a higher likelihood of receiving systemic therapy compared to laparotomy but its yield has decreased with improvements in imaging techniques. Current uses of staging laparoscopy include the following: (1) In the staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, laparoscopic staging allows for the identification of sub-radiographic metastatic disease in locally advanced cancer in approximately 30% of patients and, in radiographically resectable cancer, may identify metastatic disease in 10%-15% of cases; (2) In colorectal liver metastases, selective use of laparoscopic staging in patients with a clinical risk score of over 2 identifies unresectable disease in approximately 20% of patients; (3) In hepatocellular carcinoma, laparoscopic staging could be selectively used in high-risk patients such as those with clinically apparent liver cirrhosis and in patients with major vascular invasion or bilobar tumors; and (4) In biliary tract malignancy, staging laparoscopy may be used in all patients with potentially resectable primary gallbladder cancer and in selected patients with T2/T3 hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Because of the decreasing yield of SL secondary to improvements in imaging techniques, staging laparoscopy should be used selectively for patients with pancreatic and hepatobiliary malignancy to avoid unnecessary non-therapeutic laparotomy and to improve resource utilization. Each individual surgeon should apply his or her threshold as to whether staging laparoscopy is indicated according to the quality of preoperative imaging studies and the availability of resources at their own institution.

Abdominal Scar Recurrences of Cervical Cancer: Incidence and Characteristics: A Case-Control Study

Background:

Tumor recurrence in the surgical scar after radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer has been reported, but the incidence is unknown. Facts about patient and tumor characteristics and follow-up are lacking. The objective of this study was to analyze the incidence and characteristics of cervical cancer scar recurrences.

Methods:

All patients who were surgically treated for cervical cancer in our center between 1984 and 2007 were reviewed for scar recurrences. For each case, 5 random controls were selected. Clinical characteristics were compared between the cases and controls.

Results:

Eleven (1.3%) of 842 patients developed a scar recurrence. Mean time between surgery and scar recurrence was 16 months (range, 2-45 months). For 8 patients (73%), the scar recurrence was the first disease recurrence. Five patients (45%) died, and 2 (18%) were lost to follow-up. Mean time between scar recurrence and death was 9 months. Ninety-one percent of the cases had recurrent disease besides the scar recurrence during follow-up. The case group had a higher percentage of advanced FIGO (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics) stage and postoperatively found involvement of parametria or resection margins and tumor diameter greater than 4 cm, whereas lymph nodes were more often involved in the control group.

Conclusions:

The incidence of scar recurrences after primary surgery for cervical cancer was 1.3%. Time to development was variable, and prognosis was poor. Besides higher FIGO stage and concurrent unfavorable pathological characteristics, we found no outstanding characteristics of patients with scar recurrence. Scar recurrences go hand in hand with recurrent disease at other locations and seem a manifestation of tumors with extensive metastatic potential.

Should all distal pancreatectomies be performed laparoscopically?

Despite the relatively slow start of laparoscopic pancreatectomy relative to other laparoscopic resections, an increasing number of these procedures are being performed around the world. Operations that were once considered impossible to perform laparoscopically, such as pancreaticoduodenectomy and central pancreatectomy are gaining momentum. Technology continues to improve, as does surgical experience and prowess. There are both enough experience and data (though retrospective) to confirm that LDP with or without spleen preservation appears to be a safe treatment for benign or noninvasive lesions of the pancreas. Based on the fact that LDP can be performed with similar or shorter operative times, blood loss, complication rates, and length of hospital stay than ODP, it can be recommended as the treatment of choice for benign and noninvasive lesions in experienced hands when clinically indicated. It is very difficult to make clear recommendations with regard to laparoscopic resection of malignant pancreatic tumors due to the lack of conclusive data. As long as margins are negative and lymph node clearance is within accepted standards, LDP appears to have no untoward oncologic effects on outcome. Certainly more data, preferably in the manner of a randomized clinical trial, are needed before additional recommendations can be made. Potential benefits of laparoscopic resection for cancer include the ability to inspect the abdomen and abort the procedure with minimal damage if occult metastases are identified. This does not delay the onset of palliative chemotherapy, which would be the primary treatment in that circumstance. In fact, there is evidence to suggest that there is a greater likelihood of receiving systemic therapy if a laparotomy is avoided in patients who have radiologically occult metastases. Patients may also undergo palliative laparoscopic gastric and biliary bypass if indicated. Faster wound healing may also translate into a shorter waiting time before initiating adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy. If the patient develops a wound infection, the infection should be more readily manageable with smaller incisions. Although not proven clinically relevant in humans, the reduction in perioperative stress associated with laparoscopic resection may translate to a cancer benefit for some patients. One report compared markers of systemic inflammatory response in 15 subjects undergoing left pancreatectomy. Eight had hand-access laparoscopic procedures and the rest had standard open surgery. The subjects in the laparoscopic group had statistically lower C-reactive protein levels than the open group on postoperative days one (5.5 mg/dL versus 9.7 mg/dL, P = .006) and three (8.5 mg/dL versus 17.7 mg/dL, P = .003), suggesting that the laparoscopic approach to left pancreatectomy is associated with less inflammation. While this report is underpowered, it supports the notion that MIS cancer surgery may induce less of a systemic insult to the body than standard open cancer surgery. More work in this area is necessary before any firm conclusions can be drawn. An important issue to consider is that of training surgeons to perform these complex procedures laparoscopically. Not all pancreatectomies are amenable to the laparoscopic approach, even in the most skilled hands. As such, only a percentage of cases will be performed this way and expectations to educate surgeons adequately to perform advanced laparoscopic procedures can be unrealistic, resulting in more "on-the-job" training. Another aspect that draws some controversy is that of the totally laparoscopic procedure versus the hand-access approach. No laparoscopic instrument provides the tactile feedback possible to obtain with the hand. The HALS approach allows for this, and the opportunity to control bleeding during the procedure. HALS also provides a way to improve confidence during the learning-curve phase of these operations. Finally, it is important to remember that if the procedure is failing to progress laparoscopically, or if cancer surgery principles are likely to be violated, the surgeon (and the patient) must be willing to abort the laparoscopic approach and complete the operation using standard open technique. During the next few years we can expect to see more robust outcome data with laparoscopic pancreatectomy. The expectation is that more data will come to light demonstrating benefits of laparoscopic pancreatic resection as compared with open technique for selected patients. Several groups are considering randomized trials to look at these endpoints. Although more retrospective and prospectively maintained data will certainly be presented, it is less likely that randomized data specifically examining the question oflaparoscopic versus open pancreatectomy for cancer will mature, due to some of the limitations discussed above. Additional areas of discovery are in staple line reinforcement for left pancreatectomy and suturing technology for pancreatico-intestinal anastomosis. Robotic surgery may have a role in pancreatic surgery. Improving optics and visualization with flexible endoscopes with provide novel surgical views potentially improving the safety of laparoscopy. Another area in laparoscopic surgery that is gaining momentum is that of Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES). NOTES represents the "holy grail" of incisionless surgery. Can we enucleate a small tumor off the pancreatic body by passing an endoscope through the gastric (or colonic) wall, and bring the specimen out via the mouth or anus? Can we use this approach for formal left pancreatectomies? Pioneers have already developed a porcine model of left pancreatectomy. This technology must clear several hurdles before it is cancer ready; however, technology is moving at a rapid pace.

Laparoscopic and Open Distal Pancreatectomy: A Comparison of Outcomes

Laparoscopic (lap) pancreatic surgery has been increasingly reported since its introduction in 1992. A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing elective lap and open distal pancreatectomy from 2002 to 2007 was performed. Univariate analysis was completed to evaluate perioperative variables. Logistic regression analysis was used to model predictors of postoperative pancreatic fistula. One hundred forty-eight subjects underwent distal pancreatectomy; 98 completed open, 44 lap, and six converted to open. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative morbidity or mortality between the surgical approaches. Decreased operative time (156 vs 200 minutes, P < 0.01), blood loss (157 vs 719 mL, P < 0.01), and length of stay (5.9 vs 8.6 days, P < 0.01) were seen in the lap group. There was no significant difference in the rate of all pancreatic fistula formation (50 vs 46%, P = 0.94) or clinically significant leaks (18 vs 19%, P = 0.97) between techniques. A preoperative biopsy-proven cancer, increasing body mass index, history of pancreatitis, and male gender were significant predictors of having a pancreatic fistula. Lap and open distal pancreatectomy are performed safely at high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. This report provides ongoing support of the feasibility and safety of the lap approach with improved perioperative outcomes and equivalent pancreatic fistula rate.

Laparoscopic pancreatic resection for cancer

Laparoscopic (lap) organ resection is now commonly performed for the management of solid tumors of the kidney, colon, adrenal glands and prostate. Surgeons have been slower to adopt minimally invasive approaches to the pancreas owing to operative complexity and complication potential. The majority of existing reports concerning lap pancreatectomy are single-center studies that describe experience with fewer than 20 cases. Only recently have larger experiences surfaced demonstrating the safety and efficacy of lap tumor enucleation and lap left pancreatectomy. As neoplastic disease is the most common indication for pancreatic resection, understanding the effects of the lap approach to pancreatectomy on cancer outcome is crucial. In addition to concerns of port-site tumor recurrence and tumor dissemination due to lap manipulation in the setting of pneumoperitoneum, adequacy of resection as defined by margin status and nodal assessment must be considered. This review covers the development and current state-of-the-art of lap pancreatic surgery for cancer. Existing data are reviewed for both open and lap pancreatic resections, with particular attention to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Projections of future advances in the field of lap pancreatic surgery are provided.

The role of staging laparoscopy for intraabdominal cancers: an evidence-based review

Diagnostic laparoscopy is minimally invasive surgery for the diagnosis of intraabdominal diseases. The aim of this review is a critical examination of the available literature on the role of laparoscopy for the staging of intraabdominal cancers. A systematic literature search of English-language articles on MEDLINE, the Cochrane database of evidence-based reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects was performed for the period 1995-2006. The level of evidence in the identified articles was graded. The search identified and reviewed seven main categories that have received attention in the literature: esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, pancreatic cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary tract cancer, colorectal cancer, and lymphoma. The indications, contraindications, risks, benefits, diagnostic accuracy of the procedure, and its associated morbidity are discussed. The limitations of the available literature are highlighted, and evidence-based recommendations for the use of laparoscopy to stage intraabdominal cancers are provided.

A comparison of the effects of pneumoperitoneum and laparotomy on natural killer cell mediated cytotoxicity and Walker tumor growth in Wistar rats

BACKGROUND

Surgical stress promotes impaired immunological function, which contributes to tumor growth. Natural killer activity (NKA) has a protective role in immunity to tumors. So, the aim of this experimental study was to assess tumor growth and (NKA) after pneumoperitoneum and laparotomy. METHODS; Sixty male Wistar rats were divided into three groups (anesthesia, CO2 pneumoperitoneum and laparotomy) plus ten controls. All experimental animals were inoculated subcutaneously with 8 x 105 Walker carcinosarcoma 256 cells. Animals were sacrificed on 1st(POD1) and 8th (POD8) postoperative day. Tumors were excised and weighed.

RESULTS

On POD1 all animals had diminished NKA when compared to controls; NKA after pneumoperitoneum was significantly greater than after laparotomy. On POD8 all animals, except after laparotomy, reached NKA at controls levels. Tumor weight was significantly greater after laparotomy when compared to pneumoperitoneum.

CONCLUSIONS

Pneumoperitoneum causes a less depressed NKA and less tumor growth when compared to laparotomy.

Port-Site Recurrence After Laparoscopy-Assisted Gastrectomy: Report of the First Case

In advanced gastric cancer, laparoscopic management has been associated with trocar-site recurrence, even though laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomies have reported positive results to treat early-stage gastric cancer in the world. There are no reports of port-site recurrence after laparoscopic gastrectomy in the literature. In this paper, we present a case report of advanced gastric cancer with port-site recurrence 12 month after the initial operation. A wide excision of this recurrence was performed. Otherwise, the evaluation of metastasis in other sites remained negative at 18 months after the original operation. The laparoscopic surgeon should be aware of trocar-site recurrence when dealing with advanced gastric cancer.

Peritoneal transforming growth factor beta-1 expression during laparoscopic surgery: a clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Transforming growth factor-beta 1 (TGF-beta1) is a growth factor involved in various biologic processes, including peritoneal wound healing and dissemination of malignancies. Laparoscopic surgery is evolving rapidly, and indications are increasing. The peritoneal TGF-beta1 expression during laparoscopic surgery is unknown.

METHODS

For this study, 50 patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into five groups, then surgically treated with various pressures, light intensities, and dissection devices. Peritoneal biopsies were taken at the beginning and end of surgery. Tissue concentrations of total and active TGF-beta1 were measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) techniques.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in either total or active TGF-beta1 concentration between peritoneal biopsies taken at the start of surgery and samples taken at the end of the procedure. Patients who underwent surgery with the ultrasonic scalpel had significant lower levels of both active (p < 0.005) and total (p < 0.01) TGF-beta1 at the end of surgery than patients treated with electrocautery. Patients who had surgery with a high light intensity had significantly lower levels of total TGF-beta1 levels (p < 0.005) with an unchanged active part than patients who had surgery with low light intensity.

CONCLUSION

The choice of dissection device and the light intensity used in laparoscopic surgery affect peritoneal TGF-beta1 concentrations, indicating that peritoneal biology can be affected by laparoscopic surgery. Because TGF-beta1 is involved in various biologic processes in the peritoneal cavity, this observation may have important clinical consequences.

Assessment of pancreatic malignancy with laparoscopy and intraoperative ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Staging laparoscopy for pancreatic malignancy is controversial. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of laparoscopy with intraoperative ultrasound in the management of patients with pancreatic carcinoma.

METHODS

The study involved patients undergoing laparoscopy and intraoperative ultrasound over a period of 42 months. The entry criteria specified radiologic (computed tomography) diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma and no evidence of metastases.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 100 patients (52 men and 48 women) ages 21 to 83 years (mean, 63 years). On the basis of imaging, 75 patients had lesions judged to be operable, and 25 patients had a pancreatic head lesion larger than 4 cm radiologically, considered to be unresectable, but with no evidence of metastatic disease. At laparoscopy, three patients had a normal examination, with no evidence of a pancreatic mass, and an additional seven patients had other pathology including one lymphoma, one ampullary tumor, two cases of chronic pancreatitis, and three sarcomas. Of the patients with radiologically inoperable disease, 16% had previously undetected metastases, but 24% were judged to be suitable for curative resection. Half of these patients underwent successful resection. Of the patients with radiologically operable disease, undetected liver or peritoneal metastases were found in 20% of the body or tail lesions and in 26% of the pancreatic head lesions. Of the pancreatic head tumors, 12% were found to be larger than 4 cm and therefore unsuitable for curative resection. Consequently, only 53% were confirmed to be suitable for resection. Of the patients explored with a view to curative resection, 42% actually underwent resection, with clearance of resection margins achieved in 77.8%.

CONCLUSION

Of the patients thought to have a resectable tumor on the basis of good quality preoperative imaging, 44% had their management approach altered after laparoscopy and avoided an open procedure. Laparoscopy should therefore be used in the preoperative staging of pancreatic tumors.

Staginglaparoskopie in der Onkologie

The availability of more treatment options for gastrointestinal cancer requires precise and reliable pretherapeutic staging. Despite impressive technical progress in modern imaging procedures, this high level of staging quality is not yet warranted in all instances. Visual exploration of the abdominal cavity in extended diagnostic laparoscopy (EDL), including surgical dissection of areas which are primarily inaccessible, biopsy retrieval, and laparoscopic ultrasound, is superior in the diagnostic workup of early peritoneal carcinomatosis and (small) liver metastases. It is helpful to evaluate lymph node infliction and local resectability. In esophageal carcinoma, pretherapeutic EDL is valuable in case of advanced adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus (AEG I according to Siewert), whereas the incidence of abdominal tumor manifestations in squamous cell carcinoma is too low to perform staging laparoscopy. In advanced gastric cancer, EDL yields relevant additional information in up to 20% of cases. If a multimodal therapeutic strategy is considered, EDL should be obligatory at least in prospective therapeutic studies. In carcinoma of the pancreas, EDL is in general not recommended by the majority of centers. Selective use (in particular in advanced cancer with a high probability of local irresectability) is gaining importance. In hepatobiliary malignancy including colorectal metastases, the high yield of additional information by EDL was confirmed in recent studies.

The current role of staging laparoscopy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas: a review

In the absence of metastatic disease patients with localized or locally advanced pancreatic cancer can benefit from surgical resection or chemoradiation. Despite the advances of imaging technology, however, noninvasive staging modalities are still inaccurate in identifying small volume metastatic disease leading potentially to inappropriate treatment and avoidable morbidity in a subgroup of patients. Staging laparoscopy may identify those patients with unsuspected metastatic disease on preoperative imaging and prevent unnecessary laparotomy or chemoradiation. A controversy exists, however, as to whether the procedure should be used routinely or selectively in pancreatic cancer patients with no evidence of metastasis on noninvasive staging. This review aims to assess the current role of staging laparoscopy by examining its diagnostic accuracy and ability to prevent unnecessary treatment as well as its morbidity, oncologic effect and cost-effectiveness. The available literature will be evaluated critically, its limitations identified and exisiting controversies addressed.

Staging of pancreatic head adenocarcinoma with spiral CT and endoscopic ultrasonography: an indirect evaluation of the usefulness of laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

The interest of laparoscopy in the preoperative staging of pancreatic head adenocarcinoma before curative pancreaticoduodenectomy is a matter of controversy and depends on the accuracy of preoperative imaging techniques.

AIM

To assess the potential value of laparoscopy when a standardised and optimal preoperative staging is performed, including spiral computed tomography (CT) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS).

METHODS

All consecutive patients operated on with a view to curative pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic head or ampullary adenocarcinoma in our centre from January 1998 to August 2000 were retrospectively studied. All of them had preoperative spiral CT and EUS. Tumour resectability was considered as highly probable (HP) or uncertain (U) according to well-defined criteria. Operative records of patients were reviewed to indirectly assess the effective resectability rate and the criteria responsible for unresectability and which of them would have been identified by laparoscopy if initially performed.

RESULTS

69 consecutive patients were studied. Resectability was HP (n = 56) or U (n = 13) after preoperative staging. Curative pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 53 patients (77%) (48 HP, 5 U). Positive predictive value of preoperative imaging for highly probable resectability was 86% (48/56). Among the 16 unresectable tumours (8 HP, 8 U), the cause of non-resection would have been found at laparoscopy in 9 patients (56%) (6 HP, 3 U). Finally, if initially performed, laparoscopy would have avoided laparotomy in 9/69 patients (13%) (6/56 HP (11%); 3/13 U (23%)).

CONCLUSIONS

With accurate preoperative staging using spiral CT and EUS, laparoscopy would detect tumours which were unresectable in 13% of patients with pancreatic head cancer. Laparoscopy remains useful in selected patients, such as those with preoperative uncertain resectability, in whom it can prevent unnecessary laparotomy in one fourth of patients.