Percutaneous biliary drainage is oncologically inferior to endoscopic drainage: a propensity score matching analysis in resectable distal cholangiocarcinoma

Intraductal Implantation of Biliary Neoplasms: A Potential Cause of "Multifocal" Tumors

Multiple biliary tumors rarely develop in patients without underlying chronic hepatobiliary disease. Those lesions are regarded as multifocal neoplasms if there is no interconnecting dysplasia. This study aimed to determine whether 2 separate tumors in the biliary tract represent true multifocal independent tumorigenesis or intraluminal implantation of a single neoplasm. Two separate biliary tumors without intervening dysplasia were identified in 9 cases: biliary intraductal papillary neoplasm (IPNB; n=5) and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n=4). The 2 tumors were histologically similar in all cases. In 5 metachronous cases, the second tumor developed 2 to 13 years after the complete resection of the first tumor. In 4 synchronous cases, 2 separate neoplasms were identified in a surgical specimen. The metachronous presentation was more common in IPNB cases, whereas the synchronous development was more frequent in cholangiocarcinoma cases. The second tumors in 4 metachronous cases (4/5; 80%) and smaller lesions in all synchronous cases (4/4; 100%) were located in a lower part of the biliary. Immunophenotypes of cytokeratins and mucin core proteins were almost identical between the 2 lesions. Next-generation sequencing also confirmed that the 2 neoplasms shared gene mutations involving KRAS, GNAS, APC, BRAF, CTNNB1, SMAD4, TP53, or ARID1A in all cases. In conclusion, multiple biliary tumors without underlying chronic biliary disease are most likely due to intraductal implantation of a single neoplasm. Thick mucinous bile in IPNB and increasing use of trans-ampullary biliary interventions may contribute to this unique form of tumor extension.

Impact of biliary drainage method before pancreaticoduodenectomy on short- and long-term outcomes in patients with periampullary carcinoma and obstructive jaundice: A multicenter retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

The optima preoperative biliary drainage before pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with biliary tract and pancreatic cancer remains controversial.

METHODS

A total of 898 patients who underwent preoperative biliary drainage via endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage, endoscopic transnasal biliary drainage, or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage before pancreaticoduodenectomy for biliary tract and pancreatic cancer were included. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 morbidity rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy were higher in the endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (21.9%; P = .001) or endoscopic transnasal biliary drainage (20.2%; P = .007) than in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (9.7%) groups. In biliary tract cancer, the frequency of dissemination after pancreaticoduodenectomy was higher in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (15.3%) than in the endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (0.7%; P = .001) and endoscopic transnasal biliary drainage (4.1%; P = .037) groups; percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage was an independent factor associated with worse disease-free survival (P = .04), whereas in pancreatic cancer the frequency of dissemination and survival was comparable among the 3 preoperative biliary drainage methods. Albumin <3.9 g/dL was independently associated with worse overall survival in patients with both pancreatic (P = .038) and biliary tract (P = .002) cancers, respectively. During biliary drainage, external drainage (P = .038) was independently associated with albumin <3.9 g/dL; albumin was higher in endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage group than in endoscopic transnasal biliary drainage or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage groups after 21 days from tube insertion.

CONCLUSION

In biliary tract cancer, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage may carry the risk of increasing the incidence of disseminative recurrence. In pancreatic cancer, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is preferable owing to fewer complications without influencing recurrence. However, if patients cannot undergo surgery immediately, endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage will be applicable to help the preservation of nutritional status, which can have an impact on survival.

Prognostic impact of peritoneal washing cytology in patients with biliary tract cancer

PURPOSE

To elucidate the clinical significance of peritoneal washing cytology (PWC) in patients with resectable biliary tract cancer (BTC).

METHODS

Clinical data of patients with BTC, who received PWC at curative intent surgery from March 2009 to December 2021, were retrospectively analyzed. Eligible patients were stratified into two groups according to positive or negative PWC. Recurrence-free survival and overall survival were compared between the two groups. Independent factors associated with positive PWC were investigated using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 284 patients analyzed, all 53 patients with ampullary carcinoma showed negative PWC and these patients were excluded. Among the remaining eligible 231 patients, 41 patients had intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, 55 had gall bladder carcinoma, 72 had hilar cholangiocarcinoma, and 63 had distal cholangiocarcinoma. Eleven (4.8%) patients had positive PWC, and 220 (95.2%) had negative PWC. The median recurrence-free survival in the positive and negative PWC groups were 12.0 vs. 60.7 months (p = 0.005); the median overall survival times were 17.0 vs. 60.6 months (p = 0.008), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level over 80 U/mL and multiple lymph node metastasis were independently associated with positive PWC (odds ratio [OR]: 5.84, p = 0.031; OR: 5.28, p = 0.021, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Patients with positive PWC exhibited earlier recurrence and shorter survival times compared with those with negative PWC.

The Role of Endoscopy in the Palliation of Pancreatico-Biliary Cancers: Biliary Drainage, Management of Gastrointestinal Obstruction, and Role in Relief of Oncologic Pain

Therapeutic endoscopy permits many and various treatments for cancer palliation in patients with bilio-pancreatic cancers, enabling different options, supporting patients during their route to oncologic treatments, and trying to improve their quality of life. Therefore, both endoscopic and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided techniques are performed in this scenario. We performed a literature review focusing on the role of endoscopy in the palliation of those advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers developing malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and pain unresponsive to medical therapies. Therefore, we explored and focused on the clinical outcomes of endoscopic procedures in this scenario. In fact, the endoscopic treatment is based on achieving biliary drainage in the case of MBO through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), while GOO is endoscopically treated through the deployment of an enteral stent or the creation of EUS-guided gastro-entero-anastomosis (EUS-GEA). Furthermore, untreatable chronic abdominal pain is a major issue in patients unresponsive to high doses of painkillers, so EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) or celiac ganglia neurolysis (CGN) helps to reduce dosage and have better pain control. Therefore, therapeutic endoscopy in the palliative setting is an effective and safe approach for managing most of the clinical manifestations of advanced biliopancreatic tumors.

Endoscopic or percutaneous biliary drainage in hilar cholangiocarcinoma: When and how?

Hilar cholangiocarcinoma (hCCA) is a primary liver tumor associated with a dim prognosis. The role of preoperative and palliative biliary drainage has long been debated. The most common techniques are endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD); however, recently developed endoscopic ultrasound-assisted methods are gaining more atention. Selecting the best available method in any specific scenario is crucial, yet sometimes challenging. Thus, this review aimed to discuss the available techniques, indications, perks, pitfalls, and timing-related issues in the management of hCCA. In a preoperative setting, PTBD appears to have some advantages: low risk of postprocedural complications (namely cholangitis) and better priming for surgery. For palliative purposes, we propose ERCP/PTBD depending on the experience of the operators, but also on other factors: the level of bilirubin (if very high, rather PTBD), length of the stenosis and the presence of cholangitis (PTBD), ERCP failure, or altered biliary anatomy.

Negative prognostic outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in distal cholangiocarcinoma: a retrospective analysis using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of different types of preoperative biliary drainage for cholangiocarcinoma has been debated over the past two decades. Controversy concerning the use of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) versus endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) still exists. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes between PTBD and EBD in patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

Data of patients diagnosed with distal cholangiocarcinoma who underwent preoperative PTBD or EBD from January 1999 to December 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Post-surgical outcomes, including the incidence of post-operative complications, peritoneal metastasis, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were analyzed. Survival analyses were also performed after propensity score matching in the PTBD and EBD groups.

RESULTS

The incidence of post-operative complications was similar in both groups. The 5-year estimated cumulative incidences for peritoneal metastasis were 14.7% and 7.2% in the PTBD and EBD groups, respectively (p = 0.192). The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 23.7% and 47.3% in the PTBD and EBD groups, respectively (p = 0.015). In the multi-variate analysis for overall survival, PTBD was an independent poor prognostic factor. The 5-year overall survival rates were 35.9% and 56.3% in the PTBD and EBD groups, respectively (hazard ratio 1.85, confidence interval 1.05-3.26, p = 0.035). The results after propensity score matching indicated a poorer prognosis in the PTBD group, with a 5-year survival rate of 35.9% in the PTBD group vs 56.0% in the EBD group (p = 0.044).

CONCLUSION

PTBD should be considered as a negative prognostic factor in distal cholangiocarcinoma patients.

The prognostic impact of peritoneal washing cytology for otherwise resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients

The clinical importance of peritoneal washing cytology (PWC) for cholangiocarcinoma patients remains unclear. The clinical data of 137 extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients who received PWC and curative surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Among the 137 patients analyzed, five (3.6%) had positive PWC, and 132 (96.4%) had negative PWC. The median survival time in patients with negative PWC was 6.45 years, and the overall 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates were 86.5%, 75.3%, and 51.6%, respectively. The median survival time in patients with positive PWC was 2.56 years, and the overall 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival rates were 60.0%, 60.0%, and 40.0%, respectively. A multivariate analysis revealed that positive lymph node metastasis (P < 0.001), positive perineural invasion (P = 0.014) and no use of adjuvant chemotherapy (P < 0.001), but not positive PWC were independently associated with a worse overall survival. In conclusion, surgery and subsequent chemotherapy might be a therapeutic option for cholangiocarcinoma patients with positive PWC.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers 2019: The 3rd English edition

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery launched the clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer) in 2007, then published the 2nd version in 2014.

METHODS

In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as Grade 1 (strong) or Grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (a) prophylactic treatment, (b) diagnosis, (c) biliary drainage, (d) surgical treatment, (e) chemotherapy, and (f) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded.

CONCLUSIONS

This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.

The impact of peritoneal lavage cytology in biliary tract cancer (KHBO1701): Kansai Hepato-Biliary Oncology Group

Background

Only few studies in literature have analyzed the clinical effects of peritoneal lavage status in biliary tract cancers.

Aim

We aimed to assess the effect of cytology‐positive peritoneal lavage on survival for patients with biliary tract cancer who underwent curative resection.

Methods

The KHBO1701 study was a multi‐institutional retrospective study that assessed the clinical effects of peritoneal lavage cytology in biliary tract cancers. Using clinicopathological data from 11 Japanese institutions, we compared long‐term outcomes between patients with cytology‐positive and cytology‐negative peritoneal lavage.

Results

Of 169 patients who underwent curative resection, 164 were cytology‐negative, and five were cytology‐positive. The incidence of portal invasion and preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19‐9 levels were higher in the cytology‐positive group than in the cytology‐negative group. The incidence of peritoneal metastatic recurrence was also higher, and overall survival tended to be worse in the cytology‐positive group. In contrast, recurrence‐free survival was similar between the cytology‐negative and cytology‐positive groups.

Conclusions

The positive status of peritoneal lavage cytology could moderately affect the survival of patients with biliary tract cancers. Given that surgical resection is the only curative treatment option, it may be acceptable to resect biliary tract cancers without other non‐curative factors, regardless of peritoneal lavage cytology status.

Italian Clinical Practice Guidelines on Cholangiocarcinoma - Part II: Treatment

Currently, the only curative treatment for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is surgical resection, though this treatment is possible in less than 40% of patients. However, recent improvements in preoperative management have led to a higher number of patients who are candidates for this procedure. For unresectable patients, progress is ongoing in terms of locoregional and chemoradiation treatments and target therapies, especially in the definition of patient selection criteria. This is the second part of the Italian CCA guidelines, dealing with CCA treatment, that have been formulated in accordance with Italian National Institute of Health indications and developed according to the GRADE method and related advancements.

Oncologic Reappraisal of Bile Duct Resection for Middle-Third Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Although bile duct resection (BDR) in addition to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is considered a surgical approach in patients with middle-third cholangiocarcinoma (MCC), available prognostic information after BDR remains very limited. The aim of this study was to reappraise BDR from the viewpoint of surgical oncology.

METHODS

Patients who underwent BDR or PD for MCC between 2001 and 2010 at 32 Japanese hospitals were included. Clinicopathological factors were retrospectively compared according to surgical procedure to identify a subset cohort who benefited most from BDR.

RESULTS

During the study, 92 patients underwent BDR (n = 38) or PD (n = 54). BDR was characterized by a shorter operation time, less blood loss, less frequent complications, and lower mortality, than PD. The incidence of positive surgical margins was 26.3% versus 5.6% (P = 0.007). The survival rate after BDR was significantly worse than that after PD: 38.8% versus 54.8% at 5 years (P = 0.035), and BDR was independently associated with deteriorated survival [hazard ratio (HR), 1.76; P = 0.023] by multivariable analysis. In the BDR group, tumor length < 15 mm (HR, 3.38; P = 0.017) and ductal margin length ≥ 10 mm (HR, 2.54; P = 0.018) were independent positive prognostic factors. Stratified by these two favorable factors, the 5-year survival rate was 63.0% in patients with 1/2 factors and 6.7% in those with 0 factors (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In patients with MCC, BDR provided a better short-term and a worse long-term outcome than PD. However, patient selection using tumor length and ductal margin length may allow a favorable survival probability even after BDR.

Effects of different preoperative biliary drainage methods for resected malignant obstruction jaundice on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis: A meta-analysis

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) for resected malignant obstruction jaundice (MOJ) on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis. Databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were utilized. With reference to literature reported until January 2019, controlled clinical trials were designed to compare the effects of PTBD and EBD for MOJ on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis. Subsequently, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated with Review Manager 5.3.0 software. A total of 10 studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis, including 1,085 cases in the PTBD group and 1,379 cases in the EBD group. The results revealed that there was a significant difference in the incidence rate of implantation metastasis between the PTBD group and EBD group (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.23–0.53, P<0.00001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the incidence rates of both catheter-related implantation metastasis and peritoneal metastasis were lower in the EBD group (OR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.12–0.44, P<0.00001; OR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.31–0.74, P=0.0008, respectively), and the advantage of EBD was demonstrated in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic carcinoma (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.17–0.74, P=0.006; OR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.17–0.60, P=0.0005; OR=0.27, 95% CI: 0.19–0.40, P<0.00001, respectively). In conclusion, this meta-analysis revealed the appropriate choice of preoperative biliary drainage for resected MOJ. The application of EBD reduced the incidence rate of implantation metastasis, however more evidence is required from future studies, to confirm the results.

Fifty-year history of biliary surgery

There has been enormous progress in the surgical treatment of biliary tract cancers in the past 50 years. In preoperative management, biliary drainage methods have changed from percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage to endoscopic nasobiliary drainage, while the advent of multidetector-row computed tomography in imaging diagnostics now enables visualization of three-dimensional anatomy, extent of cancer progression, and hepatic segment volume. Portal vein embolization has also greatly improved the safety of extended hepatectomy, and indication of extended hepatectomy can now be objectively determined with a combination of the indocyanine green test and computed tomography volumetry. In terms of surgery, combined resection and reconstruction of the portal vein and/or hepatic artery can now be safely carried out at specialized centers. Further, long-term survival can be attained with combined vascular resection if R0 resection can be achieved, even in locally advanced cancer. Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy, combined major hepatectomy with pancreatoduodenectomy, should be aggressively carried out for laterally advanced cholangiocarcinoma, whereas its indication for advanced gallbladder cancer should be carefully evaluated. Japanese surgeons have made a significant contribution to the progression of extended surgeries such as combined vascular resection and hepatopancreatoduodenectomy for biliary tract cancer.

A systematic review of the comparison of the incidence of seeding metastasis between endoscopic biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for resectable malignant biliary obstruction

Background and aim

Endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD) are the two main strategies of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for resectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) worldwide, but which is better remains unclear. Seeding metastasis (SM) has been reported repeatedly in the recent decade, although it is rarely taken into consideration in the choice of PBD. Hence, a systematic review was badly warranted to evaluate the incidence of SM between PTBD and EBD in the preoperative treatment of MBO.

Methods

PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were used to identify any potentially eligible studies comparing the incidence of SM between EBD and PTBD from Nov 1990 to Mar 2018. The effect size was determined by odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Ten studies were enrolled in this study, including 1379 cases in the EBD group and 1085 cases in the PTBD group. Results showed that the incidence of SM in the EBD group was significantly lower than that in the PTBD group (10.5% vs. 22.0%, OR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.23~0.53). Subgroup analysis stratified by the definition of SM showed that the pooled ORs for peritoneal metastasis and tube-related SM between EBD and PTBD were 0.42 (95% CI 0.31~0.57) and 0.17 (95% CI 0.10~0.29), respectively. Subgroup analysis stratified by the location of MBO showed that the pooled ORs for the incidence of SM between EBD and PTBD for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, distal cholangiocarcinoma, and pancreatic cancer were 0.27 (95% CI 0.13~0.56), 0.32 (95% CI 0.17~0.60), and 0.27 (95% CI 0.19~0.40), respectively.

Conclusion

EBD should be the optimal PBD for MBO considering the SM, but it deserved further validation.

Cholangiographic Tumor Classification for Simple Patient Selection Prior to Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy for Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy (HPD) is employed for patients with laterally advanced cholangiocarcinoma. However, the survival benefit of this extended approach remains controversial. The aim of this study is to identify a tumor feature benefiting from HPD from the standpoint of long-term survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with cholangiocarcinoma who underwent HPD with curative intent between 2001 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Tumors were radiologically classified by preoperative cholangiogram. Diffuse type was defined as significant tumor/stricture located from the hilar to intrapancreatic duct; localized type was defined as tumor otherwise. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify prognostic indicators.

RESULTS

Of 100 study patients, 28 (28%) patients had diffuse tumor type, while the remaining 72 (72%) patients had localized tumors. The former group showed significantly longer lateral length (43 versus 22 mm, P < 0.001) and more frequent pancreatic invasion (50% versus 32%, P = 0.110), advanced T classification (64% versus 49%, P = 0.185), and nodal metastasis (57% versus 47%, P = 0.504), compared with the latter group. The survival for patients with diffuse tumor type was significantly worse than that for patients with localized tumor type, with 5-year survival rates of 59.0% versus 26.3%, respectively (P = 0.003). Multivariable analysis identified four independent factors deteriorating long-term survival: cholangiographic diffuse tumor (P = 0.021), higher age (P = 0.020), percutaneous biliary drainage (P = 0.007), and portal vein resection (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Presurgical cholangiographic classification, diffuse or localized type, is a tumor-related factor closely associated with survival probability; therefore, it may be a useful feature for patient selection prior to HPD for cholangiocarcinoma.

Comparison of long-term efficacy between endoscopic and percutaneous biliary drainage for resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

For resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction, it remains a controversy whether to choose percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) or endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD). A systematic review was conducted to compare the long-term efficacy between the two techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible studies were searched from January 1990 to May 2018, comparing the long-term efficacy between EBD and PTBD for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) rate, and secondary end points included postoperative severe complications and seeding metastasis. Effect size on outcomes was calculated using a fixed- or random-effect model, accompanied with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULT

Six studies were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that EBD was superior to PTBD in OS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.84,P= 0.0002). But subgroup results showed that the superiority disappeared in distal cholangiocarcinoma (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.01,P= 0.06). Other prognostic factors such as intraoperative blood transfusion, lymphatic metastasis and seeding metastasis, were inconsistent between groups. In addition, regional disparity was obviously apparent between Japanese and non-Japanese studies.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion that EBD was superior to PTBD in OS for resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction is less convincing, and more trials need to be conducted in future.

Pleural dissemination of cholangiocarcinoma caused by percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage during the management of resectable cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Only 3 case reports have addressed pleural dissemination in association with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The aim of this study was to investigate recurrence after resection of cholangiocarcinoma after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and to clarify the incidence of and the factors responsible for pleural dissemination.

METHODS

Between 2001 and 2015, we reviewed retrospectively all consecutive patients who underwent resection for perihilar or distal cholangiocarcinoma after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for recurrence, including pleural dissemination.

RESULTS

During the study period, all consecutive patients underwent resection of cholangiocarcinoma after management with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Of these, 100 patients (32.1%) underwent left-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage alone, and 212 (67.9%) underwent right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage with or without left-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Pleural dissemination, which developed exclusively on the right side of the thoracic cavity after resection, was found in 12 patients (3.8%); these patients underwent right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage; computed tomography demonstrated that the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage catheter passed through the thoracic cavity in all 12 patients. The diagnosis of pleural dissemination was made at a median of 381 days (range, 44 to 2,944 days) after operation. Survival was poor, with a median survival time of 516 days. Statistically, right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage was identified as a risk factor for pleural dissemination.

CONCLUSION

Pleural dissemination after right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is likely a procedure-related iatrogenic complication because of the "special route" by which the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage catheter must be passed through the right thoracic cavity.

Effectiveness of a modified 6-Fr endoscopic nasobiliary drainage catheter for patients with preoperative perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

To decrease complications associated with preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma patients, we developed a modified 6-Fr ENBD catheter with multiple side holes (m-ENBD). The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the m-ENBD catheter with a conventional 7-Fr ENBD catheter (c-ENBD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study involved 371 patients with suspected perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent ENBD using a c-ENBD catheter or an m-ENBD catheter. The effectiveness of each catheter and the incidence of complications were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses followed by propensity score matching were performed.

RESULTS

In 145 patients with total bilirubin levels ≥ 2.0 mg/dL prior to drainage, these levels decreased to < 2.0 mg/dL after ENBD in 81.1 % of the c-ENBD patients and in 74.0 % of the m-ENBD patients ( P  = 0.325). Post-ENBD cholangitis occurred in 24.9 % of the c-ENBD patients and in 12.4 % of the m-ENBD patients ( P  = 0.006). After propensity score matching, the rate of post-ENBD cholangitis ( P  = 0.007) and the number of patients requiring subsequent or additional drainage ( P  = 0.030) were significantly lower in the m-ENBD group.

CONCLUSION

The modified 6-Fr ENBD catheter was associated with a lower incidence of post-ENBD cholangitis than the conventional 7-Fr ENBD catheter, and the incidence of subsequent or additional drainage procedures was also decreased.

The Impact of Intraoperative Re-Resection of a Positive Bile Duct Margin on Clinical Outcomes for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The impact of re-resection of a positive intraoperative bile duct margin on clinical outcomes for resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) remains controversial. We sought to define the impact of re-resection of an initially positive frozen-section bile duct margin on outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for HCCA.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent resection for HCCA between 2000 and 2014 were identified at 10 hepatobiliary centers. Short- and long-term outcomes were analyzed among patients stratified by margin status.

RESULTS

Among 215 (83.7%) patients who underwent frozen-section evaluation of the bile duct, 80 (37.2%) patients had a positive (R1) ductal margin, 58 (72.5%) underwent re-resection, and 29 ultimately had a secondary negative margin (secondary R0). There was no difference in morbidity, 30-day mortality, and length of stay among patients who had primary R0, secondary R0, and R1 resection (all p > 0.10). Median and 5-year survival were 22.3 months and 23.3%, respectively, among patients who had a primary R0 resection compared with 18.5 months and 7.9%, respectively, for patients with an R1 resection (p = 0.08). In contrast, among patients who had a secondary R0 margin with re-resection of the bile duct margin, median and 5-year survival were 30.6 months and 44.3%, respectively, which was comparable to patients with a primary R0 margin (p = 0.804). On multivariable analysis, R1 margin resection was associated with decreased survival (R1: hazard ratio [HR] 1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.7; p = 0.027), but secondary R0 resection was associated with comparable long-term outcomes as primary R0 resection (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.4-2.3; p = 0.829).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional resection of a positive frozen-section ductal margin to achieve R0 resection was associated with improved long-term outcomes following curative-intent resection of HCCA.

Preoperative biliary colonization/infection caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens in patients undergoing major hepatectomy with extrahepatic bile duct resection

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to review the surgical outcomes of patients who underwent major hepatectomy with extrahepatic bile duct resection after preoperative biliary drainage with a particular focus on the impact of preoperative biliary colonization/infection caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent hepatobiliary resection after preoperative external biliary drainage between 2001 and 2015 were reviewed retrospectively. Prophylactic antibiotics were selected according to the results of drug susceptibility tests of surveillance bile cultures.

RESULTS

In total, 565 patients underwent surgical resection. Based on the results of bile cultures, the patients were classified into three groups: group A, patients with negative bile cultures (n = 113); group B, patients with positive bile cultures without multidrug-resistant pathogen growth (n = 416); and group C, patients with multidrug-resistant pathogen-positive bile culture (n = 36). The incidence of organ/space surgical site infection, bacteremia, median duration of postoperative hospital stay, and the mortality rate did not differ among the three groups. The incidence of incisional surgical site infection and infectious complications caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens was significantly higher in group C than in groups A and B. Fifty-two patients had postoperative infectious complications caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. Multivariate analysis identified preoperative multidrug-resistant pathogen-positive bile culture as a significant independent risk factor for postoperative infectious complications caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens (P< .001).

CONCLUSION

Major hepatectomy with extrahepatic bile duct resection after biliary drainage can be performed with acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality using appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis, even in patients with biliary colonization/infection caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens.

Comparison of efficacy and complications of endoscopic and percutaneous biliary drainage in malignant obstructive jaundice: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Malignant obstructive jaundice is a common problem in the clinic. Currently, the generally applied treatment methods are percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD). Nevertheless, there has not been a uniform conclusion published on either efficacy of the two types of drainage or the incidence rate of complications. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing endoscopic versus percutaneous biliary drainage in malignant obstructive jaundice, to determine whether there is any difference between percutaneous and endoscopic biliary drainage, with respect to efficacy and incidence rate of overall complications.

Methods

The enrolled studies contain a total of three randomized controlled trials and eleven retrospective studies, which together encompass 2246 patients with PTBD and 8100 patients with EBD.

Results

Our analysis indicates that there is no difference between PTBD and EBD with regard to therapeutic success rate (%), overall complication (%), intraperitoneal bile leak, 30-day mortality, sepsis, or duodenal perforation (%). Cholangitis and pancreatitis after PTBD were lower than after EBD, with odds ratios (OR) of 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31 to 0.74) and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.52), respectively. Incidences of bleeding and tube dislocation for PTBD were higher than EBD, OR of 1.81 (95% CI, 1.35 to 2.44) and 3.41 (95% CI, 1.10 to 10.60).

Conclusions

This meta-analysis indicates certain advantages for both PTBD and EBD. In the clinical practice, it is advised to choose specifically either PTBD or EBD, based on location of obstruction, purpose of drainage (as a preoperative procedure or a palliative treatment) and level of experience in biliary drainage at individual treatment centers.

ENBD is Associated with Decreased Tumor Dissemination Compared to PTBD in Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Little is known regarding the risk of tumor dissemination when percutaneous biliary drainage is used before surgical resection of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). We aimed to compare the incidence of tumor dissemination after preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) with that after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) for PHC.

METHODS

Data from 208 consecutive patients who underwent PHC resection between 2000 and 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. The influence of drainage type on incidence of tumor dissemination was examined. Seventy-six patients underwent ENBD (37%), 87 underwent PTBD (42%), and 45 underwent surgery without preoperative biliary drainage (WD, 22%).

RESULTS

The respective 2- and 5-year estimated cumulative incidences of tumor dissemination in the ENBD group (11.8/14.6%) were lower than in the PTBD group (28.8/35.9%, p = 0.003) and equivalent to that in the WD group (11.2/15.9%, p = NS). PTBD (hazard ratio [HR] vs. ENBD, 2.80) was an independent risk factor for postoperative tumor dissemination in the multivariate analysis. The 2- and 5-year disease-specific survival rates were higher in the ENBD group (67.6/47.3%) than in the PTBD group (56.6/27.8%, p = 0.032) and equivalent to that in the WD group (64.9/53.8%, p = NS). However, drainage type was not an independent risk factor in multivariate analysis of disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

For patients with PHC, the associated risk of postoperative tumor dissemination in the ENBD group was lower than in the PTBD group and equivalent to that in the WD group. Thus, ENBD is the ideal procedure for preoperative biliary drainage.

Outcomes of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage for malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy

AIM

To compare the outcomes of preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) and endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD) in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

Data from 153 consecutive patients who underwent preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage prior to PD between January 2009 and July 2016 were analyzed. We compared the clinical data, procedure-related complications of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and postoperative complications of PD between the ENBD and ERBD groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were used to identify the risk factors for deep abdominal infection after PD.

RESULTS

One hundred and two (66.7%) patients underwent ENBD, and 51 (33.3%) patients underwent ERBD. Endoscopic sphincterotomy was less frequently performed in the ENBD group than in the ERBD group (P = 0.039); the EBD duration in the ENBD group was shorter than that in the ERBD group (P = 0.036). After EBD, the levels of total bilirubin (TB) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were obviously decreased in both groups, and the decreases of TB and ALT in the ERBD group were greater than those in the ENBD group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.000, respectively). However, the rate of EBD procedure-related cholangitis was significantly higher in the ERBD group than in the ENBD group (P = 0.007). The postoperative complications of PD as graded by the Clavien-Dindo classification system were not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.864). However, the incidence of deep abdominal infection after PD was significantly lower in the ENBD group than in the ERBD group (P = 0.019). Male gender (OR = 3.92; 95%CI: 1.63-9.47; P = 0.002), soft pancreas texture (OR = 3.60; 95%CI: 1.37-9.49; P = 0.009), length of biliary stricture (≥ 1.5 cm) (OR = 5.20; 95%CI: 2.23-12.16; P = 0.000) and ERBD method (OR = 4.08; 95%CI: 1.69-9.87; P = 0.002) were independent risk factors for deep abdominal infection after PD.

CONCLUSION

ENBD is an optimal method for patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction prior to PD. ERBD is superior to ENBD in terms of patient tolerance and the effect of biliary drainage but is associated with an increased risk of EBD procedure-related cholangitis and deep abdominal infection after PD.

Long-term survival after multidisciplinary therapy for residual gallbladder cancer with peritoneal dissemination: a case report

Background

Although surgical resection is the only curative treatment for gallbladder cancer (GBC), concomitant peritoneal dissemination is considered far beyond the scope of resection. We report a long-term survivor with a residual GBC with multiple peritoneal disseminations who underwent an extended resection after effective chemotherapy.

Case presentation

A 59-year-old male underwent an open cholecystectomy for Mirizzi syndrome at a local hospital. Because of severe inflammation, the gallbladder was perforated during surgery, ending in a piecemeal resection. A pathological examination revealed GBC with positive margins, and the patient was referred to our hospital 1 month after surgery for further treatment. A multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) showed three hypoattenuated tumours: a tumour (3.9 cm) at the left medial segment corresponding to the gallbladder bed, a tumour (1.8 cm) around the hepatic flexure of the transverse colon, and a tumour (1.0 cm) at the stump of the cystic duct. Percutaneous needle biopsy was performed, which provided histologic evidence of adenocarcinoma. Thus, the patient had a rapidly progressive local relapse with limited peritoneal dissemination, labelled ycT3N0M1, stage IVB disease according to the UICC system. After the administration of 3 cycles of gemcitabine plus cisplatin combination chemotherapy, the size of all tumours and the CA19-9 level decreased significantly. Since the patient’s general condition and liver function reserve were satisfactory, we decided the initial unresectable scenario to perform surgical therapy. After portal vein embolization, right hepatectomy, resection of the extrahepatic bile duct, partial duodenectomy, and partial colectomy were performed. Operative time was 555 min, and intraoperative blood loss was 1654 mL. Pathologic diagnosis of residual gallbladder carcinoma with peritoneal dissemination was confirmed, and the surgical margins were tumour-free. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 29, with a Clavien-Dindo IIIa complication (abdominal wall abscess). Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil was administered during 1 year after surgery. The patient is doing well 6 years after the second surgery without evidence of disease.

Conclusions

Although specific clinical factors were associated with a favourable outcome in this patient, the present report suggests that multidisciplinary therapy may be a promising option in selected patients with distant metastatic GBC.

Prognostic impact of type of preoperative biliary drainage in patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Surgical results of patients with resected distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) were evaluated to elucidate prognostic impact of the type of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD).

METHODS

Eighty-eight patients with resected DCC were stratified into two groups according to the type of PBD: the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) group (n = 25) and the endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) group (n = 63).

RESULTS

Overall 5-year survival rate of the patients in the PTBD group was poorer than in the EBD group (24% vs. 52%, P = 0.020). On univariate analysis, PTBD, pancreatic invasion, perineural invasion, and lymph node involvement were significant prognostic factors for poor overall survival. On multivariate analysis, PTBD was the only significantly independent prognostic factor for poor overall survival. The incidence of liver metastasis was significantly higher in the PTBD group than in the EBD group (32.0% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

PTBD should be avoided as much as possible in patients with DCC since the patients who underwent PTBD had poorer overall survival and higher incidence of liver metastasis than those who underwent EBD.

Verification of the oncologic inferiority of percutaneous biliary drainage to endoscopic drainage: A propensity score matching analysis of resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is an established biliary drainage method but is associated with a potential risk of seeding metastasis. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate whether percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage really increases seeding metastasis and worsens the postoperative survival in patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage or endoscopic biliary drainage were retrospectively reviewed. Seeding metastasis was defined as peritoneal/pleural dissemination and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage sinus tract recurrence. Univariate and multivariate analyses followed by propensity score matching were performed to adjust the data for the baseline characteristics of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and endoscopic biliary drainage patients.

RESULTS

Of 320 resected patients, 168 underwent percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and the remaining 152 received endoscopic biliary drainage before operation. The survival of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage patients was significantly lower than that of the endoscopic biliary drainage patients (37.0% vs 44.3% at 5 years, P = .019). Multivariate analyses showed that percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage was an independent predictor of poor survival (P = .011) and a risk factor for seeding metastasis (P = .005). After propensity score matching (71 patients in each group), the survival of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage patients was significantly worse than that of the endoscopic biliary drainage patients (P = .018). The estimated cumulative recurrence rate of seeding metastasis was significantly higher in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage patients than in the endoscopic biliary drainage patients (P = .005), while the recurrence rates at other sites were similar between the 2 groups (P = .413).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage increases the incidence of seeding metastasis and shortens the postoperative survival in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Endoscopic biliary drainage is recommended as the optimal method for preoperative biliary drainage.