Laparoscopy predicts metastatic disease and spares laparotomy in selected patients with pancreatic nonfunctioning islet cell tumors

Neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas

Pancreatic endocrine tumors are rare neoplasms accounting for less than 5% of pancreatic malignancies. They are broadly classified into either functioning tumors (insulinomas, gastrinomas, glucagonomas, VIPomas, and somatostatinomas) or nonfunctioning tumors. The diagnosis of these tumors is difficult and requires a careful history and examination combined with laboratory tests and radiologic imaging. Signs and symptoms are usually related to hormone hypersecretion in the case of functioning tumors and to tumor size or metastases with nonfunctioning tumors. Surgical resection remains the treatment of choice even in the face of metastatic disease. Further development of novel diagnostic and treatment modalities offers potential to greatly improve quality of life and prolong disease-free survival for patients with pancreatic endocrine tumors.

The outcomes after surgical resection in pancreatic endocrine tumors: an institutional experience

AIM

Sporadic pancreatic endocrine tumors (PET) can be managed surgically with excellent outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze surgical outcomes and factors influencing survival.

METHODS

Between 1995 and 2007, 96 patients with sporadic PET who underwent surgery at our institution were retrospectively reviewed for clinicopathologic variables and outcomes according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classifications.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients had well-differentiated tumors (WDT) with benign behavior, 23 had uncertain behavior, 27 had low-grade carcinoma, and 7 were diagnosed with high-grade carcinoma. R0 resection was performed in 84 patients. No recurrence was observed in WDT regardless of its behavior or curability but 16 of 34 patients with carcinoma had recurrence. Five-year overall survival (OS) for R0-resected patients with carcinoma was 57%, and OS at 3 years for R1/R2-resected patients was 23% (P = 0.012). The WHO classification and R0 resection were independent prognostic factors in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This single institutional experience demonstrated that surgical resection is curative for WDT and recurrences are frequent in spite of curative resection for malignant PET. The WHO classification and R0 resection remained independent prognostic factor.

Diagnostic laparoscopy for patients with potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: is it cost-effective in the current era?

INTRODUCTION

For patients with potentially resectable pancreatic cancer, diagnostic laparoscopy may identify liver and peritoneal metastases that are difficult to detect with other staging modalities. The aim of this study was to utilize a population-based pancreatic cancer database to assess the cost effectiveness of preoperative laparoscopy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Data from a state cancer registry were linked with primary medical record data for years 1996-2003. De-identified patient records were reviewed to determine the role and findings of laparoscopic exploration. Average hospital and physician charges for laparotomy, biliary bypass, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and laparoscopy were determined by review of billing data from our institution and Medicare data for fiscal years 2005-2006. Cost-effectiveness was determined by comparing three methods of utilization of laparoscopy: (1) routine (all patients), (2) case-specific, and (3) no utilization.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of 298 potentially resectable patients, 86 underwent laparoscopy. The prevalence of unresectable disease was 14.1% diagnosed at either laparotomy or laparoscopy. The mean charge per patient for routine, case-specific, and no utilization of laparoscopy was $91,805, $90,888, and $93,134, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Cost analysis indicates that the case-specific or routine use of laparoscopy in pancreatic cancer does not add significantly to the overall expense of treatment and supports the use of laparoscopy in patients with known or suspected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Current utility of staging laparoscopy for pancreatic and peripancreatic neoplasms

BACKGROUND

The routine use of staging laparoscopy in patients with radiographically resectable pancreatic and peripancreatic neoplasms remains controversial.

STUDY DESIGN

We reviewed a prospective database that identified 1,045 patients who underwent staging laparoscopy for radiographically resectable pancreatic or peripancreatic tumors between 1995 and 2005. Radiographic resectability was determined by review of radiographic reports, surgeons' notes, and cross-sectional imaging studies. Factors were assessed for their association with the laparoscopic identification of radiographically occult unresectable disease. Recursive partitioning was used to build a decision tree, with laparoscopic identification of unresectable disease as the outcomes, including only patients since 1999 (modern imaging) and factors available preoperatively.

RESULTS

Unresectable disease was identified laparoscopically in 145 of the 1,045 radiographically resectable patients (14%). Factors associated with radiographically occult unresectable disease included the time period of the study, whether imaging was performed at our institution (internal versus external imaging), primary site, histology, weight loss, and jaundice. Primary site (pancreatic versus nonpancreatic) was identified as the strongest predictor of yield. In patients with nonpancreatic tumors, the yield of laparoscopy was 4%. In patients with pancreatic tumors, the yield of laparoscopy was 14% overall, but was 8.4% in patients with internal imaging versus 17% in patients with external imaging (p < 0.01). This higher-risk subgroup was partitioned by the presence of weight loss, then by primary site within the pancreas.

CONCLUSIONS

During the time period of this study, the yield of staging laparoscopy decreased and exceeded 10% only for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. When high-quality cross-sectional imaging reveals no evidence of unresectable disease, routine staging laparoscopy may not be warranted for pancreatic or peripancreatic tumors other than presumed pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Laparoscopic and open distal pancreatic resection for benign pancreatic disease

The aim of the study is to provide comparisons of the perioperative outcomes between open and laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection (DPR) for benign pancreatic disease. From 2002 and 2005, there were 28 patients (16 open, 12 laparoscopic) with a mean age of 52 who had presumptive diagnoses of benign pancreatic lesions. Pathology was neuroendocrine tumor (nine and five), mucinous cystic neoplasm (three and three), symptomatic pancreatic pseudocyst (two and two), and others (two and two). The mean operative time was 278 vs 212 min (p = 0.05), the estimated blood lost was 609 vs 193 ml (p = 0.01), and the success rate of preoperative intent for splenic preservation was 17 vs 62% (p = 0.08) in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Two patients (16%) were converted to an open procedure. There was no perioperative mortality. The mean hospital stay and total perioperative morbidity were 10.6 vs 6.2 days (p = 0.001) and nine vs two events (p = 0.03) in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Ten of 12 patients (83%) with laparoscopic DPR had adequate oral intake within 72 h post operatively in contrast to 2 of 16 (12.5%) patients in the open DPR group (p = 0.0001). Laparoscopic DPR is technically feasible, safe, and associated with less perioperative morbidity and a shorter hospital stay than open DPR. In centers with the appropriate expertise, laparoscopic DPR should be considered the procedure of choice for putative benign lesions of the pancreatic body and tail.

Aggressive surgery improves long-term survival in neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors: an institutional experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate surgical strategies for neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors (NEPT) in the light of the new WHO classification from 2004 and to draw conclusions for future surgical concepts.

BACKGROUND

: The extent of surgical resection in primary and recurrent NEPT is unclear.

METHODS

Between 1987 and 2004, 62 patients with sporadic NEPT were treated at our institution and sections from biopsy and resection specimen were histopathologically reclassified. Clinical presentation, surgery, metastases, and pattern of recurrence were related to survival.

RESULTS

Fifteen well-differentiated tumors (WDT, 24%), 39 low-grade carcinomas (LGC, 63%), and 8 high-grade carcinomas (HGC, 13%) were identified. Median observation time was 30.5 months; 48 of 62 patients (78%) were surgically resected, and in 45 patients R0/R1 status was achieved. Overall 2- and 5-year survival in the latter group was 80% and 64%, respectively. Retrospective WHO classification revealed that organ-preserving segmental resections had been performed in 10 LGC and 1 HGC. These patients showed equal outcome as radically resected counterparts (n = 19). Liver and other organ metastases were present in 19 of 62 patients (31%), and resection was accomplished in 7 of 19 patients, which conferred better overall survival (P = 0.026, log-rank test); 21 of 45 R0/R1-resected patients (47%) suffered from recurrence, and reoperation was accomplished in 9 patients, which resulted in better overall survival (P = 0.066).

CONCLUSION

Organ-preserving resections offer sufficient local control in LGC; therefore, radical resections do not seem to be justified. On the other hand, radical resection is indicated even in metastasized patients or in case of loco-regional recurrence. The silent and slow course of the disease facilitates long-term surgical control.

Resolved and unresolved controversies in the surgical management of patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Highlight unresolved controversies in the management of Zollinger-Ellison syndrome (ZES).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Recent studies have resolved some of the previous controversies including the surgical cure rate in patients with and without Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia-type1 (MEN1), the biological behavior of duodenal and pancreatic gastrinomas, role of imaging studies to localize tumor, and gastrectomy to manage acid output.

METHODS

Review of the literature based on computer searches in Index Medicus, Pubmed and Ovid.

RESULTS

Current controversies as identified in the literature include the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), surgery in ZES patients with MEN1, pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure), lymph node primary gastrinoma, parietal cell vagotomy, reoperation and surgery for metastatic tumor, and the use of minimally invasive surgical techniques to localize and remove gastrinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

It is hoped that future studies will focus on these issues to improve the surgical management of ZES patients.

Preoperative staging and evaluation of resectability in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Cancer of the pancreas is a common disease, but the large majority of patients have tumours that are irresectable at the time of diagnosis. Moreover, patients whose tumours are clearly beyond surgical cure are best treated non-operatively, if possible, by relief of biliary obstruction and percutaneous biopsy to confirm the diagnosis and then consideration of oncological treatment, notably chemotherapy. These facts underline the importance of a standard protocol for the preoperative determination of operability (is it worth operating?) and resectability (is there a chance that the tumour can be removed?). Recent years have seen the advent of many new techniques, both radiological and endoscopic, for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. It would be impracticable in time and cost to submit every patient to every test. This review will evaluate the available techniques and offer a possible algorithm for use in routine clinical practice.

DISCUSSION

In deciding whether to operate with a view to resecting a pancreatic cancer, the surgeon must take into account factors related to the patient, the tumour and the institution and team entrusted with the patient's care. Patient-related factors include age, general health, pain and the presence or absence of malnutrition and an acute phase inflammatory response. Tumour-related factors include tumour size and evidence of spread, whether to adjacent organs (notably major blood vessels) or further afield. Hospital-related factors chiefly concern the volume of pancreatic cancer treated and thus the experience of the whole team. Determination of resectability is heavily dependent upon detailed imaging. Nowadays conventional ultrasonography can be supplemented by endoscopic, laparoscopic and intra-operative techniques. Computed tomography (CT) remains the single most useful staging modality, but MRI continues to improve. PET scanning may demonstrate unsuspected metastases and likewise laparoscopy. Diagnostic cholangiography can be performed more easily by MR techniques than by endoscopy, but ERCP is still valuable for preoperative biliary decompression in appropriate patients. The role of angiography has declined. Percutaneous biopsy and peritoneal cytology are not usually required in patients with an apparently resectable tumour. The prognostic value of tumour marker levels and bone marrow biopsy is yet to be established. Preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation may have a role in down-staging an irresectable tumour sufficiently to render it resectable. Selective use of diagnostic laparoscopy staging is potentially helpful in determination of resectability. Laparotomy remains the definitive method for determining the resectability of pancreatic cancer, with or without portal vein resection, and should be undertaken in suitable patients without clear-cut evidence of irresectability.