The surgical management of neuroendocrine tumour hepatic metastases

Survival comparison between primary hepatic neuroendocrine neoplasms and primary pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms and the analysis on prognosis-related factors

BACKGROUND

Primary hepatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PHNENs) are extremely rare and few articles have compared the prognosis of PHNENs with other neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). This study aimed to investigate the different prognosis between PHNENs and pancreatic NEN (PanNENs) and evaluate the relevant prognosis-related factors.

METHODS

From January 2012 to October 2016, a total of 44 NENs patients were enrolled and divided into two groups according to the primary tumor location which were named group PHNENs (liver; n = 12) and group PanNENs (pancreas; n = 32). Demographic, clinical characteristics and survival data were compared between the two groups with Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests. Prognostic factors were analyzed using the Cox regression model.

RESULTS

The overall survival of group PHNENs and group PanNENs were 25.4 ± 6.7 months and 39.8 ± 3.7 months, respectively (P = 0.037). The cumulative survival of group PanNENs was significantly higher than that of group PHNENs (P = 0.029). Univariate analysis revealed that sex, albumin, total bilirubin, total bile acid, aspartate aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, α-fetoprotein and carbohydrate antigen 19-9, histological types, treatments and primary tumor site were the prognostic factors. Further multivariate analysis indicated that albumin (P = 0.008), histological types NEC (P = 0.035) and treatments (P = 0.005) were the independent prognostic factors. Based on the histological types, the cumulative survival of patients with well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor was significant higher than that of patients with poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma in group PHNENs (P = 0.022), but not in group PanNENs (P > 0.05). According to the different treatments, patients who received surgery had significantly higher cumulative survival than those with conservative treatment in both groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

PHNENs have lower survival compared to PanNENs. Histological types and treatments affect the prognosis. Surgical resection still remains the first line of treatment for resectable lesions and can significantly improve the survival.

Rectal Carcinoid Tumor With Liver Metastases Treated by Local Excision and Orthotopic Liver Transplant With Long-term Follow-up

In patients affected by unresectable liver metastases from neuroendocrine tumor, liver transplant represents currently the only realistic chance for cure. The first attempt to establish selection criteria for liver transplant in patients affected by neuroendocrine tumor liver metastases was made by Mazzaferro and associates in 2007. We report the case of a 46-year-old man who came to our institution in 2006 with right upper quadrant abdominal pain. Diagnosis of rectal neuroendocrine tumor with bilobar liver nodules was made; the patient underwent transanal local resection. A liver biopsy confirmed the metastatic nature of the hepatic lesion, showing a low-grade neuroendocrine tumor (G1, proliferation index Ki-67 <2%). The patient underwent 2 sessions of transarterial chemoembolization that resulted in stable disease. Afterward, the patient underwent a liver transplant, using the piggyback technique without a venous-venous bypass. His postoperative course was uneventful. The patient has been disease-free for 3 years. Posttransplant treatment has played a key role in increasing the overall survival of the patient and assuring him a good quality of life. He died 9 years (102 mo) after liver transplant.

Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy Outcomes in a North American Cohort With Metastatic Well-Differentiated Neuroendocrine Tumors

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of patients in the University of Iowa Neuroendocrine Tumor (NET) Database treated with peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT).

METHODS

One hundred thirty-five patients from the University of Iowa NET Database who received PRRT were analyzed, their characteristics were described, and survival was calculated.

RESULTS

The median age at diagnosis was 51 years, and 64% were men. The primary tumor was located in the small bowel (SBNET) in 37.8%, in the pancreas (PNET) in 26.0%, in the lung in 13.3%, in unknown primary in 9.6%, and in other sites in 13.3%. A radiographic response of any magnitude was observed in 65.8%, 11.1% had a mixed response, and 15.4% showed progression. The overall survival (OS) from the first PRRT was 40 months, and the median time to progression was 23.9 months. Higher pretreatment chromogranin A and pancreastatin levels predicted inferior OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy resulted in a relatively long OS and time to progression in heavily pretreated North American patients with advanced NETs. Elevated pretreatment chromogranin A and pancreastatin predicted shorter OS after therapy. Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy is a valuable treatment option in patients with advanced NETs, especially SBNETS.

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a review

Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are a rare and heterogeneous group of tumors with widely varying morphologies and behaviors. Due to their rarity and heterogeneity, progress in improving their treatment has been slow. However, in recent years there have been advances both in their characterization and in the available treatment options. This review will attempt to address these, with particular reference to pancreatic NETs. Pancreatic NETs are a subset of NETs, previously known as islet cell tumors, which appear to be a distinct biological entity, responding differently to systemic treatments compared with NETs arising elsewhere in the GI tract.

Aggressive Surgical Management for Metastatic Liver Tumors From Squamous Cell Carcinomas: Report of Three Cases

The use of hepatectomy for the treatment of metastatic liver tumors (MLTs) arising from squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) has not been well investigated. The use of hepatectomy for MLTs from SCCs, especially in advanced cases, needs further investigation. Three patients with SCC-derived MLTs underwent hepatectomy. On clinicopathologic examination, the primary lesions were found to be oral cancer, lung cancer, and oropharyngeal cancer, with synchronous metastasis in 2 patients and metachronous metastasis in 1 patient. One case also involved adrenal metastasis, and another involved direct invasion of the diaphragm and lung. In all cases, surgery was performed to eliminate any residual tumor tissue. After the hepatectomy, 1 patient died (22 months postoperatively) of an unrelated disease, 1 remains alive (30 months postoperatively) with a recurrent tumor, and 1 remains alive (60 months postoperatively) without recurrence. For the patients with solitary MLT derived from SCC, hepatectomy gives a chance for a cure. Thus, aggressive hepatectomy is an important modality in the multidisciplinary approach for controlling SCC-derived MLTs.

Role of surgery and transplantation in the treatment of hepatic metastases from neuroendocrine tumor

Neuroendocrine tumors (NET) are a heterogeneous group of cancers, with indolent behavior. The most common primary origin is the gastro-intestinal tract but can also appear in the lungs, kidneys, adrenals, ovaries and other organs. In general, NET is usually discovered in the metastatic phase (40%-80%). The liver is the most common organ involved when metastases occur (40%-93%), followed by bone (12%-20%) and lung (8%-10%).A number of different therapeutic options are available for the treatment of hepatic metastases including surgical resection, transplantation, ablation, trans-arterial chemoembolization, chemotherapy and somatostatin analogues. Recently, molecular targeted therapies have been used, usually in combination with other treatment options, to improve outcomes in patients with metastases. This article emphasizes on the role of surgery in the treatment of liver metastases from NET.

Surgical resection of a malignant liver lesion: what the surgeon wants the radiologist to know

OBJECTIVE

Hepatic malignancy is a common and lethal disease, whether due to a primary tumor or metastasis. There are numerous treatment options available depending on the stage of the disease and medical condition of the patient, including systemic chemotherapy, transcatheter embolization, thermal ablation, and surgical resection. In a subset of patients with liver malignancy, surgical resection can offer the best chance of long-term survival and potentially even cure. This article reviews the major indications and contraindications for resection, basic surgical techniques and terminology, key clinical and imaging preoperative workup, and pertinent interventional oncology procedures in the management of hepatic malignancy.

CONCLUSION

Diagnostic and interventional radiology plays an important role in the assessment and treatment of malignant hepatic lesions. Radiologists should be familiar with how surgeons select, work up, and treat candidates for liver resection to provide the most clinically valuable service.

Controlled low central venous pressure reduces blood loss and transfusion requirements in hepatectomy

AIM: To evaluate the effect of low central venous pressure (LCVP) on blood loss and blood transfusion in patients undergoing hepatectomy.

METHODS: Electronic databases and bibliography lists were searched for potential articles. A meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating LCVP in hepatectomy was performed. The following three outcomes were analyzed: blood loss, blood transfusion and duration of operation.

RESULTS: Five RCTs including 283 patients were assessed. Meta-analysis showed that blood loss in the LCVP group was significantly less than that in the control group (MD = -391.95, 95%CI: -559.35--224.56, P < 0.00001). In addition, blood transfusion in the LCVP group was also significantly less than that in the control group (MD = -246.87, 95%CI: -427.06--66.69, P = 0.007). The duration of operation in the LCVP group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (MD = -18.89, 95%CI: -35.18--2.59, P = 0.02). Most studies found no significant difference in renal and liver function between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: Controlled LCVP is a simple and effective technique to reduce blood loss and blood transfusion during liver resection, and appears to have no detrimental effects on liver and renal function.