Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2021

23.07.2020 | Pancreatic Tumors

Radiographic Splenic Artery Involvement Is a Poor Prognostic Factor in Upfront Surgery for Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Body and Tail Cancer

verfasst von: Manabu Kawai, MD, PhD, Seiko Hirono, MD, PhD, Ken-ichi Okada, MD, PhD, Motoki Miyazawa, MD, PhD, Yuji Kitahata, MD, PhD, Ryohei Kobayashi, MD, Masaki Ueno, MD, PhD, Shinya Hayami, MD, PhD, Hiroki Yamaue, MD, PhD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 3/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The prognostic impact of radiographic splenic vessel involvement in pancreatic cancer remains unclear. We evaluate its oncological significance in resectable pancreatic body/tail cancer.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively review 102 cases of resectable pancreatic cancer and 51 of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) who underwent pancreatectomy for pancreatic body/tail cancer. Resectable pancreatic body/tail cancer was classified into one of three categories based on radiographic splenic vessel involvement.

Results

Among 102 cases of resectable pancreatic cancer, 37 (36.3%), 35 (34.3%), and 30 cases (29.4%) were classified as no splenic vessel involvement (Rnone), splenic vein involvement (RV), and splenic artery involvement (RA), respectively. Disease-free survival (DFS) among patients with Rnone, RV, RA, and BRPC was 58.5, 18.4, 10.8, and 9.2 months, respectively. Patients with RV and RA had significantly poorer DFS than patients with Rnone (P = 0.010, P < 0.001, respectively). Median survival among Rnone, RV, RA, and BRPC was 80.6, 23.4, 15.1, and 21.3 months, respectively. Patients with RV and RA had significantly poorer survival than patients with Rnone (P = 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively) and had short survival similar to that of those with BRPC. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis detected preoperative CA19-9 ≥ 37 IU/L, radiologic splenic vein involvement, radiologic splenic artery involvement, intraoperative bleeding ≥ 500 ml, transfusion, positive washing cytology, and noncompletion of adjuvant therapy as independent prognostic factors.

Conclusions

Radiographic splenic artery involvement is a poor prognostic factor in resectable pancreatic body/tail cancer and may have a role in stratification of treatment strategy.
Literatur
1.
2.
Shimada K, Sakamoto Y, Sano T, Kosuge T. Prognostic factors after distal pancreatectomy with extended lymphadenectomy for invasive pancreatic adenocarcinoma of the body and tail. Surgery 2006;139:288–95.CrossRef
3.
Kanda M, Fujii T, Sahin TT, et al. Invasion of the splenic artery is a crucial prognostic factor in carcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas. Ann Surg. 2010;251:483–7.CrossRef
4.
Partelli S, Crippa S, Barugola G, et al. Splenic artery invasion in pancreatic adenocarcinoma of the body and tail: a novel prognostic parameter for patient selection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3608–14.CrossRef
5.
Fukami Y, Kaneoka Y, Maeda A, Takayama Y, Onoe S. Prognostic impact of splenic artery invasion for pancreatic cancer of the body and tail. Int J Surg. 2016;35:64–8.CrossRef
6.
Mizumoto, T, Toyama H, Asari S, et al. Pathological and radiological splenic vein involvement are predictors of poor prognosis and early liver metastasis after surgery in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma of the body and tail. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:638–46.CrossRef
7.
Hyun JJ, Rose JB, Alseidi AA, et al. Significance of radiographic splenic vessel involvement in the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the body and tail of the gland. J Surg Oncol. 2019;120:262–9.PubMed
8.
Strasberg SM, Drebin JA, Linehan D. Radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy. Surgery. 2003;133:521–7.CrossRef
9.
Hirano S, Kondo S, Hara T, et al. Distal pancreatectomy with en bloc celiac axis resection for locally advanced pancreatic body cancer: long-term results. Ann Surg. 2007;246:46–51.CrossRef
10.
Okada K, Kawai M, Tani M, et al. Surgical strategy for patients with pancreatic body/tail carcinoma: who should undergo distal pancreatectomy with en-bloc celiac axis resection? Surgery 2013;153:365–372.CrossRef
11.
James D. Brierley, Mary K. Gospodarowicz, Christian Wittekind. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 8th ed. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017.
12.
Strobel O, Hank T, Hinz U, et al. Pancreatic cancer surgery: the new R-status counts. Ann Surg. 2017;265:565–573.CrossRef
13.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.CrossRef
14.
Bassi C, Marchegiani G, Dervenis C, et al. The 2016 update of the International Study Group (ISGPS) definition and grading of postoperative pancreatic fistula: 11 years after. Surgery 2017;161:584–91.CrossRef
15.
Wente MN, Bassi C, Dervenis C, et al. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) after pancreatic surgery: a suggested definition by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Surgery 2007;142:761–768.CrossRef
16.
Hirono S, Kawai M, Okada KI, et al. treatment strategy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with radiographic artery involvement. Pancreas 2016;45:1438–1446.CrossRef
17.
Yamaue H, Satoi S, Kanbe T, et al. Phase II clinical study of alternate-day oral therapywithS-1 as first-line chemotherapy for locally-advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2014;73:97–102.CrossRef
18.
Okada KI, Kawai M, Hirono S, et al. Impact of treatment duration of neoadjuvant FIRINOX in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a pilot trial. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2016;78:719–26.CrossRef
19.
Okada KI, Hirono S, Kawai M, et al. Phase I study of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Anticancer Res. 2017;37:853–858.CrossRef
20.
Oettle H, Neuhaus P, Hochhaus A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: the CONKO-001 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310:1473–81.CrossRef
21.
Uesaka K, Boku N, Fukutomi A, et al; JASPAC 01 Study Group. Adjuvant chemotherapy of S-1 versus gemcitabine for resected pancreatic cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial (JASPAC 01). Lancet. 2016;388:248–57.
22.
Tani M, Kawai M, Terasawa H, et al. Does postoperative chemotherapy have a survival benefit for patients with pancreatic cancer? J Surg Oncol. 2006;93:485–90.CrossRef
23.
Takahashi H, Akita H, Gotoh K, et al. Preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma of the body and tail: impact of splenic vessels involvement on operative outcome and pattern of recurrence. Surgery. 2015;157:484–95.CrossRef
24.
Yang R, Lu M, Qian X, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS and CT of vascular invasion in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2014;140: 2077–86.CrossRef
25.
Mitsunaga S, Hasebe T, Kinoshita T, et al. Detail histologic analysis of nerve plexus invasion in invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas and its prognostic impact. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31:1636–44.CrossRef
26.
Makino I, Kitagawa H, Ohta T, et al. Nerve plexus invasion in pancreatic cancer: spread patterns on histopathologic and embryological analyses. Pancreas 2008;37:358–65.CrossRef
27.
Shimada K, Nara S, Esaki M, Sakamoto Y, Kosuge T, Hiraoka N. Intrapancreatic nerve invasion as a predictor for recurrence after pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the pancreas. Pancreas 2011;40:464–8.CrossRef
28.
Stopczynski RE, Normolle DP, Hartman DJ, et al. Neuroplastic changes occur early in the development of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Res. 2014;74:1718–27.CrossRef
29.
Amit M, Na’ara S, Gil Z. Mechanisms of cancer dissemination along nerves. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016;16:399–408.CrossRef
30.
Nagakawa T, Kayahara M, Ohta T, et al. Patterns of neural and plexus invasion of human pancreatic cancer and experimental cancer. Int J Pancreatol. 1991;10:113–119.PubMed
31.
Fabre JM, Houry S, Manderscheid JC, et al. Surgery for left-sided pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 1996;83:1065–1070.CrossRef
32.
Jang JY, Han Y, Lee H, et al. Oncological benefits of neoadjuvant chemoradiation with gemcitabine versus upfront surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter phase 2/3 trial. Ann Surg. 2018;268:215–22.CrossRef
33.
Blazer M, Wu C, Goldberg RM, et al. Neoadjuvant modified (m) FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced unresectable (LAPC) and borderline resectable (BRPC) adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:1153–9.CrossRef
34.
Murakami Y, Uemura K, Sudo T, et al. Survival impact of neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus S-1 chemotherapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma with arterial contact. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2017;79:37–47.CrossRef
35.
Eguchi H, Takeda Y, Takahashi H, et al. A prospective, open-label, multicenter phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant therapy using full-dose gemcitabine and s-1 concurrent with radiation for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:4498–4505.CrossRef
36.
Reni M, Balzano G, Zanon S, et al. Safty and efficacy of preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PACT-15): a randomised, open-label, phase 2–3 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;3:413–423.CrossRef
37.
de Geus SW, Eskander MF, Bliss LA, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A nationwide propensity score matched analysis. Surgery 2017;161:592–601.CrossRef
38.
Mokdad AA, Minter RM, Zhu H, et al. Neoadjuvant therapy followed by resection versus upfront resection for resectable pancreatic cancer: a propensity score matched analysis. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:515–22.CrossRef
39.
Nelson DW, Chang SC, Grunkemeier G, et al. Resectable distal pancreas cancer: time to reconsider the role of upfront surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 2018;25:4012–4019.CrossRef
40.
Crippa S, Cirocchi R, Maisonneuve P, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic role of splenic vessels infiltration in resectable pancreatic cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2018;44:24–30.CrossRef
41.
Malleo G, Maggino L, Ferrone CR, et al. Number of examined lymph nodes and nodal status assessment in distal pancreatectomy for body/tail ductal adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2019;270:1138–1146.CrossRef
42.
Asano D, Nara S, Kishi Y, et al. A single-institution validation study of lymph node staging by the AJCC 8th edition for patients with pancreatic head cancer: a proposal to subdivide the N2 category. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:2112–20.
43.
Metadaten
Titel
Radiographic Splenic Artery Involvement Is a Poor Prognostic Factor in Upfront Surgery for Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Body and Tail Cancer
verfasst von
Manabu Kawai, MD, PhD
Seiko Hirono, MD, PhD
Ken-ichi Okada, MD, PhD
Motoki Miyazawa, MD, PhD
Yuji Kitahata, MD, PhD
Ryohei Kobayashi, MD
Masaki Ueno, MD, PhD
Shinya Hayami, MD, PhD
Hiroki Yamaue, MD, PhD
Publikationsdatum
23.07.2020
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 3/2021
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-08922-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2021

Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Breast Oncology

Predictors of Reexcision following Breast-Conserving Surgery for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Endocrine Tumors

Comparison Between Familial and Sporadic Non-medullary Thyroid Carcinoma: A Retrospective Individual Risk Factor-Matched Cohort Study

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Minimally Invasive Surgical Outcomes in Advanced Gastric Cancer: An International Propensity Score-Matched Study

Hepatobiliary Tumors

Pure Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Bile Duct Tumor Thrombus (with Video)

ASO Author Reflections

ASO Author Reflections: Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction: A Proactive Approach to Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

Urologic Oncology

Impact of Prognostic Nutritional Index on Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Radical Cystectomy: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 | Appendizitis | Nachrichten

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 | Operationsvorbereitung | Nachrichten

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

19.04.2024 | EAU 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich
weitere anzeigen

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.