Should the extrahepatic bile duct be resected or preserved in R0 radical surgery for advanced gallbladder carcinoma? Results of a Japanese Society of Biliary Surgery Survey: A multicenter study
Department of Surgery, Institute of Gastroenterology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, Tokyo 162-8666, Japan. Surgery Today
(Impact Factor: 1.53).
09/2009; 39(9):770-9. DOI: 10.1007/s00595-009-3960-6
We assessed the significance of an extra bile duct resection by comparing the survival of patients with advanced gallbladder carcinoma who had resected bile ducts with those who had preserved bile ducts. A radical cholecystectomy that includes extra bile duct resections has been performed without any clear evidence of whether an extra bile duct resection is preventive or curative.
We conducted a questionnaire survey among clinicians who belonged to the 114 member institutions of the Japanese Society of Biliary Surgery. The questionnaires included questions on the preoperative diagnosis, complications, treatment, and surgical treatment, resection procedures, surgical results, pathological and histological findings, mode and site of recurrence, and the need for additional postoperative treatment. A total of 4243 patients who had gallbladder carcinoma and were treated from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 2003 were identified. The 838 R0 patients with pT2, pT3, and pT4 advanced carcinoma of the gallbladder for which there was no cancer invasion to the hepatoduodenal ligament or cystic duct in the final analysis.
The 5-year cumulative survival, postoperative complications, postoperative lymph node metastasis, and local recurrence along the hepatoduodenal ligament were not substantially different between the resected bile duct and the preserved bile duct groups.
Our retrospective questionnaire survey showed that an extrahepatic bile duct resection had no preventive value in some patients with advanced gallbladder carcinoma in comparison to similar patients who had no such bile duct resection. An extrahepatic bile duct resection may therefore be unnecessary in advanced gallbladder carcinoma without a direct infiltration of the hepatoduodenal ligament and the cystic duct.
Available from: Gaetano Piccolo
- "In these cases of multiorgan resection for GBC, given radical R0 resection, the long-term survival will depend on bile duct involvement [35,50e52]. In fact, stromal invasion of the extrahepatic bile ducts is sometimes a prelude to hepatoduodenal ligament involvement, and is also associated with a higher rate of metastases to para-aortic nodes with a high incidence of residual tumor and poor outcome after surgery . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the fifth most common neoplasm of the gastrointestinal tract and the most common cancer of the biliary tract. GBC is suspected preoperatively in only 30-40% of patients. The other 60-70% are discovered incidentally (IGBC) by the pathologist on a gallbladder specimen following cholecystectomy for benign diseases such as polyps, gallstones, and cholecystitis.
Materials and methods:
Between 1995 and 2011, 30 cases of GBC, who underwent resection with curative intent in our institutions, were retrospectively reviewed. They were analyzed for demographic data, and type of operation, surgical morbidity and mortality, histopathological classification, and survival. Incidental GBC was compared with suspected or preoperatively diagnosed GBC. Overall survival, disease-free survival (DFS) and the difference in DFS between patients previously treated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and those who had oncological resection as first intervention were analyzed. The authors also present a systematic review to evaluate the role of extended surgery in the treatment of the incidental GBC.
GBC was diagnosed in 30 patients, 16 women and 14 men. The M/F ratio was 1:1.14 and the mean age was 69.4 years (range 45-83 years). A preoperative diagnosis was possible only in 14 cases; fourteen of the incidental cases were diagnosed postoperatively after the pathological examination; two were suspected intraoperatively at the opening of the surgical specimen and then confirmed by frozen sections. The ratio between incidental and nonincidental cases was 1, 14/1, with twelve cases discovered after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Eighty-one per cent of the incidental cases were discovered at an early stage (≤II). The preoperative diagnosis of the 30 patients with GBC was: GBC with liver invasion diagnosed by preoperative CT (nine cases); gallbladder abscess perforated into hepatic parenchyma and involving the transversal mesocolon and hepatic hilum (one case); porcelain gallbladder (three cases); gallbladder adenoma (four cases); and chronic cholecystolithiasis (thirteen cases). Every case, except one, with a T1b or more advanced invasion underwent IVb + V wedge liver resection and pericholedochic/hepatoduodenal lymphoadenectomy. One patient refused further surgery. Cases with Tis and T1a involvement were treated with cholecystectomy alone. Nine of the sixteen patients with incidental diagnosis reached 5-year DFS (56.25%) and eight of them are recurrence free. Surprisingly, one patient reached 38 mo survival despite a port-site recurrence (the only one in our experience) 2 years after the original surgery requiring further resection. Cases with non incidental diagnosis were more locally advanced and only two patients experienced 5 years DFS (Tables 2 and 3).
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not affect survival if implemented properly. Reoperation should have two objectives: R0 resection and clearance of the lymph nodes.
International Journal of Surgery (London, England) 08/2014; 12. DOI:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.08.367 · 1.53 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article describes the epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic imaging tools, and operative management of gallbladder cancer. The rarity of gallbladder cancer coupled with the prevalence of benign gallbladder disease mean that most patients undergo initial procedures that violate tumor planes, complicating attempts at future oncologic resection. Fortunately, a previous laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy does not lessen survival after definitive surgical extirpation. Large retrospective and underpowered prospective studies have suggested benefit to adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy; however, these results need to be confirmed with large prospective randomized trials.
Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America 05/2009; 18(2):307-24, ix. DOI:10.1016/j.soc.2008.12.004 · 1.81 Impact Factor
Available from: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Gallbladder cancer is a very common malignancy in the northern part of India. Surgery is the only potentially curative modality of treatment for this disease. Radical cholecystectomy is the optimal surgical standard for resectable gallbladder cancer. This includes cholecystectomy, liver resection (wedge, segments 4b and 5, or extended right hepatectomy), and regional lymphadenectomy along the hepatoduodenal ligament, behind the duodenum and pancreatic head, common hepatic artery and celiac axis. Controversies regarding extent of liver resection, lymphadenectomy and role of multiorgan resection have been discussed. Incidental gallbladder cancer is often detected on histopathologic examination of the simple cholecystectomy specimen removed for a presumed gallstone disease. Revision surgery should be performed for incidental cancers that invade muscularis propria or beyond (T1b or more). Advanced gallbladder cancer should be treated non-operatively with a palliative intent. Obstructive jaundice in the setting of an advanced gallbladder cancer can be palliated with biliary stenting by endoscopic or transhepatic means. Occasionally, a surgical biliary bypass may be indicated to relieve intractable pruritus in a jaundiced patient with gallbladder cancer. There is no role of a planned R2 resection of advanced gallbladder cancer for the purpose of cytoreduction. Further improvement in the management of gallbladder cancer will need integration of systemic chemotherapy with radical surgery.
Indian Journal of Surgery 12/2009; 71(6):363-7. DOI:10.1007/s12262-009-0095-3 · 0.26 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.