Pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without distal gastrectomy and extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma--part 3: update on 5-year survival

Role of lymphadenectomy in surgical treatment of solid tumors: an update on the clinical data

BACKGROUND

The role of lymphadenectomy as an adjunct of standard excision for treatment of cancer is highly debated and controversial. Standard practice for treatment of solid tumors is resection with regional lymphadenectomy. This surgical concept assumes that cancers grow and spread in an orderly manner, from primary cancer to regional lymph nodes and finally to vital organs. We reviewed randomized trials, published a description of lymphatic anatomy and physiology, and presented data that disputed the role of lymphadenectomy as standard practice. The present review updates the literature and reiterates the concept that lymphadenectomy does not increase survival in the surgical treatment of solid tumors.

METHODS

We reviewed the English-language literature (Medline) for prospective randomized trials and nonrandomized reports, as well as retrospective studies addressing the role of lymphadenectomy in cancers of the esophagus, lung, stomach, pancreas, breast, and skin (melanoma) reported between 2000 and 2006.

RESULTS

This extensive review demonstrates that there are few prospective randomized trials assessing patient survival with solid tumors that contrast resection with or without lymphadenectomy. However, there was at least one, and for some cancers more than one, prospective randomized trial for each organ site studied, and the data demonstrate no statistically significant difference in overall survival of patients treated with or without lymphadenectomy. Most nonrandomized and retrospective studies, with a few exceptions, support the conclusions of randomized trials; lymphadenectomy does not improve overall survival in solid tumors. Overall survival is primarily a function of the biological nature of the primary tumor, as evidenced by lymphovascular invasion, lymph node involvement, and other prognostic features.

CONCLUSIONS

This extensive literature review of recent reports indicates that lymphadenectomy does not improve overall survival. Lymph node resection should be conceived in terms of staging, prognosis, and regional control only.

Extended Resection for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Adenocarcinoma of the pancreas presents a number of therapeutic challenges. Given the poor long-term outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), many surgeons have sought to improve survival via a radical or "extended" pancreatectomy which may include (a) total pancreatectomy (TP), (b) extended lymph node dissection (ELND), and (c) portal/mesenteric vascular resections. These themes of "extended" resection are addressed in this review. TP should not be performed for most cases of adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head because of the nominal incidence of lymph node involvement along the body and tail of the pancreas, the scarcity of multicentric disease, and the better management of pancreatic leaks after PD. Most studies show no difference in long-term survival and demonstrate greater postoperative morbidity after TP than after PD. Performing ELND in addition to PD is not worthwhile because most studies do not demonstrate any long-term benefits from ELND and the circumferential dissection around the mesenteric vessels required to harvest distant lymph nodes increases postoperative morbidity. Major arterial resection increases postoperative morbidity after PD and worsens long-term survival as the need for arterial resection to achieve negative resection margins indicates more aggressive disease. In contrast, portal and/or mesenteric venous resection does not increase the morbidity after PD or impact long-term survival as venous resection is often performed because of tumor location and not extent of disease. The disappointing experience with extended resections underscores the need for better adjuvant systemic strategies and the interdisciplinary care of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy with extended retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma

Surgical resection provides the only chance for long-term survival for patients diagnosed with pancreatic and other associated periampullary adenocarcinomas. In the past, it had been suggested that the performance of an extended lymphadenectomy in association with a pancreaticoduodenal resection might have improved long-term survival for some patients. In response, six prospective trials have been performed and reported addressing this issue. These studies, including a large randomized trial of 280 patients from Johns Hopkins University, indicate that there is no demonstrable survival benefit to extended lymphadenectomy for periampullary cancer.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of standard and extended lymphadenectomy in pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Although some retrospective studies of extended radical lymphadenectomy for pancreatic cancer have suggested a survival advantage, this is controversial.

METHODS

A literature search identified randomized controlled trials comparing extended with standard lymphadenectomy in pancreatic cancer surgery. Overall survival was analysed using hazard ratios and standard errors. Pooled estimates of overall treatment effects were calculated using a random effects model (odds ratio and 95 per cent confidence interval).

RESULTS

Of four randomized trials identified for systematic review, three were included in a meta-analysis of survival. The log hazard ratios (standard errors) for survival for the three trials were 0.36 (0.22), - 0.15 (0.17) and - 0.21 (0.15); the weighted mean log hazard ratio for survival overall was 0.93 (95 per cent confidence interval 0.77 to 1.13), revealing no significant differences between the standard and extended procedure (P = 0.480). Morbidity and mortality rates were also comparable, with a trend towards higher rates of delayed gastric emptying for extended lymphadenectomy. The number of resected lymph nodes was significantly higher in the extended lymphadenectomy groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The extended procedure does not benefit overall survival, and there may even be a trend towards increased morbidity. Therefore extended lymphadenectomy should be performed only within adequately powered controlled trials, if at all.

Nodal sampling in pancreaticoduodenectomy: does it change our management?

BACKGROUND

Lymph node involvement in periampullary malignancy is the single most important factor in predicting survival in pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). The role of nodal sampling in PD has not been well evaluated. This study evaluates the utility of nodal sampling of nodal stations 8 and 12, which are easily dissected early in PD, in overall final nodal status.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty patients underwent PD at a single institution by a one surgeon over a 15 month period. Nodal stations 8 and 12 were sent separately for pathologic evaluation. Twenty-eight patients had a final diagnosis of periampullary malignancy. Demographic and pathologic data were collected retrospectively from patient charts. Positive and negative predictive values of nodes 8 and 12 were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighteen of 28 patients with a diagnosis of periampullary malignancy had pathologically negative nodes 8 and 12, and a final nodal status (all peripancreatic lymph nodes) negative for nodal involvement. Nine of 28 patients had a negative nodal sampling result, but a positive final nodal status for metastatic tumor. The remaining four patients had both positive nodal sampling and final nodal status for metastatic tumor. The negative predictive value of negative nodes 8 and 12 was 0.625.

CONCLUSION

The negative predictive of a negative node 8 and 12 of 0.625 suggests that the decision to proceed with or abort PD should not be based on intraoperative evaluation of these nodes. Performance of PD should be undertaken if technically feasible, and not based on intraoperative nodal assessment.

Pancreatic cancer in the general population: Improvements in survival over the last decade

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether the improved survival seen at high-volume centers has been translated to all patients with pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To use the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate population-based trends in surgical resection and survival.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer from 1988-1999 were identified. The survival and proportion of patients undergoing surgical resection were compared for each of three equal time periods.

RESULTS

There were 24,016 patients with pancreatic cancer. 19,533 had stage data available. 9% had localized, 29% had regional, and 62% had distant disease. Resection rates increased for patients with localized and regional disease over the three time periods. Survival increased for patients with regional and distant disease. For regional pancreatic cancer patients, 2-year survival increased from 9.5% to 13.5% (p < 0.0001) and from 21.5% to 28.9% following surgical resection (p = 0.002). For resected local/regional pancreatic cancer, the year of diagnosis was and independent predictor of improved survival (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

SEER patients with regional and distant pancreatic cancer have improved survival over the past decade in both unadjusted and adjusted models. The improvement is most striking for patients with regional disease and reflects increased resection rates and improved resection techniques over time.

Resected periampullary adenocarcinoma: 5-year survivors and their 6- to 10-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Many studies have reported 5-year survival data after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma. This study evaluates 10-year survival in patients surviving 5 years after initial surgery.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma from April 1970 to July 1999 at a single institution. All 5-year survivors were identified, and their subsequent 5-year survival was compared with the actuarial survival of the general population starting at 70 years of age.

RESULTS

Nine hundred fifteen patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary adenocarcinoma. Follow-up was complete on 890 patients. There were 201 (23%) 5-year survivors with a median age of 65 years at initial surgery; 51% were male and 92% were Caucasian. For the 5-year survivors, the carcinoma origin was pancreatic in 46%, ampullary in 25%, distal bile duct in 17%, and duodenal in 12%. For all 5-year survivors, the subsequent 5-year actuarial survival rate was 65%, with a median survival after achieving the 5-year landmark of 7.9 additional years. The subsequent 5-year survival by site of tumor origin was 55% for pancreatic, 66% for ampullary, 74% for bile duct, and 85% for duodenal cancer. For the age-matched population, the 5-year survival rate was 87% (P<.001 when compared with those with all periampullary cancers).

CONCLUSIONS

While the 5-year survival rate for all patients with resected periampullary adenocarcinoma is only 23%, these data imply that attainment of the 5-year survival landmark carries with it an improved survival for the subsequent 5 years. While the survival rate was less than that of the age-matched population, 65% of 5-year survivors survived 5 more years, bringing them to the 10-year postresection landmark.