The role of extra-hepatic bile duct resection in the surgical management of gallbladder carcinoma. A first meta-analysis

New trends in diagnosis and management of gallbladder carcinoma

Gallbladder (GB) carcinoma, although relatively rare, is the most common biliary tree cholangiocarcinoma with aggressiveness and poor prognosis. It is closely associated with cholelithiasis and long-standing large (> 3 cm) gallstones in up to 90% of cases. The other main predisposing factors for GB carcinoma include molecular factors such as mutated genes, GB wall calcification (porcelain) or mainly mucosal microcalcifications, and GB polyps ≥ 1 cm in size. Diagnosis is made by ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), and, more precisely, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Preoperative staging is of great importance in decision-making regarding therapeutic management. Preoperative staging is based on MRI findings, the leading technique for liver metastasis imaging, enhanced three-phase CT angiography, or magnetic resonance angiography for major vessel assessment. It is also necessary to use positron emission tomography (PET)-CT or 18F-FDG PET-MRI to more accurately detect metastases and any other occult deposits with active metabolic uptake. Staging laparoscopy may detect dissemination not otherwise found in 20%-28.6% of cases. Multimodality treatment is needed, including surgical resection, targeted therapy by biological agents according to molecular testing gene mapping, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and immunotherapy. It is of great importance to understand the updated guidelines and current treatment options. The extent of surgical intervention depends on the disease stage, ranging from simple cholecystectomy (T1a) to extended resections and including extended cholecystectomy (T1b), with wide lymph node resection in every case or IV-V segmentectomy (T2), hepatic trisegmentectomy or major hepatectomy accompanied by hepaticojejunostomy Roux-Y, and adjacent organ resection if necessary (T3). Laparoscopic or robotic surgery shows fewer postoperative complications and equivalent oncological outcomes when compared to open surgery, but much attention must be paid to avoiding injuries. In addition to surgery, novel targeted treatment along with immunotherapy and recent improvements in radiotherapy and chemotherapy (neoadjuvant-adjuvant capecitabine, cisplatin, gemcitabine) have yielded promising results even in inoperable cases calling for palliation (T4). Thus, individualized treatment must be applied.

Clinical significance of extrahepatic bile duct resection for T2 gallbladder cancer using data from the Japanese Biliary Tract Cancer Registry between 2014 and 2018

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to determine whether concomitant extrahepatic bile duct resection (EHBDR) improves the prognosis of patients with T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC).

METHODS

Between 2014 and 2018, 4947 patients with GBC were registered in the National Biliary Tract Cancer Registry in Japan. This included 3804 patients (76.9%) who underwent curative-intent surgical resection; 1609 of these patients had pT2 GBC with no distant metastasis. Of the 1609 patients with GBC, 520 underwent EHBDR and 1089 did not. We compared the patients' backgrounds and disease-specific survival rates between the groups.

RESULTS

The frequency of lymph node metastasis was significantly higher in the EHBDR group than in the non-EHBDR group (38.2% vs. 20.7%, p < .001). In the entire cohort, however, there was no significant difference in disease-specific survival between the two groups (76% vs. 79%, p = .410). The EHBDR group had a significantly higher incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification grade = 3) (32.4% vs. 11.7%, p < .001). When we focused on the survival of only T2N1 patients who underwent gallbladder bed resection, the prognosis was significantly improved for the EHBDR group (5-year survival rate: 64% vs. 54%, p = .017). The non-EHBDR group was subcategorized into two groups: D2 dissection and D1 dissection or sampling, and survival curves were compared between these subgroups. Although the EHBDR group tended to have a favorable prognosis compared to the D2 group, this difference was not significant (p = .167). However, the EHBDR group had a significantly greater prognosis than the D1 dissection or sampling group (5 year-survival rate: 64 vs. 49%, p = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

The EHBDR may improve the prognosis of patients with T2 gall bladder cancer with lymph node metastases; however, its indication should be carefully determined because of the increased risk of postoperative complications.

Surgical outcomes of gallbladder cancer: the OMEGA retrospective, multicentre, international cohort study

Background

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is rare but aggressive. The extent of surgical intervention for different GBC stages is non-uniform, ranging from cholecystectomy alone to extended resections including major hepatectomy, resection of adjacent organs and routine extrahepatic bile duct resection (EBDR). Robust evidence here is lacking, however, and survival benefit poorly defined. This study assesses factors associated with recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and morbidity and mortality following GBC surgery in high income countries (HIC) and low and middle income countries (LMIC).

Methods

The multicentre, retrospective Operative Management of Gallbladder Cancer (OMEGA) cohort study included all patients who underwent GBC resection across 133 centres between 1st January 2010 and 31st December 2020. Regression analyses assessed factors associated with OS, RFS and morbidity.

Findings

On multivariable analysis of all 3676 patients, wedge resection and segment IVb/V resection failed to improve RFS (HR 1.04 [0.84-1.29], p = 0.711 and HR 1.18 [0.95-1.46], p = 0.13 respectively) or OS (HR 0.96 [0.79-1.17], p = 0.67 and HR 1.48 [1.16-1.88], p = 0.49 respectively), while major hepatectomy was associated with worse RFS (HR 1.33 [1.02-1.74], p = 0.037) and OS (HR 1.26 [1.03-1.53], p = 0.022). Furthermore, EBDR (OR 2.86 [2.3-3.52], p < 0.0010), resection of additional organs (OR 2.22 [1.62-3.02], p < 0.0010) and major hepatectomy (OR 3.81 [2.55-5.73], p < 0.0010) were all associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Compared to LMIC, patients in HIC were associated with poorer RFS (HR 1.18 [1.02-1.37], p = 0.031) but not OS (HR 1.05 [0.91-1.22], p = 0.48). Adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments were infrequently used.

Interpretation

In this large, multicentre analysis of GBC surgical outcomes, liver resection was not conclusively associated with improved survival, and extended resections were associated with greater morbidity and mortality without oncological benefit. Aggressive upfront resections do not benefit higher stage GBC, and international collaborations are needed to develop evidence-based neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategies to minimise surgical morbidity and prioritise prognostic benefit.

Funding

Cambridge Hepatopancreatobiliary Department Research Fund.

The Significance of Tumor Locations in Patients with Gallbladder Carcinoma After Curative-Intent Resection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the significance of tumor locations in patients with resected gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) and to supply the indication of extra-hepatic bile duct resection (EHBDR) according to tumor locations.

METHODS

Patients with resected GBC from 2010 to 2020 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Comparative analyses and a meta-analysis were performed according to different tumor locations (body/fundus/neck/cystic duct).

RESULTS

Article: A total of 259 patients were identified (neck: 71; cystic: 29; body: 51; fundus: 108). Patients with proximal tumors (neck/cystic duct) were often in a more advanced stage and had more aggressive tumor biological features as well as a worse prognosis compared with those with distal tumors (fundus/body). Moreover, the observation was even more obvious between cystic duct and non-cystic duct tumors. Cystic duct tumor was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (P = 0.01). EHBDR provided no survival advantage even in those with cystic duct tumor.

META-ANALYSIS

With our own cohort incorporated, five studies with 204 patients with proximal tumors and 5167 patients with distal tumors were identified. Pooled results revealed that proximal tumors indicated worse tumor biological features and prognosis versus distal tumors.

CONCLUSION

Proximal GBC had more aggressive tumor biological features, and a worse prognosis versus distal GBC and cystic duct tumor can be regarded as an independent prognostic factor. EHBDR had no obvious survival advantage even in those with cystic duct tumor and was even harmful in those with distal tumors. Upcoming more powerful well-designed studies are required for further validation.

The role of laparoscopic surgery in the surgical management of recurrent liver malignancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To evaluate the efficiency of laparoscopic surgery in treating recurrent liver tumors vs. conventional open surgery.

Methods

Database searching was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE. Rev Man 5.3 software and Stata 13.0 software were applied in statistical analyses.

Results

A total of fourteen studies were finally included with 1,284 patients receiving LRH and 2,254 with ORH. LRH was associated with less intraoperative hemorrhage, a higher R0 resection rate, a lower incidence of Pringle Maneuver, a lower incidence of postoperative morbidities, a better overall survival and an enhanced postoperative recovery vs. ORH. Patients receiving LRH shared similar operative time, tumor number and disease-free survival as those with ORH. However, tumor size was relatively larger in patients receiving ORH and major hepatectomy, anatomic hepatectomy were rarely performed in patients with LRH. Additional analyses between LRH and laparoscopic primary hepatectomy revealed less intraoperative blood loss in patients with LRH.

Conclusion

LRH is safe and feasible with more favorable peri-operative outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. However, it is only applicable for some highly-selected cases not requiring complex surgical procedures. Future larger well-designed studies are expected for further validation.

The role of extra-hepatic bile duct resection in patients with gallbladder carcinoma with peri-neural invasion: A ten-year experience in China

BACKGROUND

Peri-neural invasion (PNI) in gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) has been demonstrated as a vital prognostic factor. However, whether PNI in patients with GBC can be regarded as a surgical indication of bile duct resection (BDR) remains controversial.

METHODS

GBC patients with pathologically-confirmed PNI between September 2010 and September 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Comparative analyses were performed in patients with PNI according to the performance of BDR. SPSS 25.0 software and Graph pad PRISMA 7.0 software were used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients GBC patients with PNI were incorporated. The results of comparative analyses indicated that patients who received BDR were generally in a more advanced stage and often required a more extended radical cholecystectomy. Higher incidences of preoperative jaundice (48.6% vs 2.9%, P < 0.0001), major hepatectomy (25.7% vs 8.6%, P = 0.055), combined multi-visceral resections (48.6% vs 5.7%, P < 0.0001), combined major vascular reconstruction (22.9% vs 2.9%, P = 0.014), and a lower R0 rate (68.6% vs 88.6%, P = 0.039) were detected in patients who received BDR. Even after propensity score matching (PSM), BDR still had no significant survival advantage but only increased the length of postoperative stay and the frequency of postoperative morbidities.

CONCLUSION

BDR seemed to have no significant survival advantage in GBC patients with PNI and was only correlated with a longer postoperative hospital stay and a higher rate of morbidities. PNI should not be regarded as a surgical indication of BDR in patients with GBC.

The consistencies and inconsistencies between distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To evaluate the consistencies and inconsistencies between distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCCA) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDCA) regarding their biological features and long-term prognosis.

Methods

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched to find comparative studies between DCCA and PDCA. RevMan5.3 and Stata 13.0 software were used for the statistical analyses.

Results

Eleven studies with 4,698 patients with DCCA and 100,629 patients with PDCA were identified. Pooled results indicated that patients with DCCA had a significantly higher rate of preoperative jaundice (p = 0.0003). Lymphatic metastasis (p < 0.00001), vascular invasion (p < 0.0001), and peri-neural invasion (p = 0.005) were more frequently detected in patients with PDCA. After curative pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), a significantly higher R0 rate (p < 0.0001) and significantly smaller tumor size (p < 0.00001) were detected in patients with DCCA. Patients with DCCA had a more favorable overall survival (OS) (p < 0.00001) and disease-free survival (DFS) (p = 0.005) than patients with PDCA. However, postoperative morbidities (p = 0.02), especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (p < 0.00001), more frequently occurred in DCCA.

Conclusion

Patients with DCCA had more favorable tumor pathological features and long-term prognosis than patients with PDCA. An early diagnosis more frequently occurred in patients with DCCA. However, postoperative complications, especially POPF, were more frequently observed in patients with DCCA.