Staging laparoscopy: a peek may save a cut

Diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancer. A considerable proportion of patients undergo unnecessary laparotomy because of underestimation of the extent of the cancer on computed tomography (CT) scanning. Laparoscopy can detect metastases not visualised on CT scanning, enabling better assessment of the spread of cancer (staging of cancer). This is an update to a previous Cochrane Review published in 2013 evaluating the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in assessing the resectability with curative intent in people with pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy performed as an add-on test to CT scanning in the assessment of curative resectability in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via OvidSP (from inception to 15 May 2016), and Science Citation Index Expanded (from 1980 to 15 May 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies of diagnostic laparoscopy in people with potentially resectable pancreatic and periampullary cancer on CT scan, where confirmation of liver or peritoneal involvement was by histopathological examination of suspicious (liver or peritoneal) lesions obtained at diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy. We accepted any criteria of resectability used in the studies. We included studies irrespective of language, publication status, or study design (prospective or retrospective). We excluded case-control studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. The specificity of diagnostic laparoscopy in all studies was 1 because there were no false positives since laparoscopy and the reference standard are one and the same if histological examination after diagnostic laparoscopy is positive. The sensitivities were therefore meta-analysed using a univariate random-effects logistic regression model. The probability of unresectability in people who had a negative laparoscopy (post-test probability for people with a negative test result) was calculated using the median probability of unresectability (pre-test probability) from the included studies, and the negative likelihood ratio derived from the model (specificity of 1 assumed). The difference between the pre-test and post-test probabilities gave the overall added value of diagnostic laparoscopy compared to the standard practice of CT scan staging alone.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies with a total of 1146 participants in the meta-analysis. Only one study including 52 participants had a low risk of bias and low applicability concern in the patient selection domain. The median pre-test probability of unresectable disease after CT scanning across studies was 41.4% (that is 41 out of 100 participants who had resectable cancer after CT scan were found to have unresectable disease on laparotomy). The summary sensitivity of diagnostic laparoscopy was 64.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 50.1% to 76.6%). Assuming a pre-test probability of 41.4%, the post-test probability of unresectable disease for participants with a negative test result was 0.20 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.27). This indicates that if a person is said to have resectable disease after diagnostic laparoscopy and CT scan, there is a 20% probability that their cancer will be unresectable compared to a 41% probability for those receiving CT alone.A subgroup analysis of people with pancreatic cancer gave a summary sensitivity of 67.9% (95% CI 41.1% to 86.5%). The post-test probability of unresectable disease after being considered resectable on both CT and diagnostic laparoscopy was 18% compared to 40.0% for those receiving CT alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic laparoscopy may decrease the rate of unnecessary laparotomy in people with pancreatic and periampullary cancer found to have resectable disease on CT scan. On average, using diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy and histopathological confirmation of suspicious lesions prior to laparotomy would avoid 21 unnecessary laparotomies in 100 people in whom resection of cancer with curative intent is planned.

Diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic and periampullary cancer. A considerable proportion of patients undergo unnecessary laparotomy because of underestimation of the extent of the cancer on computed tomography (CT) scanning. Laparoscopy can detect metastases not visualised on CT scanning, enabling better assessment of the spread of cancer (staging of cancer). There has been no systematic review or meta-analysis assessing the role of diagnostic laparoscopy in assessing the resectability with curative intent in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy performed as an add-on test to CT scanning in the assessment of curative resectability in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Register of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE via OvidSP (from inception to 13 September 2012), and Science Citation Index Expanded (from 1980 to 13 September 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included diagnostic accuracy studies of diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with potentially resectable pancreatic and periampullary cancer on CT scan, where confirmation of liver or peritoneal involvement was by histopathological examination of suspicious (liver or peritoneal) lesions obtained at diagnostic laparoscopy or laparotomy. We accepted any criteria of resectability used in the studies. We included studies irrespective of language, publication status, or study design (prospective or retrospective). We excluded case-control studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently performed data extraction and quality assessment using the QUADAS-2 tool. The specificity of diagnostic laparoscopy in all studies was 1 because there were no false positives since laparoscopy and the reference standard are one and the same if histological examination after diagnostic laparoscopy is positive. Therefore, the sensitivities were meta-analysed using a univariate random-effects logistic regression model. The probability of unresectability in patients who had a negative laparoscopy (post-test probability for patients with a negative test result) was calculated using the median probability of unresectability (pre-test probability) from the included studies and the negative likelihood ratio derived from the model (specificity of 1 assumed). The difference between the pre-test and post-test probabilities gave the overall added value of diagnostic laparoscopy compared to the standard practice of CT scan staging alone.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies with a total of 1015 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Only one study including 52 patients had a low risk of bias and low applicability concern in the patient selection domain. The median pre-test probability of unresectable disease after CT scanning across studies was 40.3% (that is 40 out of 100 patients who had resectable cancer after CT scan were found to have unresectable disease on laparotomy). The summary sensitivity of diagnostic laparoscopy was 68.7% (95% CI 54.3% to 80.2%). Assuming a pre-test probability of 40.3%, the post-test probability of unresectable disease for patients with a negative test result was 0.17 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.24). This indicates that if a patient is said to have resectable disease after diagnostic laparoscopy and CT scan, there is a 17% probability that their cancer will be unresectable compared to a 40% probability for those receiving CT alone.A subgroup analysis of patients with pancreatic cancer gave a summary sensitivity of 67.9% (95% CI 41.1% to 86.5%). The post-test probability of unresectable disease after being considered resectable on both CT and diagnostic laparoscopy was 18% compared to 40% for those receiving CT alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic laparoscopy may decrease the rate of unnecessary laparotomy in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancer found to have resectable disease on CT scan. On average, using diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy and histopathological confirmation of suspicious lesions prior to laparotomy would avoid 23 unnecessary laparotomies in 100 patients in whom resection of cancer with curative intent is planned.

Transgastric pure-NOTES peritoneoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography for staging of gastrointestinal cancers: a survival and feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Human natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) has mainly been based on simultaneous laparoscopic assistance (hybrid NOTES), forgoing the theoretical benefits of the NOTES technique. This is due to a lack of NOTES-specific instruments and endoscopes, making pure-NOTES procedures difficult and time consuming. An area where pure NOTES could be adopted at its present stage of development is minimally invasive staging of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of combining transgastric (TG) pure-NOTES peritoneoscopy and intraperitoneal endoscopic ultrasonography (ip-EUS) with intraluminal EUS (il-EUS) for peritoneal evaluation.

METHODS

This was a feasibility and survival study where il-EUS followed by ip-EUS and peritoneoscopy was performed in 10 pigs subjected to TG pure NOTES. A score was given with regard to achieved visualisation of predefined anatomical structures. Survival was assessed at postoperative day (POD) 14.

RESULTS

All animals survived until POD 14. Median total procedural time was 94 min (range 74-130 min). Median time for il-EUS, ip-EUS and peritoneoscopy was 11 min (range 7-14 min), 13 min (range 8-20 min) and 10 min (range 6-23 min). Il-EUS, ip-EUS and peritoneoscopy resulted in a score of 15/15 points (range 14-15 points), 6/9 points (range 1-8 points) and 12/13 points (range 8-13 points).

CONCLUSIONS

TG pure-NOTES peritoneoscopy and ip-EUS combined with il-EUS is feasible and provides sufficient peritoneal evaluation. The technique could have potential for minimally invasive staging of GI cancers.

The role of staging laparoscopy in oesophagogastric cancers

AIMS

Selection of patients for treatment of oesophagogastric cancers rests on accurate staging. Laparoscopy has become a safe and effective staging tool in upper gastrointestinal cancers because of its ability to detect small peritoneal and liver metastases missed by imaging techniques. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of staging laparoscopy (SL) in determining resectability of oesophagogastric cancers.

METHODS

A review of 511 patients with oesophagogastric cancers referred to our centre during a 7-year period was performed. Four hundred and sixteen of them assessed to have resectable tumours after preoperative staging with CT and/or ultrasound underwent SL. The main outcome measure was the number of patients in whom laparoscopy changed treatment decision.

RESULTS

Staging laparoscopy changed treatment decision in 84 cases (20.2%): locally advanced disease in 17, extensive lymph node disease in four and distant metastases (liver and peritoneum) in 63 cases. The sensitivity of laparoscopy for resectability was 88%. Eighty-one percent of patients who had combined CT scan and EUS were resectable at surgery compared with 65% of those who had CT scan alone (statistically significant with P-value<0.05). Of those patients deemed resectable by SL 8.1% were found to be unresectable at laparotomy, 16 with locally advanced disease and 11 with metastases.

CONCLUSION

Staging laparoscopy avoided unnecessary laparotomy in 20.2% of our patients and was most useful in adenocarcinoma, distal oesophageal, GOJ and gastric cancers and probably not necessary in lesions of the upper two-third of the oesophagus.

Minilaparoscopy in the diagnosis of peritoneal tumor spread: prospective controlled comparison with computed tomography

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis of peritoneal spread in malignant disease prevents unnecessary laparotomies. Minimally invasive laparoscopy with the patient under conscious sedation is a new, easily feasible diagnostic technique. This study compares prospective and controlled diagnostic minilaparoscopy with computed tomography (CT) scan for the diagnosis of peritoneal metastases.

METHODS

In this study, 56 patients with malignant disease were prospectively investigated with diagnostic minilaparoscopy and CT scan.

RESULTS

The study criteria were fulfilled by 54 patients. Minilaparoscopy detected peritoneal carcinosis in 28 of 54 cases, whereas CT detected the disease in 14 of 54 cases. For 36 patients, the diagnosis could be verified by histologic examination of peritoneal biopsies or laparotomy. In this group, minilaparoscopy detected peritoneal carcinosis in 25 of 36 cases, whereas CT detected the disease in 12 of 36 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Minilaparoscopy was more sensitive than CT in detecting peritoneal carcinosis (100% vs 47.8%; p < 0.01). Considering its low grade of invasiveness and superior sensitivity, minilaparoscopy should be regarded as the procedure of choice for the early detection of peritoneal carcinosis.

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage in staging gastric and oesophageal cancer

AIMS

Accurate staging of gastric, oesophageal and oesophagogastric cancer is essential to avoid unnecessary laparotomies in patients where only palliation is appropriate. This requires a multimodal approach utilizing endoscopy, computed tomography and laparoscopy. Previous authors have found that the presence of free peritoneal tumour cells (FPTCs) detected at laparoscopy or laparotomy confers a poorer prognosis. However, various methods of peritoneal lavage are described. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of our technique of peritoneal lavage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

88 staging laparoscopies with peritoneal lavage were carried out between March 1997 and February 1999 on patients eligible for attempted curative resection of a gastric, oesophageal or oesophagogastric cancer. During laparoscopy the pelvis was irrigated with 200 ml of normal saline, with 100 ml aspirated and examined cytologically. Patients were followed-up until September, 1999.

RESULTS

11 patients had FPTC-positive cytology with a median survival following laparoscopy of 122 days (95% CI 82-161) with only a single patient surviving more than one year. In the FPTC-negative group, median survival was 378 days (95% CI 256,-). Log-rank Chi(2)=16.7, P<0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of FPTCs detected by our technique is a contraindication to attempted curative resection - palliation only (medical or surgical) is appropriate.