EUS-guided ethanol ablation for small pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm

Comparison of EUS-guided ablation and surgical resection for nonfunctioning small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a propensity score-matching study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Treatment strategies for small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) <2 cm in size are still under debate. The feasibility and safety of EUS-guided ethanol ablation (EUS-EA) have been demonstrated. However, sample sizes in previous studies were small with no comparative studies on surgery. Therefore, we aimed to compare the safety and long-term outcomes of EUS-EA with those of surgery for the management of nonfunctioning small PNETs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with PNETs who were managed by EUS-EA (from 2011 to 2018) and surgery (from 2000 to 2018) at Asan Medical Center. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to increase comparability. The primary outcome was early and late major adverse events (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III) after treatment. Secondary outcomes were 10-year overall (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates, length of hospital stay, and development of endocrine pancreatic insufficiency.

RESULTS

Of all patients, 97 and 188 patients were included in the EUS-EA and surgery groups, respectively. PSM created 89 matched pairs. EUS-EA was associated with a significantly lower rate of early major adverse events (0% vs 11.2%, P = .003). Late major adverse events occurred more frequently after surgery, with no significant difference between groups (3.4% vs 10.1%, P = .07). Both treatment modalities showed comparable 10-year OS and DSS rates. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the EUS-EA group (4 days vs 14.1 days, P < .001), and endocrine pancreatic insufficiency was less common after EUS-EA than after surgery (33.3% vs 48.6%, P = .121).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-EA had fewer adverse events and a shorter hospital stay with similar OS and DSS rates compared with surgery, suggesting that EUS-EA may be a preferred alternative to surgical resection in selected patients with nonfunctioning small PNETs.

Endoscopic ablation therapy for the pancreatic neoplasms

Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ablation therapy has been reported as a less invasive therapy for patients with pancreatic neoplasms. Some ablation techniques, including injective ablation (using ethanol or other ablative agents), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), photodynamic therapy, and laser ablation, have been described in the literature. Among these, injective ablation and RFA are more frequently used for treating pancreatic neoplasms. Few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of EUS-guided ethanol ablation (EUS-EA) for potentially malignant solid neoplasms (neuroendocrine neoplasms or solid pseudopapillary neoplasms) and have reported a complete response (CR) rate of 60-80%. In addition, the CR rate after EUS-RFA for these lesions has been reported to be 55-100%, with no additional procedure-related adverse events (AEs). Regarding the amelioration of the symptoms of an insulinoma, the success rates of both the therapies were found to be excellent. Regarding complete tumor ablation, EUS-RFA appeared to be superior to EUS-EA. Although EUS-RFA has been reported as a safe treatment for pancreatic cancers, its effectiveness remains inadequate. Some studies have examined the effectiveness of EUS-guided injection ablation therapy for pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) and have reported CR rates that range from 35% to 79%. Alcohol-free chemotherapeutic agent ablation appears to be effective, with a low risk of AEs. However, studies on the effectiveness of EUS-RFA for PCNs are limited. In the future, EUS-guided ablation therapy could become a more widely used approach for potentially malignant and malignant pancreatic lesions.