Percutaneous Preoperative Biliary Drainage for Resectable Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma: No Association with Survival and No Increase in Seeding Metastases

[Surgical treatment and prognostic factors in perihilar tumors]

OBJECTIVE

To study the results of surgical treatment in patients with perihilar tumors.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed 98 patients with perihilar tumors who underwent surgery.

RESULTS

We prefer percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (n=58) for jaundice. Retrograde interventions were performed in 18 cases (20.5%), complications grade III-IV were more common (p=0.037) in the last group. Postoperative mortality was 12%. Complications developed in 81 patients (82.7%), grade ≥3 - in 39 (39.8%) cases. Portal vein resection (n=26) increased the incidence of complications grade ≥III (p=0.035) and portal vein thrombosis (p=0.0001). Chemotherapy after surgery was performed in 47 patients (48.0%), photodynamic therapy - in 7 (7.1%) patients. A 5-year overall survival was 28.1%, the median survival - 29 months. R2 resection and/or M1 stage (n=12) significantly worsened the prognosis and overall survival (16.5 vs. 31 months, p=0.0055). Lymph node (LN) lesion, microscopic status (R0 vs. R1) of resection margin, technique of decompression and isolated resection of extrahepatic bile ducts did not affect the prognosis, and we combined appropriate patients (n=72) for analysis. SI resection and excision of ≥6 lymph nodes were independent positive factors for disease-free survival (p=0.042 and p=0.007, respectively). Blood transfusion and high preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte index (NLI ≥2.15) worsened overall (p=0.009 and p=0.002, respectively) and disease-free survival (p=0.002 and 0.007, respectively). The absence of adjuvant therapy worsened disease-free survival alone (p=0.024).

CONCLUSION

SI liver resection, adequate lymph node dissection and adjuvant therapy should be used for perihilar tumors. Isolated resection of extrahepatic bile ducts is permissible in some cases. Blood transfusion and NLI ≥2.15 are independent negative prognostic factors.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Biliary Strictures

A biliary stricture is an abnormal narrowing in the ductal drainage system of the liver that can result in clinically and physiologically relevant obstruction to the flow of bile. The most common and ominous etiology is malignancy, underscoring the importance of a high index of suspicion in the evaluation of this condition. The goals of care in patients with a biliary stricture are confirming or excluding malignancy (diagnosis) and reestablishing flow of bile to the duodenum (drainage); the approach to diagnosis and drainage varies according to anatomic location (extrahepatic vs perihilar). For extrahepatic strictures, endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition is highly accurate and has become the diagnostic mainstay. In contrast, the diagnosis of perihilar strictures remains a challenge. Similarly, the drainage of extrahepatic strictures tends to be more straightforward and safer and less controversial than that of perihilar strictures. Recent evidence has provided some clarity in multiple important areas pertaining to biliary strictures, whereas several remaining controversies require additional research. The goal of this guideline is to provide practicing clinicians with the most evidence-based guidance on the approach to patients with extrahepatic and perihilar strictures, focusing on diagnosis and drainage.

Long-term follow-up of a randomized trial of biliary drainage in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The DRAINAGE trial was a randomized controlled trial comparing preoperative endoscopic (EBD) and percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with potentially resectable, perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Patients were randomized in four tertiary referral centers. Follow-up data were available for all included patients. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were readmissions, and re-interventions not including in-trial interventions.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients were randomized; 27 in both groups. Median follow-up for both groups was 62 months (95% CI 54-70). The median OS was 13 months (95% CI 7.9-18.1) in the EBD and 7 months (95% CI 0.0-17.2) in the PTBD group (P = 0.28). Twenty (37%, n = 8 EBD vs n = 12 PTBD, P = 0.43) of 54 patients were readmitted at least once, mostly due to drainage-related complications (n = 13, 24%). Of note, 14 out of the 54 patients died within the trial. A total of 76 drainage procedures (32 EBD and 44 PTBD) were performed in 28 patients. The median number of stent or drain placements was 2 (2-4) for the EBD group and 2 (1-3) for the PTBD group (P = 0.77).

DISCUSSION

Although this follow-up study represented a small cohort, no long-term differences in survival, readmissions, and drainage procedures for EBD and PTBD were found, even when comparing the resected and unresected group. However, this study demonstrates the complexity of biliary drainage for patients with potentially resectable pCCA, even in tertiary referral centers.

Endoscopic Biliary Darinage (EBD) versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage (PTBD) for biliary drainage in patients with Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma (PCCA): A systematic review and meta-analysis

Biliary drainage for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma (PCCA) can be performed either by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage (PTBD). To date there is no consensus about which method is preferred. Taking that into account, the aim of this study is to compare Endoscopic Biliary Drainage (EBD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma through a systematic review and metanalysis. A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases was performed. Evaluated outcomes included technical success, clinical success, post drainage complications (cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, and major complications), crossover, hospital length stay, and seeding metastases. Data extracted from the studies were used to calculate Mean Differences (MD). Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 2284 patients (EBD = 1239, PTBD = 1045). Considering resectable PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated lower rates of crossover (RD = 0.29; 95% CI 0.07‒0.51; p = 0.009 I² = 90%), post-drainage complications (RD = 0.20; 95% CI 0.06‒0.33; p < 0.0001; I² = 78%), and post-drainage pancreatitis (RD = 0.10; 95% CI 0.05‒0.16; p < 0.0001; I² = 64%). The EBD group presented reduced length of hospital stay (RD = -2.89; 95% CI -3.35 ‒ -2,43; p < 0.00001; I² = 42%). Considering palliative PCCA, the PTBD group demonstrated a higher clinical success (RD = -0.19; 95% CI -0.27 ‒ -0.11; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%) and less post-drainage cholangitis (RD = 0.08; 95% CI 0.01‒0.15; p = 0.02; I² = 48%) when compared to the EBD group. There was no statistical difference between the groups regarding: technical success, post-drainage bleeding, major post-drainage complications, and seeding metastases.

Surgery

This chapter provides a comprehensive background from basic to applied knowledge of surgical anatomy which is necessary for the surgical treatment of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) patients. Significant advances that have been made in the surgical treatment of CCA were examined. For instance, in-depth details are provided for appropriate preoperative assessment and treatment to optimize patient status and to improve the outcome of surgical treatment(s). Comprehensive details are provided for the surgical techniques and outcomes of treatments for each type of CCA with clear illustrations and images. This chapter also describes the role of minimally invasive surgery and liver transplantation in CCA treatment.

Success, complication, and mortality rates of initial biliary drainage in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma require biliary drainage to relieve symptoms and allow for palliative systemic chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to establish the success, complication, and mortality rates of the initial biliary drainage in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma at presentation.

METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter study, patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma who underwent initial endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage between 2002 and 2014 were included. The success of drainage was defined as a successful biliary stent or drain placement, no unscheduled reintervention within 14 days, and serum bilirubin levels <50 μmol/L (ie, 2.9 mg/dL) or a >50% decrease in serum bilirubin after 14 days. Severe complications, and 90-day mortality were recorded.

RESULTS

Included were 186 patients: 161 (87%) underwent initial endoscopic biliary drainage and 25 (13%) underwent initial percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The success of initial drainage was observed in 73 patients (45%) after endoscopic biliary drainage and 6 (24%) after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The reasons for an unsuccessful initial drainage were: the failure to place a drain or stent in 39 patients (21%), an unplanned reintervention within 14 days in 52 patients (28%), and the bilirubin level >50 μmol/L (or not halved) after 14 days of initial drainage in 16 patients (9%). Severe drainage-related complications occurred in 19 patients (12%) after endoscopic biliary drainage and in 3 (12%) after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Overall, 66 patients (36%) died within 90 days after initial biliary drainage.

CONCLUSION

Initial biliary drainage in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma had a success rate of 45% and a 90-day mortality rate of 36%. Future studies for patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma should focus on improving biliary drainage.

Outcome of primary ERCP versus primary PTC for biliary drainage in malignant hilar biliary strictures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with malignant hilar biliary strictures can suffer from obstructive jaundice. Controversy remains on the optimal approach to obtain preoperative or palliative biliary drainage in these patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare the two modalities most commonly used in this scenario: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC).

METHODS

MEDLINE via PubMed was searched for relevant articles published from 2005 to April 2019. Following outcome measures were used to compare ERCP and PTC: therapeutic success rate, cholangitis, pancreatitis, bleeding, tube dislocation, reintervention rate, mortality such as 30d mortality and in-hospital death, median survival time, drainage patency, duration until decompression and hospital stay. Risk of bias assessment for the retrospective studies was conducted by NOS. RoB 2 was used for RCT. A meta-analysis was performed by using Review Manager 5.3. The certainty of evidence was appraised using GRADE.

RESULTS

Eleven articles of which one RCT and ten retrospective cohort studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for data-analysis (1417 patients; 784 ERCP, 633 PTC). The combined odds ratio (OR) for therapeutic succes was 3.5 times higher in the PTC group (95% CI 2.05-5.97; high certainty). In terms of cholangitis, ERCP carried a 1.7-fold risk as compared to PTC (95% CI 0.92-3.08; moderate certainty). Patients who underwent ERCP were 11.50 times more likely to undergo a reintervention (95% CI 3.51-37.70; moderate certainty). ERCP was comparable to PTC in terms of pancreatitis (low certainty), bleeding (high certainty) and tube dislocation rate (moderate certainty). Mortality tended to be numerically higher in the PTC group but low patient numbers, selection bias and study heterogeneity did not allow uniform comparative analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with malignant hilar biliary strictures, PTC is associated with a better therapeutic success rate, less cholangitis and lower reintervention rate as compared to ERCP.

Research Priorities in Percutaneous Image and Endoscopy Guided Interventions for Biliary and Gallbladder Diseases: Proceedings from the Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation Multidisciplinary Research Consensus Panel

Recent technological advancements including the introduction of disposable endoscopes have enhanced the role of interventional radiology (IR) in the management of biliary/gallbladder diseases. There are unanswered questions in this growing field. The Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation convened a virtual Research Consensus Panel consisting of a multidisciplinary group of experts, to develop a prioritized research agenda regarding percutaneous image and endoscopy guided procedures for biliary and gallbladder diseases. The panelists discussed current data, opportunities for IR and future efforts to maximize IR's ability and scope. A recurring theme throughout the discussions was to find ways to reduce the total duration of percutaneous drains and to improve the patients' quality of life. Following the presentations and discussions, research priorities were ranked based on their clinical relevance and impact. The research ideas ranked top three were as follows: 1- Percutaneous multimodality management of benign anastomotic biliary strictures (Laser vs endobiliary ablation vs cholangioplasty vs drain upsize protocol alone); 2- Ablation of intraductal cholangiocarcinoma with and without stenting; and 3- Cholecystoscopy/choledochoscopy and lithotripsy in non-surgical patients with calculous cholecystitis. Collaborative retrospective and prospective research studies are essential to answer these questions and to improve the management protocols for patients with biliary/gallbladder diseases.

Association between biopsy method and development of peritoneal metastases in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

In patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC), there is concern that transperitoneal (TP) biopsy may seed tumor in the peritoneal cavity, increasing risk of peritoneal metastases (PM).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients undergoing surgery for PHC (1991-2014) was performed. Clinicopathologic characteristics and incidence of PM at the time of index surgery, and one and two years after surgery were compared in patients who did vs. did not undergo TP biopsy.

RESULTS

Among 262 patients who underwent surgery, 37 had undergone TP biopsy, and 225 had undergone intraluminal biopsy or had no biopsy. No differences in demographic or clinicopathologic characteristics were noted between groups. The incidence of PM at surgery was not significantly different between TP and non-TP biopsy patients (5.4% vs. 7.6%, p > 0.9). Among 243 patients who did not have PM at surgery, the cumulative incidence of PM in the TP and non-TP biopsy groups were not different at one year (11.4% [95%CI 3.5-24.4] vs. 10.8% [95%CI 7.0-15.5]) or two years (20.3% [95%CI 8.7-35.2] vs. 20.1% [95%CI 14.9-25.9]) (p = 0.7).

DISCUSSION

Although PM commonly occurs in patients with PHC, TP biopsy was not associated with higher incidence of PM at surgery or at one or two years after surgery.

Preoperative Management of Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma

Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is a rare hepatobiliary malignancy that requires thoughtful, multidisciplinary evaluation in the preoperative setting to ensure optimal patient outcomes. Comprehensive preoperative imaging, including multiphase CT angiography and some form of cholangiographic assessment, is key to assessing resectability. While many staging systems exist, the Blumgart staging system provides the most useful combination of resectability assessment and prognostic information for use in the preoperative setting. Once resectability is confirmed, volumetric analysis should be performed. Upfront resection without biliary drainage or portal venous embolization may be considered in patients without cholangitis and an estimated functional liver remnant (FLR) > 40%. In patients with FLR < 40%, judicious use of biliary drainage is advised, with the goal of selective biliary drainage of the functional liver remnant. Percutaneous biliary drainage may avoid inadvertent contamination of the contralateral biliary tree and associated infectious complications, though the relative effectiveness of percutaneous and endoscopic techniques is an ongoing area of study and debate. Patients with low FLR also require intervention to induce hypertrophy, most commonly portal venous embolization, in an effort to reduce the rate of postoperative liver failure. Even with extensive preoperative workup, many patients will be found to have metastatic disease at exploration and diagnostic laparoscopy may reduce the rate of non-therapeutic laparotomy. Management of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma continues to evolve, with ongoing efforts to improve preoperative liver hypertrophy and to further define the role of transplantation in disease management.

Treatment of Malignant Bile Duct Obstruction: What the Interventional Radiologist Needs to Know

Management of malignant bile duct obstruction is both a clinically important and technically challenging aspect of caring for patients with advanced malignancy. Bile duct obstruction can be caused by extrinsic compression, intrinsic tumor/stone/debris, or by biliary ischemia, inflammation, and sclerosis. Common indications for biliary intervention include lowering the serum bilirubin level for chemotherapy, ameliorating pruritus, treating cholangitis or bile leak, and providing access for bile duct biopsy or other adjuvant therapies. In some institutions, biliary drainage may also be considered prior to hepatic or pancreatic resection. Prior to undertaking biliary intervention, it is essential to have high-quality cross-sectional imaging to determine the level of obstruction, the presence of filling defects or atrophy, and status of the portal vein. High bile duct obstruction, which we consider to be obstruction above, at, or just below the confluence (Bismuth classifications IV, III, II, and some I), is optimally managed percutaneously rather than endoscopically because interventional radiologists can target specific ducts for drainage and can typically avoid introducing enteric contents into isolated undrained bile ducts. Options for biliary drainage include external or internal/external catheters and stents. In the setting of high obstruction, placement of a catheter or stent above the ampulla, preserving the function of the sphincter of Oddi, may lower the risk of future cholangitis by preventing enteric contamination of the biliary tree. Placement of a primary suprapapillary stent without a catheter, when possible, is the procedure most likely to keep the biliary tree sterile.

Negative prognostic outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage in distal cholangiocarcinoma: a retrospective analysis using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of different types of preoperative biliary drainage for cholangiocarcinoma has been debated over the past two decades. Controversy concerning the use of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) versus endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) still exists. This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes between PTBD and EBD in patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

Data of patients diagnosed with distal cholangiocarcinoma who underwent preoperative PTBD or EBD from January 1999 to December 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. Post-surgical outcomes, including the incidence of post-operative complications, peritoneal metastasis, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were analyzed. Survival analyses were also performed after propensity score matching in the PTBD and EBD groups.

RESULTS

The incidence of post-operative complications was similar in both groups. The 5-year estimated cumulative incidences for peritoneal metastasis were 14.7% and 7.2% in the PTBD and EBD groups, respectively (p = 0.192). The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 23.7% and 47.3% in the PTBD and EBD groups, respectively (p = 0.015). In the multi-variate analysis for overall survival, PTBD was an independent poor prognostic factor. The 5-year overall survival rates were 35.9% and 56.3% in the PTBD and EBD groups, respectively (hazard ratio 1.85, confidence interval 1.05-3.26, p = 0.035). The results after propensity score matching indicated a poorer prognosis in the PTBD group, with a 5-year survival rate of 35.9% in the PTBD group vs 56.0% in the EBD group (p = 0.044).

CONCLUSION

PTBD should be considered as a negative prognostic factor in distal cholangiocarcinoma patients.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers 2019: The 3rd English edition

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery launched the clinical practice guidelines for the management of biliary tract cancers (cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer) in 2007, then published the 2nd version in 2014.

METHODS

In this 3rd version, clinical questions (CQs) were proposed on six topics. The recommendation, grade for recommendation, and statement for each CQ were discussed and finalized by an evidence-based approach. Recommendations were graded as Grade 1 (strong) or Grade 2 (weak) according to the concepts of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

The 31 CQs covered the six topics: (a) prophylactic treatment, (b) diagnosis, (c) biliary drainage, (d) surgical treatment, (e) chemotherapy, and (f) radiation therapy. In the 31 CQs, 14 recommendations were rated strong and 14 recommendations weak. The remaining three CQs had no recommendation. Each CQ includes a statement of how the recommendations were graded.

CONCLUSIONS

This latest guideline provides recommendations for important clinical aspects based on evidence. Future collaboration with the cancer registry will be key for assessing the guidelines and establishing new evidence.

Italian Clinical Practice Guidelines on Cholangiocarcinoma - Part II: Treatment

Currently, the only curative treatment for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is surgical resection, though this treatment is possible in less than 40% of patients. However, recent improvements in preoperative management have led to a higher number of patients who are candidates for this procedure. For unresectable patients, progress is ongoing in terms of locoregional and chemoradiation treatments and target therapies, especially in the definition of patient selection criteria. This is the second part of the Italian CCA guidelines, dealing with CCA treatment, that have been formulated in accordance with Italian National Institute of Health indications and developed according to the GRADE method and related advancements.

Occurrence of seeding metastases in resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and the role of low-dose radiotherapy to prevent this

BACKGROUND

Preoperative biliary drainage in patients with presumed resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is hypothesized to promote the occurrence of seeding metastases. Seeding metastases can occur at the surgical scars or at the site of postoperative drains, and in case of percutaneous biliary drainage, at the catheter port-site. To prevent seeding metastases after resection, we routinely treated PHC patients with preoperative radiotherapy (RT) for over 25 years until January 2018.

AIM

To investigate the incidence of seeding metastases following resection of PHC.

METHODS

All patients who underwent resection for pathology proven PHC between January 2000 and March 2019 were included in this retrospective study. Between 2000-January 2018, patients received preoperative RT (3 × 3.5 Gray). RT was omitted in patients treated after January 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients underwent resection for PHC between January 2000 and March 2019. Of 171 patients undergoing resection, 111 patients (65%) were treated with preoperative RT. Intraoperative bile cytology showed no difference in the presence of viable tumor cells in bile of patients undergoing preoperative RT or not. Overall, two patients (1.2%) with seeding metastases were identified, both in the laparotomy scar and both after preoperative RT (one patient with endoscopic and the other with percutaneous and endoscopic biliary drainage).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of seeding metastases in patients with resected PHC in our series was low (1.2%). This low incidence and the inability of providing evidence that preoperative low-dose RT prevents seeding metastases, has led us to discontinue preoperative RT in patients with resectable PHC in our center.

Effects of different preoperative biliary drainage methods for resected malignant obstruction jaundice on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis: A meta-analysis

The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) for resected malignant obstruction jaundice (MOJ) on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis. Databases including PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were utilized. With reference to literature reported until January 2019, controlled clinical trials were designed to compare the effects of PTBD and EBD for MOJ on the incidence rate of implantation metastasis. Subsequently, odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated with Review Manager 5.3.0 software. A total of 10 studies were enrolled in this meta-analysis, including 1,085 cases in the PTBD group and 1,379 cases in the EBD group. The results revealed that there was a significant difference in the incidence rate of implantation metastasis between the PTBD group and EBD group (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.23–0.53, P<0.00001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the incidence rates of both catheter-related implantation metastasis and peritoneal metastasis were lower in the EBD group (OR=0.23, 95% CI: 0.12–0.44, P<0.00001; OR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.31–0.74, P=0.0008, respectively), and the advantage of EBD was demonstrated in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, distal cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic carcinoma (OR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.17–0.74, P=0.006; OR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.17–0.60, P=0.0005; OR=0.27, 95% CI: 0.19–0.40, P<0.00001, respectively). In conclusion, this meta-analysis revealed the appropriate choice of preoperative biliary drainage for resected MOJ. The application of EBD reduced the incidence rate of implantation metastasis, however more evidence is required from future studies, to confirm the results.

Prediction Efficacy for Clinical Outcome of Prognostic Nutritional Index in Patients with Resectable Biliary Tract Cancer Depends on Sex and Obstructive Jaundice Status

BACKGROUND

The Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), a marker of nutritional status and systemic inflammation, is a proven prognostic biomarker in some cancers. The predictive value of PNI in biliary tract cancer (BTC) has not been established.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between the PNI and outcomes of resectable BTC.

METHODS

In total, 430 patients with stage I-III resectable BTC [gallbladder cancer (GBC), n = 212; cholangiocarcinoma (CHO), n = 218] who had attended Fudan University Zhongshan Hospital were enrolled. The relationship between the PNI and clinical outcomes was evaluated both in the whole cohort and in selected subgroups.

RESULTS

Eligible patients were classified into PNI-low (PNI < 45) and PNI-high (PNI ≥ 45) groups. The PNI-low group had significantly worse overall survival (OS) in both the whole cohort (p = 0.002) and in the GBC subgroup (p = 0.001), but had similar OS as the PNI-high group in the CHO subgroup (p = 0.328). Multivariate analysis revealed that low PNI is an independent risk factor for worse survival in GBC (hazard ratio 1.623, 95% confidence interval 1.063-2.480, p = 0.026). PNI was found to predict clinical outcome in women (p < 0.001) and patients without obstructive jaundice (p = 0.017) with GBC, but was not a prognostic factor in any subgroup with CHO. The estimated area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve was significantly greater when TNM stage was combined with PNI in women with GBC.

CONCLUSIONS

PNI is an independent predictor of OS in GBC, but not in CHO. It has no prognostic value in men with GBC or patients with obstructive jaundice.

The methods of preoperative biliary drainage for resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma patients: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical outcomes of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) with those of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients with resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) and evaluate the effect of EBD and PTBD on tumor prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles about the comparison between PTBD and EBD. Data were analyzed by Revman 5.3.

RESULTS

PTBD showed a lower risk of drainage-related complications than EBD (OR, 2.73; 95%CI, 1.52-4.91; P < .05). PTBD was also associated with lower risk of pancreatitis (OR, 8.47; 95%CI, 2.28-31.45; P < .05). The differences in preoperative cholangitis, R0 resection, blood loss and recurrence showed no statistically significance between EBD and PTBD (all P > .05). Several literatures have reported the tumor implantation metastasis after PTBD. Since no well-designed prospective randomized controlled studies have explored in this depth, this article is unable to draw conclusions on this aspect.

CONCLUSION

PTBD is a reasonable choice for PBD, and EBD should only be used as preoperative drainage for HCCA by more experienced physicians. There is a greater need to design prospective randomized controlled studies to obtain high-level evidence-based medicinal proof. It is worth noting that, whether EBD or PTBD, accurate selective biliary drainage should be the trend.

Endoscopic Versus Percutaneous Preoperative Biliary Drainage in Patients With Klatskin Tumor Undergoing Curative Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes

Aims. To compare short-term and long-term outcomes of preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and percutaneous biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with Klatskin tumor undergoing curative surgery. Methods. We conducted a search of electronic information sources to identify all studies comparing EBD and PBD in patients with Klatskin tumor undergoing curative surgery. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess the risk of bias observational studies. Random-effects or fixed-effects modeling was applied as appropriate to calculate pooled outcome data. Results. We identified 9 observational studies, enrolling a total of 1436 patients. The patients in the PBD group had more advanced disease than those in EBD group in terms of Bismuth-Corlette classification and tumor classification. EBD was associated with higher risks of postprocedural complications (odds ratio [OR] =2.24, P = .001), conversion to another drainage method (OR =11.16, P < .00001), cholangitis (OR = 4.58, P < .0001), and pancreatitis (OR = 8.90, P = .009) than PBD; there was no difference between the 2 methods in terms of technical success (OR = 0.79, P = .50) and tube dislocation (OR = 0.81, P = .54). Regarding the postoperative outcomes, there was no difference in terms of 30-day mortality (OR = 0.61, P = .16) and major postoperative complications (OR = 0.60, P = .06). Regarding the long-term outcomes, EBD was associated with lower risks of seeding metastasis (OR = 0.46, P = .0004) and 5-year recurrence (OR = 0.72, P = .010), and better 5-year survival (OR = 1.62, P = .001). Conclusions. EBD may be associated with higher procedure-related complications compared with PBD as a preoperative biliary drainage method in patients with Klatskin tumor undergoing curative surgery. The available evidence on long-term oncological and survival outcomes are subject to confounding by indication, and high-quality randomized controlled trials are required for definite conclusions.

A systematic review of the comparison of the incidence of seeding metastasis between endoscopic biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for resectable malignant biliary obstruction

Background and aim

Endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) and percutaneous biliary drainage (PTBD) are the two main strategies of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for resectable malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) worldwide, but which is better remains unclear. Seeding metastasis (SM) has been reported repeatedly in the recent decade, although it is rarely taken into consideration in the choice of PBD. Hence, a systematic review was badly warranted to evaluate the incidence of SM between PTBD and EBD in the preoperative treatment of MBO.

Methods

PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were used to identify any potentially eligible studies comparing the incidence of SM between EBD and PTBD from Nov 1990 to Mar 2018. The effect size was determined by odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Ten studies were enrolled in this study, including 1379 cases in the EBD group and 1085 cases in the PTBD group. Results showed that the incidence of SM in the EBD group was significantly lower than that in the PTBD group (10.5% vs. 22.0%, OR = 0.35, 95% CI 0.23~0.53). Subgroup analysis stratified by the definition of SM showed that the pooled ORs for peritoneal metastasis and tube-related SM between EBD and PTBD were 0.42 (95% CI 0.31~0.57) and 0.17 (95% CI 0.10~0.29), respectively. Subgroup analysis stratified by the location of MBO showed that the pooled ORs for the incidence of SM between EBD and PTBD for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, distal cholangiocarcinoma, and pancreatic cancer were 0.27 (95% CI 0.13~0.56), 0.32 (95% CI 0.17~0.60), and 0.27 (95% CI 0.19~0.40), respectively.

Conclusion

EBD should be the optimal PBD for MBO considering the SM, but it deserved further validation.

Comparing the efficacy of initial percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stenting for relief of biliary obstruction in unresectable cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

In patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CC), management of biliary obstruction commonly involves either up-front percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) or initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stent placement. The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy and of initial ERCP with stent placement with efficacy of initial PTBD in management of biliary obstruction in CC.

METHODS

A single-center database of patients with unresectable CC treated between 2006 and 2017 was queried for patients with biliary obstruction who underwent either PTBD or ERCP. Groups were compared with respect to patient, tumor, procedure, and outcome variables.

RESULTS

Of 87 patients with unresectable CC and biliary obstruction, 69 (79%) underwent initial ERCP while 18 (21%) underwent initial PTBD. Groups did not differ significantly with respect to age, gender, or tumor location. Initial procedure success did not differ between the groups (94% ERCP vs 89% PTBD, p = 0.339). Total number of procedures did not differ significantly between the two groups (ERCP median = 2 vs. PTC median = 2.5, p = 0.83). 21% of patients required ERCP after PTBD compared to 25% of patients requiring PTBD after ERCP (p = 1.00). Procedure success rate (97% ERCP vs. 93% PTBD, p = 0.27) and rates of cholangitis (22% ERCP vs. 17% PTBD, p = 0.58) were similar between the groups. Number of hospitalizations since initial intervention did not differ significantly between the two groups (ERCP median = 1 vs. PTC median = 3.5, p = 0.052).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CC and biliary obstruction, initial ERCP with stent placement and initial PTBD both represent safe and effective methods of biliary decompression. Initial ERCP and stenting should be considered for relief of biliary obstruction in such patients in centers with advanced endoscopic capabilities.

Percutaneous management of malignant biliary disease

Percutaneous biliary interventions have established their role in the management of benign and malignant biliary disease. There are limited data comparing procedures performed by gastroenterologists and interventional radiologists in managing malignant biliary obstruction. Endoscopic procedures performed by gastroenterologists are not completely benign with reported complications ranging from 2% to 15%. It is important that gastroenterologists and interventional radiologists collaborate to form algorithms for management of malignant biliary obstruction which provide safe and efficacious care to these patients.

A comparison of treatment and outcomes of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma between Eastern and Western centers

BACKGROUND

Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) often requires extensive surgery which is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to compare an Eastern and Western PHC cohort in terms of patient characteristics, treatment strategies and outcomes including a propensity score matched analysis.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent combined biliary and liver resection for PHC between 2005 and 2016 at two Western and one Eastern center were included. The overall perioperative and long-term outcomes of the cohorts were compared and a propensity score matched analysis was performed to compare perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 210 Western patients were compared to 164 Eastern patients. Western patients had inferior survival compared to the East (hazard-ratio 1.72 (1-23-2.40) P < 0.001) corrected for age, ASA score, tumor stage and margin status. After propensity score matching, liver failure rate, morbidity, and mortality were similar. There was more biliary leakage (38% versus 13%, p = 0.015) in the West.

CONCLUSION

There were major differences in patient characteristics, treatment strategies, perioperative outcomes and survival between Eastern and Western PHC cohorts. Future studies should focus whether these findings are due to the differences in the treatment or the disease itself.

Comparison of long-term efficacy between endoscopic and percutaneous biliary drainage for resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

For resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction, it remains a controversy whether to choose percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) or endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD). A systematic review was conducted to compare the long-term efficacy between the two techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible studies were searched from January 1990 to May 2018, comparing the long-term efficacy between EBD and PTBD for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) rate, and secondary end points included postoperative severe complications and seeding metastasis. Effect size on outcomes was calculated using a fixed- or random-effect model, accompanied with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULT

Six studies were included in this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that EBD was superior to PTBD in OS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.84,P= 0.0002). But subgroup results showed that the superiority disappeared in distal cholangiocarcinoma (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.01,P= 0.06). Other prognostic factors such as intraoperative blood transfusion, lymphatic metastasis and seeding metastasis, were inconsistent between groups. In addition, regional disparity was obviously apparent between Japanese and non-Japanese studies.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion that EBD was superior to PTBD in OS for resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with biliary obstruction is less convincing, and more trials need to be conducted in future.

Pleural dissemination of cholangiocarcinoma caused by percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage during the management of resectable cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Only 3 case reports have addressed pleural dissemination in association with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. The aim of this study was to investigate recurrence after resection of cholangiocarcinoma after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and to clarify the incidence of and the factors responsible for pleural dissemination.

METHODS

Between 2001 and 2015, we reviewed retrospectively all consecutive patients who underwent resection for perihilar or distal cholangiocarcinoma after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for recurrence, including pleural dissemination.

RESULTS

During the study period, all consecutive patients underwent resection of cholangiocarcinoma after management with percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Of these, 100 patients (32.1%) underwent left-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage alone, and 212 (67.9%) underwent right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage with or without left-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. Pleural dissemination, which developed exclusively on the right side of the thoracic cavity after resection, was found in 12 patients (3.8%); these patients underwent right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage; computed tomography demonstrated that the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage catheter passed through the thoracic cavity in all 12 patients. The diagnosis of pleural dissemination was made at a median of 381 days (range, 44 to 2,944 days) after operation. Survival was poor, with a median survival time of 516 days. Statistically, right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage was identified as a risk factor for pleural dissemination.

CONCLUSION

Pleural dissemination after right-sided percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is likely a procedure-related iatrogenic complication because of the "special route" by which the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage catheter must be passed through the right thoracic cavity.

Liver Transplant for Cholangiocarcinoma

Liver transplant (LT) for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) offers an opportunity for survival among patients with early-stage but anatomically unresectable disease. The 5-year survival rate after LT is 65% to 70%, higher among patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis, who are often diagnosed earlier, and lower among patients with de novo CCA. The results of LT for hilar CCA, along with recent limited data suggesting favorable survival among patients with very early intrahepatic CCA (ICC), have reignited interest in the subject. This article discusses LT following neoadjuvant therapy for CCA and the early data on LT alone for ICC.

Multicenter study of endoscopic preoperative biliary drainage for malignant hilar biliary obstruction: E-POD hilar study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) is often recommended in preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for hilar malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), but endoscopic biliary stent (EBS) is also used in the clinical practice. We conducted this large-scale multicenter study to compare ENBD and EBS in this setting.

METHODS

A total of 374 cases undergoing PBD including 281 ENBD and 76 EBS for hilar MBO in 29 centers were retrospectively studied.

RESULTS

Extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC) accounted for 69.8% and Bismuth-Corlette classification was III or more in 58.8% of the study population. Endoscopic PBD was technically successful in 94.6%, and adverse event rate was 21.9%. The rate of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis was 16.0%, and non-endoscopic sphincterotomy was the only risk factor (odds ratio [OR] 2.51). Preoperative re-intervention was performed in 61.5%: planned re-interventions in 48.4% and unplanned re-interventions in 31.0%. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage was placed in 6.4% at the time of surgery. The risk factors for unplanned procedures were ECC (OR 2.64) and total bilirubin ≥ 10 mg/dL (OR 2.18). In surgically resected cases, prognostic factors were ECC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57), predraiange magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (HR 1.62) and unplanned re-interventions (HR 1.81). EBS was not associated with increased adverse events, unplanned re-interventions, or a poor prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our retrospective analysis did not demonstrate the advantage of ENBD over EBS as the initial PBD for resectable hilar MBO. Although the technical success rate of endoscopic PBD was high, its re-intervention rate was not negligible, and unplanned re-intervention was associated with a poor prognosis in resected hilar MBO.

Modern work-up and extended resection in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: the AMC experience

AIM

Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) is a challenging disease and requires aggressive surgical treatment in order to achieve curation. The assessment and work-up of patients with presumed PHC is multidisciplinary, complex and requires extensive experience. The aim of this paper is to review current aspects of diagnosis, preoperative work-up and extended resection in patients with PHC from the perspective of our own institutional experience with this complex tumor.

METHODS

We provided a review of applied modalities in the diagnosis and work-up of PHC according to current literature. All patients with presumed PHC in our center between 2000 and 2016 were identified and described. The types of resection, surgical techniques and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Upcoming diagnostic modalities such as Spyglass and combinations of serum biomarkers and molecular markers have potential to decrease the rate of misdiagnosis of benign, inflammatory disease. Assessment of liver function with hepatobiliary scintigraphy provides better information on the future remnant liver (FRL) than volume alone. The selective use of staging laparoscopy is advisable to avoid futile laparotomies. In patients requiring extended resection, selective preoperative biliary drainage is mandatory in cholangitis and when FRL is small (< 50%). Preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) is used when FRL volume is less than 40% and optionally includes the left portal vein branches to segment 4. Associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) as alternative to PVE is not recommended in PHC. N2 positive lymph nodes preclude long-term survival. The benefit of unconditional en bloc resection of the portal vein bifurcation is uncertain. Along these lines, an aggressive surgical approach encompassing extended liver resection including segment 1, regional lymphadenectomy and conditional portal venous resection translates into favorable long-term survival.

Endoscopic Biliary Drainage Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Biliary Drainage in Patients with Resectable Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA) is a rare tumor, usually associated with obstructive jaundice and unfavorable prognosis. Obstructive jaundice can affect the liver, kidney, heart, and the immune system of the patients. Currently, controversy exists in whether preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is of any benefit to the patients, and the best way for PBD in patients with resectable HCCA of malignant biliary obstruction remains to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) treatment with those of percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) treatment in patients with malignant biliary obstruction caused by resectable HCCA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CBM (China Biological Medicine Database), and CNKI were employed to identify the clinic trials on EBD versus PTBD for malignant biliary obstruction associated with resectable HCCA from January 2008 to October 2017. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out.

RESULTS

Six trials were identified and included in this study. Overall, the differences in technical success rate, R0 resection, incidence of total complication after resection, postoperative hospitalization time, resection time, and recurrence were not statistically significant between the EBD group and PTBD group (all P > .05). However, the incidence of total complications after EBD treatment is higher than that after PTBD treatment (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

For patients with obstructive jaundice associated with HCCA, current evidence indicate no superiority of PTBD over EBD regarding clinical feasibility and success rate, but data suggest a better clinical safety of PTBD compared with EBD in short-term postoperation. In long-term evaluation, the differences in clinical outcomes are not statistically significant between PTBD and EBD.

Diagnosis and Management of Intrahepatic and Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

Cholangiocarcinomas (CC) are rare tumors which usually present late and are often difficult to diagnose and treat. CCs are categorized as intrahepatic, hilar, or extrahepatic. Epidemiologic studies suggest that the incidence of intrahepatic CCs may be increasing worldwide. In this chapter, we review the risk factors, clinical presentation, and management of cholangiocarcinoma.

ENBD is Associated with Decreased Tumor Dissemination Compared to PTBD in Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Little is known regarding the risk of tumor dissemination when percutaneous biliary drainage is used before surgical resection of perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). We aimed to compare the incidence of tumor dissemination after preoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) with that after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) for PHC.

METHODS

Data from 208 consecutive patients who underwent PHC resection between 2000 and 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. The influence of drainage type on incidence of tumor dissemination was examined. Seventy-six patients underwent ENBD (37%), 87 underwent PTBD (42%), and 45 underwent surgery without preoperative biliary drainage (WD, 22%).

RESULTS

The respective 2- and 5-year estimated cumulative incidences of tumor dissemination in the ENBD group (11.8/14.6%) were lower than in the PTBD group (28.8/35.9%, p = 0.003) and equivalent to that in the WD group (11.2/15.9%, p = NS). PTBD (hazard ratio [HR] vs. ENBD, 2.80) was an independent risk factor for postoperative tumor dissemination in the multivariate analysis. The 2- and 5-year disease-specific survival rates were higher in the ENBD group (67.6/47.3%) than in the PTBD group (56.6/27.8%, p = 0.032) and equivalent to that in the WD group (64.9/53.8%, p = NS). However, drainage type was not an independent risk factor in multivariate analysis of disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

For patients with PHC, the associated risk of postoperative tumor dissemination in the ENBD group was lower than in the PTBD group and equivalent to that in the WD group. Thus, ENBD is the ideal procedure for preoperative biliary drainage.

Verification of the oncologic inferiority of percutaneous biliary drainage to endoscopic drainage: A propensity score matching analysis of resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage is an established biliary drainage method but is associated with a potential risk of seeding metastasis. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate whether percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage really increases seeding metastasis and worsens the postoperative survival in patients with resectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma after percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage or endoscopic biliary drainage were retrospectively reviewed. Seeding metastasis was defined as peritoneal/pleural dissemination and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage sinus tract recurrence. Univariate and multivariate analyses followed by propensity score matching were performed to adjust the data for the baseline characteristics of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and endoscopic biliary drainage patients.

RESULTS

Of 320 resected patients, 168 underwent percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and the remaining 152 received endoscopic biliary drainage before operation. The survival of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage patients was significantly lower than that of the endoscopic biliary drainage patients (37.0% vs 44.3% at 5 years, P = .019). Multivariate analyses showed that percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage was an independent predictor of poor survival (P = .011) and a risk factor for seeding metastasis (P = .005). After propensity score matching (71 patients in each group), the survival of the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage patients was significantly worse than that of the endoscopic biliary drainage patients (P = .018). The estimated cumulative recurrence rate of seeding metastasis was significantly higher in the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage patients than in the endoscopic biliary drainage patients (P = .005), while the recurrence rates at other sites were similar between the 2 groups (P = .413).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage increases the incidence of seeding metastasis and shortens the postoperative survival in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Endoscopic biliary drainage is recommended as the optimal method for preoperative biliary drainage.