Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 43, Issue 4, pp 1094–1104 | Cite as

Our Rationale of Initiating Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma: A Proposal of Criteria for “Borderline Resectable” in the Field of Surgery for Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma

  • Ryusei MatsuyamaEmail author
  • Daisuke Morioka
  • Ryutaro Mori
  • Yasuhiro Yabushita
  • Seigo Hiratani
  • Yohei Ota
  • Takafumi Kumamoto
  • Itaru Endo
Original Scientific Report
  • 142 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The concept of “borderline resectable” was recently introduced to the field of surgery for pancreatic cancer, and surgical outcomes for this disease with extremely dismal prognosis have improved since the introduction of this concept. However, no such concept has yet been introduced to the field of surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCca).

Aim

To determine a definition and criteria for “borderline resectable” in the field of surgery for HCca.

Patients and methods

Retrospective analysis of 88 patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for HCca at our institution between May 1992 and December 2008 to clarify independent prognostic factors.

Results

Survival outcomes were obtained for these 88 patients, with a 5-year overall survival rate of 31.8%. Independent factors predictive of cancer death were determined by multivariate analysis to be the presence of regional lymph node metastasis (LNM) and pathological confirmed vascular invasion (VI). Cumulative survival rates of 23 patients with both LNM and VI who underwent surgery were significantly worse than those of the remaining 65 surgically treated patients and similar to those of 26 patients who were considered to have unresectable disease and treated with non-surgical multidisciplinary treatment during the same study period.

Conclusion

Outcomes of surgery for cases of HCca showing regional LNM and VI were no better than those of non-surgical treatment for unresectable disease. Coexistence of these two factors indicates oncologically dismal condition and thus such cases should be considered “borderline resectable.” Treatments additional to surgery are required for “borderline resectable” cases to obtain better outcomes.

References

  1. 1.
    Ito F, Cho CS, Rikkers LF et al (2009) Hilar cholangiocarcinoma: current management. Ann Surg 250:210–218CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nagino M (2012) Perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a surgeon’s viewpoint on current topics. J Gastroenterol 47:1165–1176CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Poruk KE, Pawlik TM, Weiss MJ (2015) Perioperative management of Hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 19:1889–1899CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Verbeek PC, van Leeuwen DJ, de Wit LT et al (1992) Benign fibrosing disease at the hepatic confluence mimicking Klatskin tumors. Surgery 112:866–871PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baer HU, Stain SC, Dennison AR et al (1993) Improvements in survival by aggressive resections of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg 217:20–27CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Miyazaki M, Kato A, Ito H et al (2007) Combined vascular resection in operative resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: does it works or not? Surgery 141:581–588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hemming AW, Makeel K, Khanna A et al (2011) Portal vein resection in management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 212:604–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Neuhaus P, Thelen A, Jonas S et al (2012) Oncological superiority of hilar en bloc resection for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 19:1602–1608CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Jong MC, Marques H, Clary BM et al (2012) The impact of portal vein resection on outcomes for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a multi-institutional analysis of 305 cases. Cancer 118:4737–4747CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tamoto E, Hirano S, Tsuchikawa T et al (2014) Portal vein resection using the no-touch technique with a hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. HPB (Oxford) 16:56–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wu XS, Dong P, Gu J et al (2013) Combined portal vein resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a metaanalysis of comparative studies. J Gastrointes Surg 17:1107–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abbas S, Sandroussi C (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of vascular resection in the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma. HPB (Oxford) 15:492–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen W, Ke K, Chen YL (2014) Combined portal vein resection in the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 40:489–495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Igami T, Nishio T, Ebata T et al (2010) Surgical treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma in the “new era”: the Nagoya experience. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 17:449–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miyazaki M, Kimura F, Shimizu H et al (2010) One hundred seven consecutive surgical resections for hilar cholangiocarcinoma of Bismuth types II, III, IV between 2001 and 2008. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 17:470–475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nuzzo G, Giuliante F, Ardito F et al (2012) Improvements in perioperative and long-term outcome after surgical treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma: results of an Italian multicenter analysis of 440 patients. Arch Surg 147:26–34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Matsuo K, Rocha FG, Ito K et al (2012) The Blumgart preoperative staging system for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: analysis of resectability and outcomes in 380 patients. J Am Coll Surg 215:343–355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ratti F, Cipriani F, Piozzi G et al (2015) Comparative analysis of left- versus right-sided resection in Klatskin tumor surgery: can lesion side be considered a prognostic factor? J Gastrointest Surg 19:1324–1333CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katz MH, Pisters PW, Evans DB et al (2008) Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: the importance of this emerging stage of disease. J Am Coll Surg 206:833–846CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ferrone CR, Marchegiani G, Hong TS et al (2015) Radiological and surgical implications of neoadjuvant treatment with FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 261:12–17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khushman M, Dempsey N, Cudris Maldonado J et al (2015) Full dose neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX is associated with prolonged survival in patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Pancreatology 15:667–673CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guideline for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/pancreatic.pdf
  23. 23.
    Choi ER, Chung YH, Lee JK et al (2011) Preoperative evaluation of the longitudinal extent of borderline resectable hilar cholangiocarcinoma by intraductal ultrasonography. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 26:1803–1810.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06804.x Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wakai T, Shirai Y, Moroda T et al (2015) Impact of ductal resection margin status on long-term survival in patients undergoing resection for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Cancer 103:1210–1216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Koo TR, Eom KY, Kim IA et al (2014) Patterns of failure and prognostic factors in resected extrahepatic bile duct cancer: implication for adjuvant radiotherapy. Raidat Oncol J 32:63–69.  https://doi.org/10.3857/roj.2014.32.2.63 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Im JH, Seong J, Lee J et al (2014) Postoperative radiotherapy dose correlates with locoregional control in patients with extra-hepatic bile duct cancer. Radiat Oncol J 32:7–13.  https://doi.org/10.3857/roj.2014.32.1.7 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bismuth H, Corlette MBm (1975) Intrahepatic cholangioenteric anastomosis in carcinoma of the hilus of the liver. Surg Gynecol Obstet 140:170–178PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    International Union Against Cancer (UICC) (2009) TNM classification of malignant tumors, 7th edn. Wiley-Liss, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Neuhaus P, Jonas S, Bechstein WO et al (1999) Extended resections for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg 230:808–818CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nimura Y, Kamiya J, Kondo S et al (2000) Aggressive preoperative management and extended surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma: Nagoya experience. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 7:155–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rea DJ, Munoz-Juarez M, Farnell MB et al (2004) Major hepatic resection for hilar choangiocarcinoma: analysis of 46 patients. Arch Surg 139:514–523CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Witzigmann H, Berr F, Ringel U et al (2006) Surgical and palliative management and outcome in 184 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma: palliative photodynamic therapy is comparable to r1/r2 resection. Ann Surg 244:230–239CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Baton O, Azoulay D, Adam DV et al (2007) Major hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma type 3 and 4: prognostic factors and long-term outcomes. J Am Coll Surg 204:250–260CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gomez D, Patel PB, Lacasia-Purroy C et al (2014) Impact of specialized multi-disciplinary approach and an integrated pathway on outcomes in hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 40:77–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Furusawa N, Kobayashi A, Yokoyama T et al (2014) Surgical treatment of 144 cases of hilar cholangiocarcinoma without liver-related mortality. World J Surg 38:1164–1176.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2394-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hosokawa I, Shimizu H, Yoshidome H et al (2014) Surgical strategy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma of the left-side predominance: current role of left trisectionectomy. Ann Surg 259:1178–1185CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Murakami Y, Uemura K, Sudo T et al (2009) Gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival after aggressive surgery for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 13:1470–1479.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-009-0900-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Murakami Y, Uemura K, Sudo T et al (2009) Adjuvant gemcitabine plus S-1 chemotherapy improves survival after aggressive surgical resection for advanced biliary carcinoma. Ann Surg 250:950–956.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b0fc8b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fujiwara Y, Kobayashi S, Nagano H et al (2015) Pharmacokinetic study of adjuvant gemcitabine therapy for biliary tract cancer following major hepatectomy (KHB01101). PLoS ONE 10:e0143072.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143072 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Endo I, Shimada H, Sugita M et al (2007) Role of three-dimensional imaging in operative planning for hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Surgery 142:666–675CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hu JH, Tang JH, Lin CH et al (2018) Preoperative staging of cholangiocarcinoma and biliary carcinoma using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: a meta-analysis. J Investig Med 66:52–61.  https://doi.org/10.1136/jim-2017-000472 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ma KW, Cheung TT, She WH et al (2018) Diagnostic and prognostic role of 18-FDG PET/CT in the management of resectable biliary tract cancer. World J Surg 42:823–834.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-017-4192-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Morine Y, Shimada M, Imura S et al (2015) Detection of lymph node metastasis in biliary carcinomas: morphological criteria by MDCT and the clinical impact of DWI-MRI. Hepatogastroenterology 62:777–781PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Holzapfel K, Gaa J, Schubert EC et al (2016) Value of diffusion-weighed MR imaging in the diagnosis of lymph node metastases in patients with cholangiocarcinoma. Abdom Radiol (NY) 41:1937–1941.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-016-0791-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Yamashita S, Passot G, Aloia TA et al (2017) Prognostic value of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 in patients undergoing resection of biliary tract cancer. Br J Surg 104:267–277.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10415 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Matsuyama R, Morioka D, Mori R et al (2018) Single-institution experience with gemcitabine-cisplatin combination therapy as a second-line treatment for patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer after failure of gemcitabine-S-1 combination therapy: a prospective feasibility study. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 81:949–955.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-018-3566-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryusei Matsuyama
    • 1
    Email author
  • Daisuke Morioka
    • 1
  • Ryutaro Mori
    • 1
  • Yasuhiro Yabushita
    • 1
  • Seigo Hiratani
    • 1
  • Yohei Ota
    • 1
  • Takafumi Kumamoto
    • 1
  • Itaru Endo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryYokohama City University Graduate School of MedicineYokohamaJapan

Personalised recommendations