BACKGROUND: The optimum management of neuroendocrine liver metastases, particularly the role of liver transplantation is ill-defined. Current strategies are based on anecdotal reports and small retrospective studies, rather than prospective data. This, as well as the failure to standardize treatment, has probably contributed to the reported variations in outcome. DATA SOURCES: To formulate a putative management protocol and to reevaluate the role of liver transplantation in patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases, a review of the published literature (Medline search) was conducted. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated hepatic metastases should be resected when suitable. Chemoembolization of liver metastases should precede resection of bulky disease and be used to palliate those with unresectable disease. Radiofrequency ablation is suitable for smaller metastatic lesions (<3 cm diameter) in the liver. Systemic treatment with somatostatin analogues or radioactive metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) is appropriate to reduce symptoms and slow disease progression, but prospective data is required to define their exact roles as adjuvant and therapeutic agents. Although current systemic chemotherapy, applied in isolation, may have a role in patients in whom other therapies have failed, its efficacy remains unproven. Restriction of liver transplantation to the treatment of patients with carcinoid metastases with biologically favorable features, limited tumor bulk and without systemic disease may make transplantation a curative rather than a palliative treatment option in selected patients.
BACKGROUND: The optimum management of neuroendocrine liver metastases, particularly the role of liver transplantation is ill-defined. Current strategies are based on anecdotal reports and small retrospective studies, rather than prospective data. This, as well as the failure to standardize treatment, has probably contributed to the reported variations in outcome. DATA SOURCES: To formulate a putative management protocol and to reevaluate the role of liver transplantation in patients with neuroendocrine liver metastases, a review of the published literature (Medline search) was conducted. CONCLUSIONS: Isolated hepatic metastases should be resected when suitable. Chemoembolization of liver metastases should precede resection of bulky disease and be used to palliate those with unresectable disease. Radiofrequency ablation is suitable for smaller metastatic lesions (<3 cm diameter) in the liver. Systemic treatment with somatostatin analogues or radioactive metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) is appropriate to reduce symptoms and slow disease progression, but prospective data is required to define their exact roles as adjuvant and therapeutic agents. Although current systemic chemotherapy, applied in isolation, may have a role in patients in whom other therapies have failed, its efficacy remains unproven. Restriction of liver transplantation to the treatment of patients with carcinoid metastases with biologically favorable features, limited tumor bulk and without systemic disease may make transplantation a curative rather than a palliative treatment option in selected patients.
Authors: Miguel Angel Cañizares; Eva M García-Fontán; José Eduardo Rivo; Ana Gonzalez-Piñeiro Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Wojciech C Blonski; K Rajender Reddy; Abraham Shaked; Evan Siegelman; David C Metz Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2005-12-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Linda S Sher; David M Levi; Julie S Wecsler; Mary Lo; Lydia M Petrovic; Susan Groshen; Lingyun Ji; Teresa Diago Uso; A Joseph Tector; Ann S Hamilton; J Wallis Marsh; Myron E Schwartz Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Tobias S Schiergens; Juliane Lüning; Bernhard W Renz; Michael Thomas; Sebastian Pratschke; Hao Feng; Serene M L Lee; Jutta Engel; Markus Rentsch; Markus Guba; Jens Werner; Wolfgang E Thasler Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Samira M Sadowski; Vladimir Neychev; Corina Millo; Joanna Shih; Naris Nilubol; Peter Herscovitch; Karel Pacak; Stephen J Marx; Electron Kebebew Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-12-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ravi Marudanayagam; Bynvant Sandhu; M Thamara P R Perera; Phillipe Taniere; Chris Coldham; Simon Bramhall; David Mayer; John Buckels; Darius Mirza Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2011-03-02 Impact factor: 3.647