INTRODUCTION: Aggressive management of hepatic neuroendocrine (NE) metastases improves symptoms and prolongs survival. Because of the rarity of these tumors, however, the best method for hepatic artery embolization has not been established. We hypothesized that in patients with hepatic NE metastases, hepatic artery chemoembolization (HACE) would result in better symptom improvement and survival compared to bland embolization (HAE). METHODS: Retrospective review identified all patients with NE hepatic metastases managed by HACE or HAE at three institutions from January 1996 through December 2007. RESULTS: We identified 100 patients managed by HACE (n = 49) or HAE (n = 51) that were similar with respect to age, gender, and primary tumor type. The percentage of patients experiencing morbidity, 30-day mortality, and symptom improvement were similar between the two groups (HACE vs. HAE: 2.4% vs. 6.6%; 0.8% vs. 1.8%; and 88% vs. 83%, respectively.) No differences in the median overall survival were observed between HACE and HAE from the time of the first embolization procedure (25.5 vs. 25.7 months, p = 0.79). Multivariate analysis revealed that resection of the primary tumor predicted survival (73.8 vs. 19.4 months, p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that morbidity, mortality, symptom improvement, and overall survival are similar in patients with hepatic neuroendocrine metastases managed by chemo- or bland hepatic artery embolization.
INTRODUCTION: Aggressive management of hepatic neuroendocrine (NE) metastases improves symptoms and prolongs survival. Because of the rarity of these tumors, however, the best method for hepatic artery embolization has not been established. We hypothesized that in patients with hepatic NE metastases, hepatic artery chemoembolization (HACE) would result in better symptom improvement and survival compared to bland embolization (HAE). METHODS: Retrospective review identified all patients with NE hepatic metastases managed by HACE or HAE at three institutions from January 1996 through December 2007. RESULTS: We identified 100 patients managed by HACE (n = 49) or HAE (n = 51) that were similar with respect to age, gender, and primary tumor type. The percentage of patients experiencing morbidity, 30-day mortality, and symptom improvement were similar between the two groups (HACE vs. HAE: 2.4% vs. 6.6%; 0.8% vs. 1.8%; and 88% vs. 83%, respectively.) No differences in the median overall survival were observed between HACE and HAE from the time of the first embolization procedure (25.5 vs. 25.7 months, p = 0.79). Multivariate analysis revealed that resection of the primary tumor predicted survival (73.8 vs. 19.4 months, p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that morbidity, mortality, symptom improvement, and overall survival are similar in patients with hepatic neuroendocrine metastases managed by chemo- or bland hepatic artery embolization.
Authors: D Granberg; L-G Eriksson; S Welin; H Kindmark; E T Janson; B Skogseid; K Oberg; B Eriksson; R Nyman Journal: Acta Radiol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Emilio Bajetta; Laura Catena; Giuseppe Procopio; Sara De Dosso; Ettore Bichisao; Leonardo Ferrari; Antonia Martinetti; Marco Platania; Elena Verzoni; Barbara Formisano; Roberto Bajetta Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2006-08-26 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: M P Ducreux; V Boige; S Leboulleux; D Malka; P Kergoat; C Dromain; D Elias; T de Baere; J C Sabourin; P Duvillard; P Lasser; M Schlumberger; E Baudin Journal: Oncology Date: 2006-04-26 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Sandeepa Musunuru; Herbert Chen; Sharad Rajpal; Nicholas Stephani; John C McDermott; Kyle Holen; Layton F Rikkers; Sharon M Weber Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2006-10
Authors: John G Touzios; James M Kiely; Susan C Pitt; William S Rilling; Edward J Quebbeman; Stuart D Wilson; Henry A Pitt Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Dana A Osborne; Emmanuel E Zervos; Jonathan Strosberg; Jonathon Strosberg; Brian A Boe; Mokenge Malafa; Alexander S Rosemurgy; Timothy J Yeatman; Larry Carey; Lisa Duhaine; Larry K Kvols Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-02-28 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Alexander S Ho; Joel Picus; Michael D Darcy; Benjamin Tan; Jennifer E Gould; Thomas K Pilgram; Daniel B Brown Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Alexander T Ruutiainen; Michael C Soulen; Catherine M Tuite; Timothy W I Clark; Jeffrey I Mondschein; S William Stavropoulos; Scott O Trerotola Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Alexander N Shoushtari; Anne M Covey; Ghazi Zaatari; Ali Shamseddine; Andrew S Epstein; Ali Haydar; Mohamed Naghy; Deborah Mukherji; David P Kelsen; Ghassan K Abou-Alfa; Eileen M O'Reilly Journal: Gastrointest Cancer Res Date: 2014-01
Authors: Jonathan R Strosberg; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Andrew M Bellizzi; Jennifer A Chan; Joseph S Dillon; Anthony P Heaney; Pamela L Kunz; Thomas M O'Dorisio; Riad Salem; Eva Segelov; James R Howe; Rodney F Pommier; Kari Brendtro; Mohammad A Bashir; Simron Singh; Michael C Soulen; Laura Tang; Jerome S Zacks; James C Yao; Emily K Bergsland Journal: Pancreas Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 3.327
Authors: Sarah Wulfert; Clemens Kratochwil; Peter L Choyke; Ali Afshar-Oromieh; Walter Mier; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Jens-Peter Schenk; Uwe Haberkorn; Frederik L Giesel Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: S Grozinsky-Glasberg; G Kaltsas; M Kaltsatou; N Lev-Cohain; A Klimov; V Vergadis; I Uri; A I Bloom; D J Gross Journal: Endocrine Date: 2018-01-30 Impact factor: 3.633