Georgios Antonios Margonis1, Mario Samaha1, Yuhree Kim1, Lauren McLendon Postlewait2, Pamela Kunz3, Shishir Maithel2, Thuy Tran3, Nickolas Berger4, T Clark Gamblin4, Matthew G Mullen5, Todd W Bauer5, Timothy M Pawlik6. 1. Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Blalock 688, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA. 6. Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Blalock 688, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. tpawlik1@jhmi.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare neoplasms with poorly defined management. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing resection of duodenal NETs. METHODS: Using a multi-institutional database, 146 patients who underwent resection for duodenal NETs between 1993 and 2015 were identified. Data on clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Local surgical resection (LR) was performed in 57 (39.0 %) patients, while 50 (34.3 %) patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and 39 (26.7 %) patients an endoscopic resection (ER). Factors associated with worse RFS included advanced tumor grade and metastasis at diagnosis (both P < 0.05) but not procedure type (P > 0.05). Among patients who had at least one lymph node examined (n = 85), 50 (58.8 %) had a metastatic lymph node; lymph node metastasis (P = 0.04) and advanced tumor grade (P = 0.04) were more common among patients with tumors >1.5 cm. Median length-of-stay was longer for PD versus LR (P < 0.001). PD patients were at increased risk for severe postoperative complications (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Recurrence of duodenal NETs was dependent on tumor biology rather than procedure type. PD was associated with a longer hospital stay and higher risk of perioperative complications. For patients with tumors ≤1.5 cm, LR or ER may be appropriate with PD reserved for larger lesions and those not amenable to a more local approach.
INTRODUCTION:Duodenal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare neoplasms with poorly defined management. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing resection of duodenal NETs. METHODS: Using a multi-institutional database, 146 patients who underwent resection for duodenal NETs between 1993 and 2015 were identified. Data on clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Local surgical resection (LR) was performed in 57 (39.0 %) patients, while 50 (34.3 %) patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and 39 (26.7 %) patients an endoscopic resection (ER). Factors associated with worse RFS included advanced tumor grade and metastasis at diagnosis (both P < 0.05) but not procedure type (P > 0.05). Among patients who had at least one lymph node examined (n = 85), 50 (58.8 %) had a metastatic lymph node; lymph node metastasis (P = 0.04) and advanced tumor grade (P = 0.04) were more common among patients with tumors >1.5 cm. Median length-of-stay was longer for PD versus LR (P < 0.001). PDpatients were at increased risk for severe postoperative complications (P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Recurrence of duodenal NETs was dependent on tumor biology rather than procedure type. PD was associated with a longer hospital stay and higher risk of perioperative complications. For patients with tumors ≤1.5 cm, LR or ER may be appropriate with PD reserved for larger lesions and those not amenable to a more local approach.
Authors: John T Mullen; Huamin Wang; James C Yao; Jeffrey H Lee; Nancy D Perrier; Peter W T Pisters; Jeffrey E Lee; Douglas B Evans Journal: Surgery Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: James C Yao; Manal Hassan; Alexandria Phan; Cecile Dagohoy; Colleen Leary; Jeannette E Mares; Eddie K Abdalla; Jason B Fleming; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Asif Rashid; Douglas B Evans Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Catherine G Tran; Scott K Sherman; Mohammed O Suraju; Apoorve Nayyar; Henning Gerke; Rami G El Abiad; Chandrikha Chandrasekharan; Po Hien Ear; Thomas M O'Dorisio; Joseph S Dillon; Andrew M Bellizzi; James R Howe Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Epameinondas Dogeas; John L Cameron; Cristopher L Wolfgang; Kenzo Hirose; Ralph H Hruban; Martin A Makary; Timothy A Pawlik; Michael A Choti Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-05-17 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Bobby V M Dasari; Sarah Al-Shakhshir; Timothy M Pawlik; Tahir Shah; Ravi Marudanayagam; Robert P Sutcliffe; Darius F Mirza; Paolo Muiesan; Keith J Roberts; John Isaac Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-06-04 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Adriana C Gamboa; Yuan Liu; Rachel M Lee; Mohammad Y Zaidi; Charles A Staley; David A Kooby; Joshua H Winer; Mihir M Shah; Maria C Russell; Kenneth Cardona; Shishir K Maithel Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.454