| Literature DB >> 27062713 |
Hendrik T J Mantel1, Andrie C Westerkamp1, Egbert Sieders1, Paul M J G Peeters1, Koert P de Jong1, Marieke T Boer1, Ruben H de Kleine1, Annette S H Gouw2, Robert J Porte1.
Abstract
Frozen section analysis (FS) during cancer surgery is widely used to assess resection margins. However, in hilar cholangiocarcinoma (HCCA), FS may be less reliable because of the specific growth characteristics of the tumor. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy and consequences of intraoperative FS of the proximal bile duct margins in HCCA. Between 1990 and 2014, 67 patients underwent combined extrahepatic bile duct resection and partial liver resection for HCCA with the use of FS. Sensitivity and specificity of FS was 68% and 97%, respectively. Seventeen of 67 patients (25%) displayed a positive bile duct margin at FS. The false-negative rate was 16% (eight patients). Ten patients (15%) with a positive bile duct margin underwent an additional resection in an attempt to achieve negative margins, which succeeded in three patients (4%). However, only one of these three patients did not have concomitant lymph node metastases, which are associated with a poor prognosis by itself. The use of FS of the proximal bile duct is of limited clinical value because of the relatively low sensitivity, high risk of false-negative results, and the low rate of secondary obtained tumor-free resection margins. Supported by the literature, a new approach to the use of FS in HCCA should be adopted, reserving the technique only for cases in which a substantial additional resection is possible.Entities:
Keywords: Frozen section analysis; Klatskin tumor; hilar cholangiocarcinoma; prognosis
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27062713 PMCID: PMC4944862 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.693
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Med ISSN: 2045-7634 Impact factor: 4.452
Demographics, surgical characteristics, and final pathological findings in 67 patients with resected hilar cholangiocarcinoma
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Mean age in years (±SD) | 61 (±8) |
| Gender | |
| Male | 40 (60%) |
| Female | 27 (40%) |
| Liver segments resected in combination with EHBD resection | |
| 1234 | 22 (32%) |
| 145678 | 12 (17%) |
| 45678 | 11 (16%) |
| 5678 | 8 (12%) |
| 234 | 5 (8%) |
| 4 | 4 (6%) |
| 15678 | 2 (3%) |
| 14 | 1 (2%) |
| 123 | 1 (2%) |
| 123458 | 1 (2%) |
| Additional pancreatoduodenectomy | 6 (9%) |
| Vascular reconstruction | |
| No | 52 (78%) |
| Yes | |
| Venous | 11 (16%) |
| Arterial | 2 (3%) |
| Arterial and venous | 2 (3%) |
| Mean estimated blood loss in mL (±SD) | 2200 (±1800) |
| Tumor stage | |
| IA | 2 (3%) |
| IB | 18 (27%) |
| IIA | 16 (24%) |
| IIB | 29 (43%) |
| III | 0 (0%) |
| IV | 2 (3%) |
EHBD, extrahepatic bile duct.
AJCC TNM staging system (6th edition, 2002).
Univariable analysis of postoperative survival in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma
| Variable | No. patients | % 5‐year survival |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | |||
| <60 | 23 (42%) | 28 | 0.55 |
| ≥60 | 32 (58%) | 35 | |
| Gender | |||
| Male | 33 (60%) | 37 | 0.49 |
| Female | 22 (40%) | 24 | |
| Type of hepatectomy | |||
| Left | 29 (53%) | 38 | 0.39 |
| Right | 26 (47%) | 24 | |
| pT stage | |||
| T1 | 2 (4%) | 100 | 0.21 |
| T2 | 29 (53%) | 44 | |
| T3 | 24 (43%) | 13 | |
| Perineural invasion | |||
| Negative | 9 (19%) | 33 | 0.91 |
| Positive | 39 (81%) | 35 | |
| Lymph node metastases | |||
| Negative | 31 (56%) | 44 | 0.009 |
| Positive | 24 (44%) | 17 | |
| Final resection status | |||
| R0 | 30 (55%) | 39 | 0.054 |
| R1 | 25 (45%) | 22 | |
Twelve patients with 90‐day mortality were excluded from the analysis.
According to the sixth edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual.
Accuracy calculation of frozen section analysis of the proximal bile duct margin during surgical resection of hilar cholangiocarcinomaa
| Positive resection margin at final pathology | Negative resection margin at final pathology | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive result intraoperative frozen section analysis | 17 | 2 | 19 |
| Negative result intraoperative frozen section analysis | 8 | 63 | 71 |
| 25 | 65 | 90 | |
| Sensitivity | 68% | ||
| Specificity | 97% | ||
| Positive likelihood ratio | 22 | ||
| Positive predictive value | 89% | ||
| Negative predictive value | 89% |
In some patients more than one proximal bile duct was examined by frozen section analysis.
Figure 1Flow diagram elucidating proximal bile duct margin status at intraoperative and final pathology, additional proximal bile duct resections, other margins’ positivity, final pathology, and defintive lymph node status.
Figure 2Cumulative probability of reccurence after resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma according to final resection status (R0 vs. R1). Patients with in‐hospital mortality were excluded from the analysis. P = 0.15 (log‐rank test).
Overview of the literature
| Author | n | Sensitivity | Number of patients in which a secondary R0 resection was obtained | Survival benefit of secondary R0 resections compared to R1 resection? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Okazaki et al., 2002 | 23 | 75% | 0 (0%) | – |
| Endo et al., 2008 | 101 | NR | 9 (9%) | no |
| Shingu et al., 2009 | 138 | NR | 8 (6%) | no |
| Ribero et al., 2011 | 67 | NR | 13 (19%) | yes |
| Lee et al., 2012 | 162 | NR | 7 (4%) | no |
| Present study | 67 | 68% | 3 (4%) | – |
NR: not reported.