Anfeng Si1,2, Jun Li1, Zhishi Yang1, Yong Xia1,3, Tian Yang1, Zhengqing Lei1, Zhangjun Cheng1,4, Timothy M Pawlik5, Wan Yee Lau1,6, Feng Shen7. 1. Department of Hepatic Surgery IV, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Surgical Oncology, Jinling Hospital, School of Medicine, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China. 3. Department of Clinical Database, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China. 4. Department of General Surgery, Affiliated Zhongda Hospital, Southeast University, Nanjing, China. 5. Department of Surgery, Wexner Medical Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. 6. Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong. 7. Department of Hepatic Surgery IV, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, China. shenfengehbh@sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) on the survival outcomes in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on 702 consecutive patients who underwent either AR (n = 319) or NAR (n = 383) for ICC were reviewed. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) following AR versus NAR was compared using propensity score matching (PSM). Subgroups of patients who benefited from AR versus NAR were examined after being stratified by the 8th TNM staging of ICC. RESULTS: AR and NAR had similar complication rates (26.6% vs. 25.1%, p = 0.634). AR was associated with better 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS and OS rates compared with NAR after PSM (58.1%, 35.7% and 28.1% vs. 44.1%, 23.9% and 18.0%; 72.9%, 45.7% and 36.0% vs. 62.0%, 30.8% and 25.3%; both p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, NAR was associated with worse DFS and OS than AR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.461 and 1.488; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.184-1.804 and 1.189-1.863, respectively]. Stratified analysis demonstrated similar outcomes following AR versus NAR for ICC at stages IA, II with vascular invasion, and III with visceral peritoneum perforation, local extrahepatic invasion and nodal metastasis, while NAR was associated with worse DFS and OS versus AR for stages IB (HR 1.897 and 2.321; 95% CI 1.179-3.052 and 1.376-3.914, respectively) or II ICC without vascular invasion (2.071 and 2.077; 95% CI 1.239-3.462 and 1.205-3.579, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: AR was associated with better survival outcomes compared with NAR in ICC patients with stage IB or II tumors without vascular invasion.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the impact of anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) on the survival outcomes in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on 702 consecutive patients who underwent either AR (n = 319) or NAR (n = 383) for ICC were reviewed. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) following AR versus NAR was compared using propensity score matching (PSM). Subgroups of patients who benefited from AR versus NAR were examined after being stratified by the 8th TNM staging of ICC. RESULTS:AR and NAR had similar complication rates (26.6% vs. 25.1%, p = 0.634). AR was associated with better 1-, 3-, and 5-year DFS and OS rates compared with NAR after PSM (58.1%, 35.7% and 28.1% vs. 44.1%, 23.9% and 18.0%; 72.9%, 45.7% and 36.0% vs. 62.0%, 30.8% and 25.3%; both p = 0.002). On multivariate analysis, NAR was associated with worse DFS and OS than AR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.461 and 1.488; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.184-1.804 and 1.189-1.863, respectively]. Stratified analysis demonstrated similar outcomes following AR versus NAR for ICC at stages IA, II with vascular invasion, and III with visceral peritoneum perforation, local extrahepatic invasion and nodal metastasis, while NAR was associated with worse DFS and OS versus AR for stages IB (HR 1.897 and 2.321; 95% CI 1.179-3.052 and 1.376-3.914, respectively) or II ICC without vascular invasion (2.071 and 2.077; 95% CI 1.239-3.462 and 1.205-3.579, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:AR was associated with better survival outcomes compared with NAR in ICC patients with stage IB or II tumors without vascular invasion.
Authors: T Peter Kingham; Victoria G Aveson; Alice C Wei; Jason A Castellanos; Peter J Allen; Daniel P Nussbaum; Yinin Hu; Michael I D'Angelica Journal: Curr Probl Surg Date: 2020-06-30 Impact factor: 1.909