Giovanni Guarneri1,2, Louis de Mestier3, Luca Landoni4, Stefano Partelli5, Sébastien Gaujoux6, Valentina Andreasi5, Chiara Nessi4, Safi Dokmak7, Michele Fontana4, Bertrand Dousset6, Philippe Ruszniewski3, Claudio Bassi4, Massimo Falconi5, Alain Sauvanet7. 1. Department of Hepato-Bilio-Pancreatic Surgery, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, APHP, Clichy, France, guarneri.giovanni@hsr.it. 2. Pancreatic Surgery Unit, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Centre, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy, guarneri.giovanni@hsr.it. 3. Department of Gastroenterology and Pancreatology, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, APHP, Clichy, France. 4. General and Pancreatic Surgery, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. 5. Pancreatic Surgery Unit, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Centre, San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy. 6. Department of Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, Cochin Hospital, APHP, Paris, France. 7. Department of Hepato-Bilio-Pancreatic Surgery, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, APHP, Clichy, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The most appropriate nodal staging system for non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-PanNETs) remains unclear. Despite some evidence is available for pancreaticoduodenectomy, the adequate nodal staging is still unknown for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the number of positive lymph nodes (PLNs) after DP for NF-PanNETs and to define the minimal number of lymph nodes to be harvested for an appropriate nodal staging. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from patients who underwent DP with curative intent (R0-R1) for sporadic well-differentiated NF-PanNETs in 4 European high-volume centres. NF-PanNETs with nodal involvement (N+) were subclassified into N1 (1-3 PLNs) and N2 (4 or more PLNs). Univariate and multivariate analyses of disease-free survival (DFS) were performed. RESULTS: Of 271 patients in the study, 62 (23%) had nodal involvement (N+). A higher probability of N+ was associated with the following factors: grading, resection margin status, perineural and microvascular invasion, and the number of examined lymph nodes. Three-year DFS rate for N0, N1, and N2 patients was 92, 72, and 50%, respectively (p < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, independent predictors of DFS were grading, T stage, presence of necrosis, and nodal status. For patients with ≥12 examined/resected lymph nodes, the N status remained a significant predictor of disease recurrence (p < 0.001), while it failed to predict recurrence in patients with <12 lymph nodes examined/resected (p = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: A minimal number of 12 nodes should be harvested in case of DP for NF-PanNET for an appropriate nodal staging. The number of positive lymph nodes is an independent predictor of DFS after DP for NF-PanNET, and the N0/N1/N2 nodal classification seems to be more relevant than the current N0/N+ staging.
BACKGROUND: The most appropriate nodal staging system for non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-PanNETs) remains unclear. Despite some evidence is available for pancreaticoduodenectomy, the adequate nodal staging is still unknown for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of the number of positive lymph nodes (PLNs) after DP for NF-PanNETs and to define the minimal number of lymph nodes to be harvested for an appropriate nodal staging. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from patients who underwent DP with curative intent (R0-R1) for sporadic well-differentiated NF-PanNETs in 4 European high-volume centres. NF-PanNETs with nodal involvement (N+) were subclassified into N1 (1-3 PLNs) and N2 (4 or more PLNs). Univariate and multivariate analyses of disease-free survival (DFS) were performed. RESULTS: Of 271 patients in the study, 62 (23%) had nodal involvement (N+). A higher probability of N+ was associated with the following factors: grading, resection margin status, perineural and microvascular invasion, and the number of examined lymph nodes. Three-year DFS rate for N0, N1, and N2 patients was 92, 72, and 50%, respectively (p < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, independent predictors of DFS were grading, T stage, presence of necrosis, and nodal status. For patients with ≥12 examined/resected lymph nodes, the N status remained a significant predictor of disease recurrence (p < 0.001), while it failed to predict recurrence in patients with <12 lymph nodes examined/resected (p = 0.116). CONCLUSIONS: A minimal number of 12 nodes should be harvested in case of DP for NF-PanNET for an appropriate nodal staging. The number of positive lymph nodes is an independent predictor of DFS after DP for NF-PanNET, and the N0/N1/N2 nodal classification seems to be more relevant than the current N0/N+ staging.