Ying Lv1, Pin Wang1, Jun Chen2, Li Zhao1, Lingyan Chen1, Yingjia Zhuang3, Lei Wang1, Xiaoping Zou4. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 2. Department of Pathology, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Clinical College of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 4. Department of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 13770771661@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The relationship between the pathological classification and recurrence of duodenal papillary adenomas (DPAs) has not been elucidated. We studied the clinicopathological characteristics of DPAs with different pathological types and conducted long-term follow-up to explore its prognosis and identify methods for appropriate clinical management of DPAs. METHODS: In total, 95 DPA cases confirmed by postoperative pathology were enrolled, of which 58 underwent endoscopic papillectomy (EP) and 37 underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). The cases were classified into three anatomical and two histomorphological types according to the histopathology and location of endoscopic features. We analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics of DPAs with different pathological types and investigated the factors associated with recurrence in the EP subgroup. RESULTS: Although EP was associated with fewer adverse events, the complete resection rate was significantly lower (72.4% vs. 100.0%, p < 0.001) and the recurrence rate significantly higher than with PD (16.3% vs. 0.0%, p < 0.001). Among eight EP cases with recurrence, six had intra-DPA (75%). A positive resection margin (HR 23.67, 95% CI 6.42-87.27; p < 0.001) and MUC2-negative status (HR 3.47, 95% CI 1.16-10.40; p = 0.026) were independent risk factors for recurrence after EP. CONCLUSION: We identified different pathological types within DPAs, which presented varying clinicopathological features. The majority of peri-DPAs and mixed-DPAs were of the intestinal type histologically and EP is the primary recommendation. However, intra-DPA was mainly of the pancreaticobiliary type, which tends to get positive resection margins; thus, surgical resection is more suitable.
OBJECTIVES: The relationship between the pathological classification and recurrence of duodenal papillary adenomas (DPAs) has not been elucidated. We studied the clinicopathological characteristics of DPAs with different pathological types and conducted long-term follow-up to explore its prognosis and identify methods for appropriate clinical management of DPAs. METHODS: In total, 95 DPA cases confirmed by postoperative pathology were enrolled, of which 58 underwent endoscopic papillectomy (EP) and 37 underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). The cases were classified into three anatomical and two histomorphological types according to the histopathology and location of endoscopic features. We analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics of DPAs with different pathological types and investigated the factors associated with recurrence in the EP subgroup. RESULTS: Although EP was associated with fewer adverse events, the complete resection rate was significantly lower (72.4% vs. 100.0%, p < 0.001) and the recurrence rate significantly higher than with PD (16.3% vs. 0.0%, p < 0.001). Among eight EP cases with recurrence, six had intra-DPA (75%). A positive resection margin (HR 23.67, 95% CI 6.42-87.27; p < 0.001) and MUC2-negative status (HR 3.47, 95% CI 1.16-10.40; p = 0.026) were independent risk factors for recurrence after EP. CONCLUSION: We identified different pathological types within DPAs, which presented varying clinicopathological features. The majority of peri-DPAs and mixed-DPAs were of the intestinal type histologically and EP is the primary recommendation. However, intra-DPA was mainly of the pancreaticobiliary type, which tends to get positive resection margins; thus, surgical resection is more suitable.
Authors: Wim Laleman; Annelies Verreth; Baki Topal; Raymond Aerts; Mina Komuta; Tania Roskams; Schalk Van der Merwe; David Cassiman; Frederik Nevens; Chris Verslype; Werner Van Steenbergen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-05-25 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Volkan Adsay; Nobuyuki Ohike; Takuma Tajiri; Grace E Kim; Alyssa Krasinskas; Serdar Balci; Pelin Bagci; Olca Basturk; Sudeshna Bandyopadhyay; Kee-Taek Jang; David A Kooby; Shishir K Maithel; Juan Sarmiento; Charles A Staley; Raul S Gonzalez; So Yeon Kong; Michael Goodman Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Chi-Liang Cheng; Stuart Sherman; Evan L Fogel; Lee McHenry; James L Watkins; Toyomi Fukushima; Thomas J Howard; Laura Lazzell-Pannell; Glen A Lehman Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Shayan Irani; Andrew Arai; Kamran Ayub; Thomas Biehl; John J Brandabur; Russell Dorer; Michael Gluck; Geoffrey Jiranek; David Patterson; Drew Schembre; L William Traverso; Richard A Kozarek Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2009-07-15 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: N Volkan Adsay; Kambiz Merati; Olca Basturk; Christine Iacobuzio-Donahue; Edi Levi; Jeanette D Cheng; Fazlul H Sarkar; Ralph H Hruban; David S Klimstra Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Marc F Catalano; Jeffrey D Linder; Amitabh Chak; Michael V Sivak; Isaac Raijman; Joseph E Geenen; Douglas A Howell Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 9.427