Cargando…

Long-term outcomes of surgical resection for T1b gallbladder cancer: an institutional evaluation

BACKGROUND: There is no comprehensive agreement concerning the overall performance of radical resection for T1b gallbladder cancer (GBC). This research focused on addressing whether T1b GBC may spread loco-regionally and whether radical resection is necessary. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yuza, Kizuki, Sakata, Jun, Prasoon, Pankaj, Hirose, Yuki, Ohashi, Taku, Toge, Koji, Miura, Kohei, Nagahashi, Masayuki, Kobayashi, Takashi, Wakai, Toshifumi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6945689/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31907021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-019-6507-2
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: There is no comprehensive agreement concerning the overall performance of radical resection for T1b gallbladder cancer (GBC). This research focused on addressing whether T1b GBC may spread loco-regionally and whether radical resection is necessary. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 1032 patients with GBC who underwent surgical resection at our centre and its affiliated institutions between January 1982 and December 2018. A total of 47 patients with T1b GBC, 29 (62%) of whom underwent simple cholecystectomy and 18 (38%) of whom underwent radical resection with regional lymph node dissection, were enrolled in the study. RESULTS: GBC was diagnosed pre-operatively in 16 patients (34%), whereas 31 patients (66%) had incidental GBC. There was no blood venous or perineural invasion in any patient on histology evaluation, except for lymphatic vessel invasion in a single patient. There were no metastases in any analysed lymph nodes. The open surgical approach was more prevalent among the 18 patients who underwent radical resection (open in all 18 patients) than among the 29 patients who underwent simple cholecystectomy (open in 21; laparoscopic in 8) (P = 0.017). The cumulative 10- and 20-year overall survival rates were 65 and 25%, respectively. The outcome following simple cholecystectomy (10-year overall survival rate of 66%) was akin to that following radical resection (64%, P = 0.618). The cumulative 10- and 20-year disease-specific survival rates were 93 and 93%, respectively. The outcome following simple cholecystectomy (10-year disease-specific survival rate of 100%) was equivalent to that following radical resection (that of 86%, P = 0.151). While age (> 70 years, hazard ratio 5.285, P = 0.003) and gender (female, hazard ratio 0.272, P = 0.007) had a strong effect on patient overall survival, surgical procedure (simple cholecystectomy vs. radical resection) and surgical approach (open vs. laparoscopic) did not. CONCLUSIONS: Most T1b GBCs represent local disease. As pre-operative diagnosis, including tumour penetration of T1b GBC, is difficult, the decision of radical resection is justified. Additional radical resection is not required following simple cholecystectomy provided that the penetration depth is restricted towards the muscular layer and that surgical margins are uninvolved.