Cargando…
The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial
SIMPLE SUMMARY: There is no clear evidence on the most effective method of pathological analysis and clearance definition (0 vs. 1 mm) to define R1 resection after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). However, several studies showed that the R1 resection is a poor prognostic factor in patients that have unde...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8123600/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926138 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13092097 |
_version_ | 1783692955157004288 |
---|---|
author | Nappo, Gennaro Borzomati, Domenico Zerbi, Alessandro Spaggiari, Paola Boggi, Ugo Campani, Daniela Mrowiec, Sławomir Liszka, Łukasz Coppola, Alessandro Amato, Michela Petitti, Tommasangelo Vistoli, Fabio Montorsi, Marco Perrone, Giuseppe Coppola, Roberto Caputo, Damiano |
author_facet | Nappo, Gennaro Borzomati, Domenico Zerbi, Alessandro Spaggiari, Paola Boggi, Ugo Campani, Daniela Mrowiec, Sławomir Liszka, Łukasz Coppola, Alessandro Amato, Michela Petitti, Tommasangelo Vistoli, Fabio Montorsi, Marco Perrone, Giuseppe Coppola, Roberto Caputo, Damiano |
author_sort | Nappo, Gennaro |
collection | PubMed |
description | SIMPLE SUMMARY: There is no clear evidence on the most effective method of pathological analysis and clearance definition (0 vs. 1 mm) to define R1 resection after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). However, several studies showed that the R1 resection is a poor prognostic factor in patients that have undergone PDs for periampullary cancers. In this randomized clinical trial, specimens were randomized with two pathological methods, the Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) or the conventional method adopted before the study. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining R1 rate after PD but only when adopting the LEEP, the R1 resection represents a significant prognostic factor. ABSTRACT: Background: There is extreme heterogeneity in the available literature on the determination of R1 resection rate after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD); consequently, its prognostic role is still debated. The aims of this multicenter randomized study were to evaluate the effect of sampling and clearance definition in determining R1 rate after PD for periampullary cancer and to assess the prognostic role of R1 resection. Methods: PD specimens were randomized to Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) (group A) or the conventional method adopted before the study (group B). R1 rate was determined by adopting 0- and 1-mm clearance; the association between R1, local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS) was also evaluated. Results. One-hundred-sixty-eight PD specimens were included. With 0 mm clearance, R1 rate was 26.2% and 20.2% for groups A and B, respectively; with 1 mm, R1 rate was 60.7% and 57.1%, respectively (p > 0.05). Only in group A was R1 found to be a significant prognostic factor: at 0 mm, median OS was 36 and 20 months for R0 and R1, respectively, while at 1 mm, median OS was not reached and 30 months. At multivariate analysis, R1 resection was found to be a significant prognostic factor independent of clearance definition only in the case of the adoption of LEEPP. Conclusions. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining the R1 rate after PD. However, the pathological method is crucial to accurately evaluate its prognostic role: only R1 resections obtained with the adoption of LEEPP seem to significantly affect prognosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8123600 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81236002021-05-16 The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial Nappo, Gennaro Borzomati, Domenico Zerbi, Alessandro Spaggiari, Paola Boggi, Ugo Campani, Daniela Mrowiec, Sławomir Liszka, Łukasz Coppola, Alessandro Amato, Michela Petitti, Tommasangelo Vistoli, Fabio Montorsi, Marco Perrone, Giuseppe Coppola, Roberto Caputo, Damiano Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: There is no clear evidence on the most effective method of pathological analysis and clearance definition (0 vs. 1 mm) to define R1 resection after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). However, several studies showed that the R1 resection is a poor prognostic factor in patients that have undergone PDs for periampullary cancers. In this randomized clinical trial, specimens were randomized with two pathological methods, the Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) or the conventional method adopted before the study. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining R1 rate after PD but only when adopting the LEEP, the R1 resection represents a significant prognostic factor. ABSTRACT: Background: There is extreme heterogeneity in the available literature on the determination of R1 resection rate after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD); consequently, its prognostic role is still debated. The aims of this multicenter randomized study were to evaluate the effect of sampling and clearance definition in determining R1 rate after PD for periampullary cancer and to assess the prognostic role of R1 resection. Methods: PD specimens were randomized to Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) (group A) or the conventional method adopted before the study (group B). R1 rate was determined by adopting 0- and 1-mm clearance; the association between R1, local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS) was also evaluated. Results. One-hundred-sixty-eight PD specimens were included. With 0 mm clearance, R1 rate was 26.2% and 20.2% for groups A and B, respectively; with 1 mm, R1 rate was 60.7% and 57.1%, respectively (p > 0.05). Only in group A was R1 found to be a significant prognostic factor: at 0 mm, median OS was 36 and 20 months for R0 and R1, respectively, while at 1 mm, median OS was not reached and 30 months. At multivariate analysis, R1 resection was found to be a significant prognostic factor independent of clearance definition only in the case of the adoption of LEEPP. Conclusions. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining the R1 rate after PD. However, the pathological method is crucial to accurately evaluate its prognostic role: only R1 resections obtained with the adoption of LEEPP seem to significantly affect prognosis. MDPI 2021-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8123600/ /pubmed/33926138 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13092097 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Nappo, Gennaro Borzomati, Domenico Zerbi, Alessandro Spaggiari, Paola Boggi, Ugo Campani, Daniela Mrowiec, Sławomir Liszka, Łukasz Coppola, Alessandro Amato, Michela Petitti, Tommasangelo Vistoli, Fabio Montorsi, Marco Perrone, Giuseppe Coppola, Roberto Caputo, Damiano The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial |
title | The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial |
title_full | The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial |
title_fullStr | The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial |
title_short | The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial |
title_sort | role of pathological method and clearance definition for the evaluation of margin status after pancreatoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer. results of a multicenter prospective randomized trial |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8123600/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926138 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers13092097 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nappogennaro theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT borzomatidomenico theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT zerbialessandro theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT spaggiaripaola theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT boggiugo theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT campanidaniela theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT mrowiecsławomir theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT liszkałukasz theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT coppolaalessandro theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT amatomichela theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT petittitommasangelo theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT vistolifabio theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT montorsimarco theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT perronegiuseppe theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT coppolaroberto theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT caputodamiano theroleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT nappogennaro roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT borzomatidomenico roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT zerbialessandro roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT spaggiaripaola roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT boggiugo roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT campanidaniela roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT mrowiecsławomir roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT liszkałukasz roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT coppolaalessandro roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT amatomichela roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT petittitommasangelo roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT vistolifabio roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT montorsimarco roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT perronegiuseppe roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT coppolaroberto roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial AT caputodamiano roleofpathologicalmethodandclearancedefinitionfortheevaluationofmarginstatusafterpancreatoduodenectomyforperiampullarycancerresultsofamulticenterprospectiverandomizedtrial |