Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2018
Periampullary Gangliocytic Paraganglioma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chiang Ching-Shu, Shyr Bor-Uei, Chen Shih-Chin, Shyr Yi-Ming, Wang Shin-E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Gangliocytic paraganglioma (GP) is rare and difficult to be differentiated from other periampullary neoplasms. The clinical characteristics and optimal treatment of periampullary GPs have not been clarified.
METHODS: The data pool for the analysis comprised of cases of periampullary GP encountered in our institution and sporadic cases reported in the English literature.
RESULTS: A total of 117 cases with periampullary GP were studied, including 2 from our institute, and among them, duodenal GP was the most common (53.0%). GP size ranged from 0.7 to 19.0 cm, with a median of 2.2 cm. The most common presenting symptom for overall periampullary GPs was epigastric pain in 49.5% cases, followed by gastrointestinal bleeding in 35.4% cases. Most (84.1%) of the periampullary GPs were benign, whereas 15.9% were malignant. Metastasis was noted in 26.3% of periampullary GPs, with 14.5% showing lymph node metastasis and 1.8% showing liver metastasis. Of the periampullary GP cases included, 30.1% were treated with pancreaticoduodenectomy, 40.6% with local excision, and 17.7% with endoscopic resection.
CONCLUSIONS: Periampullary GP should be considered as a tumor with malignant potential. Endoscopic resection is the treatment of choice for most of the duodenal GPs, whereas pancreaticoduodenectomy is recommended for GPs with possible malignancy, such as large size, with submucosal invasion, or pancreatic GP.
METHODS: The data pool for the analysis comprised of cases of periampullary GP encountered in our institution and sporadic cases reported in the English literature.
RESULTS: A total of 117 cases with periampullary GP were studied, including 2 from our institute, and among them, duodenal GP was the most common (53.0%). GP size ranged from 0.7 to 19.0 cm, with a median of 2.2 cm. The most common presenting symptom for overall periampullary GPs was epigastric pain in 49.5% cases, followed by gastrointestinal bleeding in 35.4% cases. Most (84.1%) of the periampullary GPs were benign, whereas 15.9% were malignant. Metastasis was noted in 26.3% of periampullary GPs, with 14.5% showing lymph node metastasis and 1.8% showing liver metastasis. Of the periampullary GP cases included, 30.1% were treated with pancreaticoduodenectomy, 40.6% with local excision, and 17.7% with endoscopic resection.
CONCLUSIONS: Periampullary GP should be considered as a tumor with malignant potential. Endoscopic resection is the treatment of choice for most of the duodenal GPs, whereas pancreaticoduodenectomy is recommended for GPs with possible malignancy, such as large size, with submucosal invasion, or pancreatic GP.