Annals of surgical oncology · 2025
Long-Term Outcomes According to Surgical Margin in Mass-Forming Cholangiocarcinoma: The Role of R1vasc.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Milana Flavio, Procopio Fabio, Calafiore Eleonora, Famularo Simone, Costa Guido, Galvanin Jacopo, Branciforte Bruno, Torzilli Guido
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: R0 resection is the standard for mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma (MFCCC). R1vasc resection (tumor-vessel detachment) yielded results comparable to R0 and superior to parenchymal-tumor exposure (R1par) for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases. This study aims to clarify R1vasc outcomes for MFCCC.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Margin status of patients with MFCCC undergoing resection between 2008 and 2022 was assessed to determine the oncological efficacy of R1vasc regarding survival and hepatic recurrence.
RESULTS: The study analyzed 125 patients: 68 (54.4%) R0, 18 (14.4%) R1vasc, 24 (19.2%) R1par, and 15 (12.0%) R1vasc + par. Tumor size was similar between R0 (4.4 cm, range 1.5-19.0) and R1vasc (4.3 cm, range 2.3-14.5, p = 0.754) but larger for R1par (8.2 cm, range 2.5-15.0, p = 0.005) and R1vasc + par (9.0 cm, range 5.0-17.0, p < 0.001). The median overall survival (OS) was comparable for R0 [64.8 months; 95% confidence interval (CI): 50.0-79.6], R1vasc (54.4 months; 95% CI 19.6-89.2; p = 0.932), and R1vasc + par (62.0 months; 95% CI 35.6-88.5; p = 0.989). R1par showed lower OS (26.8 months; 95% CI 16.1-37.6; p = 0.134). Local recurrence was higher for R1par (45.8%, p < 0.0001) compared with R0 (10.3%) and similar for R1vasc (16.6%) and R1vasc + par (20.0%). Survival after hepatic recurrence was higher for R1vasc compared with R1par (p = 0.041).
CONCLUSIONS: R1vasc is a valid option for increasing resectability in patients with MFCCC, with OS being comparable to R0. R1vasc + par may be necessary for larger tumors.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Margin status of patients with MFCCC undergoing resection between 2008 and 2022 was assessed to determine the oncological efficacy of R1vasc regarding survival and hepatic recurrence.
RESULTS: The study analyzed 125 patients: 68 (54.4%) R0, 18 (14.4%) R1vasc, 24 (19.2%) R1par, and 15 (12.0%) R1vasc + par. Tumor size was similar between R0 (4.4 cm, range 1.5-19.0) and R1vasc (4.3 cm, range 2.3-14.5, p = 0.754) but larger for R1par (8.2 cm, range 2.5-15.0, p = 0.005) and R1vasc + par (9.0 cm, range 5.0-17.0, p < 0.001). The median overall survival (OS) was comparable for R0 [64.8 months; 95% confidence interval (CI): 50.0-79.6], R1vasc (54.4 months; 95% CI 19.6-89.2; p = 0.932), and R1vasc + par (62.0 months; 95% CI 35.6-88.5; p = 0.989). R1par showed lower OS (26.8 months; 95% CI 16.1-37.6; p = 0.134). Local recurrence was higher for R1par (45.8%, p < 0.0001) compared with R0 (10.3%) and similar for R1vasc (16.6%) and R1vasc + par (20.0%). Survival after hepatic recurrence was higher for R1vasc compared with R1par (p = 0.041).
CONCLUSIONS: R1vasc is a valid option for increasing resectability in patients with MFCCC, with OS being comparable to R0. R1vasc + par may be necessary for larger tumors.