Journal of Surgery Concepts & Practice >

2022 , Vol. 27 >Issue 03: 221 - 228

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16139/j.1007-9610.2022.03.008

Original article

Relationship between surgical margin and prognosis of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Expand
  • National Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China

Received date: 2021-03-09

  Online published: 2022-08-03

Fold

Abstract

Objective To analyze the effect of surgical margin on the prognosis of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), and to explore the distance of margin of ICC hepatectomy to be recommended. Methods The clinical and pathological data of patients with ICC were collected from January 2011 to January 2017 in the Cancer Hospital in Beijing. Single-factor and multi-factor Cox analysis were used to explore risk factors that affected the prognosis of ICC. Kaplan-Meier method was used for recurrent free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) curves. Restricted cubic splines (RCS) were used to study the relationship between R0 margin distance and OS or RFS, and the recommended distance of surgical margin. Results There were 71 patients with median RFS 8 months and OS 17 months after follow-up from 2 to 107 months in this study. One, 3 and 5 year RFS were 35%, 20% and 10%, and OS 68%, 38%, and 23%, respectively. It was shown by Cox regression analysis that the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging, surgical margin, alpha-fetoprotein, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 were independent risk factors of the prognosis of ICC patients. R0 resection was in 59 (83%) cases and R1 resection in 12 (17%) cases. R0 resection was found to be more likely in the patients when tumor was single, in stage Ⅰ or stage Ⅱ of AJCC or of Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (LCSGJ) after comparison the preoperative clinicopathological factors between R0 resection and R1 resection. Original data was pathological margin and for the shrinkage during preparation of pathological specimens, the pathological margin converted to surgical margin. Using restricted cubic spline and Kaplan-Meier method it was shown that wider margin group (>0.5 cm-<2.8 cm) had longer RFS than more narrow margin group (>0.1 cm-≤0.5 cm). Conclusions R1 resection would be an independent risk factor for the prognosis of ICC patients. When the tumor is single, AJCC staging or LCSGJ staging in stage Ⅰ or stage Ⅱ, it could be more likely to have R0 resection and surgical margin at least 0.5 cm or more could improve the prognosis.

Key words： Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma; Surgical margin; Prognosis; Risk factor

Cite this article

YIN Yanjiang, LUO Zhiwen, CHEN Xiao, ZHANG Yefan, HUANG Zhen, ZHAO Hong, ZHAO Jianjun, LI Zhiyu, ZHOU Jianguo, CAI Jianqiang, BI Xinyu . Relationship between surgical margin and prognosis of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Journal of Surgery Concepts & Practice, 2022 , 27(03) : 221 -228 . DOI: 10.16139/j.1007-9610.2022.03.008

References

[1] Cillo U, Fondevila C, Donadon M, et al. Surgery for cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Liver Int, 2019, 39 Suppl 1:143-155.
[2] de Jong MC, Nathan H, Sotiropoulos GC, et al. Intrahe-patic cholangiocarcinoma: an international multi-institutional analysis of prognostic factors and lymph node assessment[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2011, 29(23):3140-3145.
[3] Watanabe Y, Matsuyama Y, Izumi N, et al. Effect of surgical margin width after R0 resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a nationwide survey of the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan[J]. Surgery, 2020, 167(5):793-802.
[4] Chan KM, Tsai CY, Yeh CN, et al. Characterization of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after curative resection: outcome, prognostic factor, and recurrence[J]. BMC gastroenterology, 2018, 18(1):180.
[5] Miwa S, Miyagawa S, Kobayashi A, et al. Predictive factors for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma recurrence in the liver following surgery[J]. J Gastroenterol, 2006, 41(9):893-900.
[6] Fabris L, Cadamuro M, Moserle L, et al. Nuclear expression of S100A4 calcium-binding protein increases cholangiocarcinoma invasiveness and metastasization[J]. Hepatology, 2011, 54(3):890-899.
[7] Gerrits PO, Horobin RW, Stokroos I. The effects of glycol methacrylate as a dehydrating agent on the dimensional changes of liver tissue[J]. J Microsc, 1992, 165(Pt 2):273-280.
[8] Riley TR, Ruggiero FM. The effect of processing on liver biopsy core size[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 2008, 53(10):2775-2777.
[9] Rutherford EE, Karanjia ND. The measurement of liver resection margins[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2004, 6(1):18-20.
[10] Hanstede JG, Gerrits PO. The effects of embedding in water-soluble plastics on the final dimensions of liver sections[J]. J Microsc, 1983, 131(Pt 1):79-86.
[11] Lang H, Sotiropoulos GC, Sgourakis G, et al. Operations for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: single-institution experience of 158 patients[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2009, 208(2):218-228.
[12] Lee AJ, Chun YS. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: the AJCC/UICC 8th edition updates[J]. Chin Clin Oncol, 2018, 7(5):52.
[13] Maithel SK, Gamblin TC, Kamel I, et al. Multidisciplinary approaches to intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Cancer, 2013, 119(22):3929-3942.
[14] Benson AB, D′Angelica MI, Abbott DE, et al. Guidelines insights: hepatobiliary cancers, version 2.2019[J]. J Natl Compr Canc Netw, 2019, 17(4):302-310.
[15] Rahnemai-Azar AA, Weisbrod AB, Dillhoff M, et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: current management and emerging therapies[J]. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2017, 11(5):439-449.
[16] Tang H, Lu W, Li B, et al. Influence of surgical margins on overall survival after resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a meta-analysis[J]. Medicine, 2016, 95(35):e4621.
[17] Beal EW, Cloyd JM, Pawlik TM. Surgical treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: current and emerging principles[J]. J Clin Med, 2020, 10(1):104.
[18] Ma KW, Cheung TT, She WH, et al. The effect of wide resection margin in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a single-center experience[J]. Medicine, 2016, 95(28):e4133.
[19] Spolverato G, Kim Y, Alexandrescu S, et al. Is hepatic resection for large or multifocal intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma justified? Results from a multi-institutional collaboration[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2015, 22(7):2218-2225.
[20] 傅俊, 李俊, 项红军, 等. 肝切除切缘的距离对肝内胆管癌伴乙型肝炎肝硬化预后的影响[J]. 肝胆外科杂志, 2017, 25(2):89-94.
[21] Farges O, Fuks D, Boleslawski E, et al. Influence of surgical margins on outcome in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter study by the AFC-IHCC-2009 study group[J]. Ann Surg,2011, 254(5):824-829.
[22] Ribero D, Pinna AD, Guglielmi A, et al. Surgical approach for long-term survival of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a multi-institutional analysis of 434 patients[J]. Arch Surg, 2012, 147(12):1107-1113.
[23] Tamandl D, Herberger B, Gruenberger B, et al. Influence of hepatic resection margin on recurrence and survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2008, 15(10):2787-2794.
[24] Bartsch F, Baumgart J, Hoppe-Lotichius M, et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma - influence of resection margin and tumor distance to the liver capsule on survival[J]. BMC Surg, 2020, 20(1):61.
[25] Spolverato G, Yakoob MY, Kim Y, et al. The impact of surgical margin status on long-term outcome after resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2015, 22(12):4020-4028.
[26] Wang Y, Li J, Xia Y, et al. Prognostic nomogram for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after partial hepatectomy[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2013, 31(9):1188-1195.
[27] Zhang XF, Bagante F, Chakedis J, et al. Perioperative and long-term outcome for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: impact of major versus minor hepatectomy[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2017, 21(11):1841-1850.
[28] Mazzaferro V, Gorgen A, Roayaie S, et al. Liver resection and transplantation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2020, 72(2):364-377.
[29] Squires MH, Cloyd JM, Dillhoff M, et al. Challenges of surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2018, 12(7):671-681.
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉