SUMMARY Background

BackgroundNearly half of patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC) have incurable tumors at laparotomy. Staging laparoscopy (SL) potentially detects metastases or locally advanced disease, thereby avoiding unnecessary laparotomy. However, the diagnostic yield of SL has decreased with improved imaging in recent years.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify predictors for detecting metastasized or locally advanced PHC at SL and to develop a risk score to select patients who may benefit most from this procedure.MethodsData of patients with potentially resectable PHC who underwent SL between 2000 and 2015 in our center were retrospectively analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors and to develop a preoperative risk score.ResultsUnresectable PHC was detected in 41 of 273 patients undergoing SL (yield 15 %). Overall sensitivity of SL was 30 %, with highest sensitivity for detecting peritoneal metastases (73 %). Preoperative imaging factors that were independently associated with unresectability at SL were tumor size ≥4.5 cm, bilateral portal vein involvement, suspected lymph node metastases, and suspected (extra)hepatic metastases on imaging without the possibility of diagnosis by percutaneous- or endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy. The derived preoperative risk score showed good discrimination to predict unresectability (area under the curve 0.77, 95 % confidence interval 0.68–0.86) and identified three subgroups with a predicted low-risk of 7 % (N = 203 patients), intermediate-risk of 21 % (N = 39), and high-risk of 58 % (N = 31).ConclusionsA selective approach for SL in PHC is recommended since the overall yield is low. The proposed preoperative risk score is useful in selecting patients for SL.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1245/s10434-016-5531-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Most tumour response scoring systems for resected pancreatic cancer after neoadjuvant therapy score tumour regression. However, whether treatment-induced changes, including tumour regression, can be identified reliably on haematoxylin and eosin-stained slides remains unclear. Moreover, no large study of the interobserver agreement of current tumour response scoring systems for pancreatic cancer exists. This study aimed to investigate whether gastrointestinal/pancreatic pathologists can reliably identify treatment effect on tumour by histology, and to determine the interobserver agreement for current tumour response scoring systems. Methods Overall, 23 gastrointestinal/pancreatic pathologists reviewed digital haematoxylin and eosin-stained slides of pancreatic cancer or treated tumour bed. The accuracy in identifying the treatment effect was investigated in 60 patients (30 treatment-naive, 30 after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT)). The interobserver agreement for the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) tumour response scoring systems was assessed in 50 patients using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). An ICC value below 0.50 indicated poor reliability, 0.50 or more and less than 0.75 indicated moderate reliability, 0.75 or more and below 0.90 indicated good reliability, and above 0.90 indicated excellent reliability. Results The sensitivity and specificity for identifying NAT effect were 76.2 and 49.0 per cent respectively. After NAT in 50 patients, ICC values for both tumour response scoring systems were moderate: 0.66 for CAP and 0.71 for MDACC. Conclusion Identification of the effect of NAT in resected pancreatic cancer proved unreliable, and interobserver agreement for the current tumour response scoring systems was suboptimal. These findings support the recently published International Study Group of Pancreatic Pathologists recommendations to score residual tumour burden rather than tumour regression after NAT.

Background Transarterial (chemo-)embolization/lipiodolization (TAE/TAL) might be an attractive minimally invasive alternative to surgery in the treatment of symptomatic hepatic haemangioma. This review assesses the efficacy and safety of TAE/TAL as primary treatment for symptomatic hepatic haemangioma. Methods A systematic search of the literature was performed by two reviewers following the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies and case reports were identified; outcomes of cohort studies were reported. The primary efficacy outcome was tumour size before and after TAE/ TAL. Improvement of symptoms and quality of life (QoL) were secondary outcomes; the primary safety outcome was complications. The Downs and Black statement was used for quality assessment. Results Eighteen cohort studies were identified, including 1284 patients. TAE/TAL led to a decrease in tumour size in 1100/1223 (89.9%) patients and to improvement or disappearance of symptoms in 1080/1096 (98.5%) patients. A significant decrease in tumour size from 9.79 ± 0.79 cm to 4.00 ± 1.36 cm (p \ 0.001) was shown. Grade 3 complications occurred in 37/1284 (2.9%) patients. Surgical treatment was necessary in 35/1284 (2.7%) of patients. Conclusion TAE/TAL appears to be a promising and safe treatment to decrease tumour size of hepatic haemangioma. The technique might also provide partial relief of symptoms, although no randomized clinical trials or prospective studies using validated QoL questionnaires are available. TAE/TAL may be considered as a viable alternative to resection.