ObjectiveTo evaluate the consistencies and inconsistencies between distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCCA) and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDCA) regarding their biological features and long-term prognosis.MethodsPubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched to find comparative studies between DCCA and PDCA. RevMan5.3 and Stata 13.0 software were used for the statistical analyses.ResultsEleven studies with 4,698 patients with DCCA and 100,629 patients with PDCA were identified. Pooled results indicated that patients with DCCA had a significantly higher rate of preoperative jaundice (p = 0.0003). Lymphatic metastasis (p < 0.00001), vascular invasion (p < 0.0001), and peri-neural invasion (p = 0.005) were more frequently detected in patients with PDCA. After curative pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), a significantly higher R0 rate (p < 0.0001) and significantly smaller tumor size (p < 0.00001) were detected in patients with DCCA. Patients with DCCA had a more favorable overall survival (OS) (p < 0.00001) and disease-free survival (DFS) (p = 0.005) than patients with PDCA. However, postoperative morbidities (p = 0.02), especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (p < 0.00001), more frequently occurred in DCCA.ConclusionPatients with DCCA had more favorable tumor pathological features and long-term prognosis than patients with PDCA. An early diagnosis more frequently occurred in patients with DCCA. However, postoperative complications, especially POPF, were more frequently observed in patients with DCCA.

Background It has been proven that tumor necrosis is associated with poor prognoses in various solid malignant tumors. However, the prognostic effect of tumor necrosis in hepato‐biliary‐pancreatic cancers is still unclear. Therefore, this study was performed to evaluate the associations of tumor necrosis with survival outcomes and clinicopathological features in patients with hepato‐biliary‐pancreatic cancers. Methods Based on the PRISMA statement, eligible studies were identified from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception until January 2023. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated to assess the connection between tumor necrosis and hepato‐biliary‐pancreatic cancers. We then choose which effects model to use to generate pooled HRs and 95% CIs, depending on data heterogeneity. Results In total, 6497 articles were identified, 10 of which were included in this meta‐analysis. Our results suggested that the presence of tumor necrosis predicted a poorer outcome for overall survival (HR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.35–1.77, p < 0.001) and recurrence‐free survival (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.37–2.08, p < 0.001). In addition, tumor necrosis was correlated with larger tumor size, a higher frequency of lymph node metastasis, poorer histologic differentiation, and higher recurrence and metastasis rates. Conclusion Our meta‐analysis suggests that hepato‐biliary‐pancreatic cancer patients with tumor necrosis have dismal survival outcomes, and that their tumors have aggressive biological behaviors. Tumor necrosis has the potential to be a promising biomarker for forecasting poor prognosis in these patients.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficiency of laparoscopic surgery in treating recurrent liver tumors vs. conventional open surgery.MethodsDatabase searching was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE. Rev Man 5.3 software and Stata 13.0 software were applied in statistical analyses.ResultsA total of fourteen studies were finally included with 1,284 patients receiving LRH and 2,254 with ORH. LRH was associated with less intraoperative hemorrhage, a higher R0 resection rate, a lower incidence of Pringle Maneuver, a lower incidence of postoperative morbidities, a better overall survival and an enhanced postoperative recovery vs. ORH. Patients receiving LRH shared similar operative time, tumor number and disease-free survival as those with ORH. However, tumor size was relatively larger in patients receiving ORH and major hepatectomy, anatomic hepatectomy were rarely performed in patients with LRH. Additional analyses between LRH and laparoscopic primary hepatectomy revealed less intraoperative blood loss in patients with LRH.ConclusionLRH is safe and feasible with more favorable peri-operative outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. However, it is only applicable for some highly-selected cases not requiring complex surgical procedures. Future larger well-designed studies are expected for further validation.

No abstract