2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.10.025
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic assessment of recurrent pancreatic high-risk lesions in the remnant pancreas: Metachronous multifocal lesion or local recurrence?

Abstract: Background: It is difficult to determine whether a second high-risk lesion, including pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma or high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasm, is a metachronous multifocal lesion or represents local recurrence after resection of the first high-risk lesion. This study attempts to clarify the characteristics of second high-risk lesions in the remnant pancreas using genetic analyses. Methods: Clinicopathologic data were collected from 12 patients who underwent pancreatectomy for a secon… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One possible explanation may be that the remnant pancreatic lesions in the advanced‐stage group included more recurrent lesions than those in the early‐stage group. If a remnant pancreatic lesion is due to recurrence, then the prognosis might be poorer than in the case of multifocal lesions 10 . In contrast, a pooled analysis by Zhou et al in patients who underwent a second pancreatectomy for remnant pancreatic cancer showed the opposite result 18 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…One possible explanation may be that the remnant pancreatic lesions in the advanced‐stage group included more recurrent lesions than those in the early‐stage group. If a remnant pancreatic lesion is due to recurrence, then the prognosis might be poorer than in the case of multifocal lesions 10 . In contrast, a pooled analysis by Zhou et al in patients who underwent a second pancreatectomy for remnant pancreatic cancer showed the opposite result 18 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…One is the recurrence of the initial pancreatic cancer, and the other is the metachronous development of a new primary cancer 4 . Several studies that compared genetic mutations between the initial and remnant pancreatic lesions supported the presence of both patterns 8,10,11 . Because of the aggressive nature of pancreatic cancer, approximately 80% of patients who undergo surgery for pancreatic cancer develop recurrence 12,13 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In a prospective study of 30 patients with Stage 0 or IA, 9 patients developed recurrence (8 in the remnant pancreas and 1 in the liver) during the median follow-up period of 54 months. Discrimination of local recurrence from multicentric cancer is difficult in the absence of genetic analysis (Gotoh et al 2019). Mikata et al (2013) reported that SPACE was a feasible method in the diagnosis of pancreatic high-grade PanIN/ CIS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, in pathological assessment, most of these patients had lots of micro premalignant lesions such as small IPMNs and pancreatic intraepitehrial neoplasms (PanINs) in the background pancreas, indicating that all the pancreas having IPMNs have a potential to develop multifocal lesions. There are 3 possible types of multifocal lesions in patients with IPMNs, namely multiple branch duct IPMNs (BD-IPMNs) by multicentric development, multiple main duct or mixed type IPMNs (MD-or Mix-IPMNs) by the mechanism of intraductal dissemination of the neoplastic cells [1,2], and the development of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) concomitant with IPMNs [3,4]. Pancreatic juice cytology under endoscopic retrograde pancreatography is reported to leads early detection of concomitant PDAC during assessment of IPMNs [5], while it is often difficult to determine the location of malignant lesions when pancreatography and other imaging modalities cannot provide any significant abnormalities.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%