Published online Apr 27, 2013. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v5.i4.83
Revised: February 9, 2013
Accepted: February 28, 2013
Published online: April 27, 2013
Processing time: 152 Days and 21.3 Hours
AIM: To inquire into a question of an overestimation of arterial involvement in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC).
METHODS: Radiology data were compared with the findings from 51 standard, 58 extended and 17 total pancreaticoduodenectomies; 9 distal resections with celiac artery (CA) excision; and 28 palliations for PC. The survival of 11 patients with controversial computed tomography (CT) and endoscopic ultrasound data with regard to arterial invasion, after R0/R1 procedures (false-positive CT results, Group A), was compared to survival after eight R2 resections (false-negative CT results, Group B) and after 12 bypass procedures for locally advanced cancer (true-positive CT results, Group C).
RESULTS: In all of the cases in group A, operative exploration revealed no arterial invasion, which was predicted by CT. The one-year survival in Group A was 88.9%, and the two-year survival was 26.7%, with a median follow-up of 22 mo. One-year survival was not attained in groups B and C, with a significant difference in survival (Pa-b = 0.0029, Pb-c = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: Arterial encasement on CT does not necessarily indicate arterial invasion. Whenever PC is considered unresectable, endoUS should be used. In patients with controversial CT an EUS data for peripancreatic arteries involvement radical resection might be possible, providing survival benefits as compared to R2- resections or palliative surgery.
Core Tip: Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most aggressive neoplastic processes, and the methods to manage it are constantly evolving. Resection remains the only potential cure for pancreatic cancer, and it can prolong survival in patients compared to those who do not undergo resection. However, only a minority of patients are candidates for surgery at diagnosis, and only a minority of patients who undergo surgery survive beyond 5 years. The most important cause of an inacurate assessment of resectability is underestimation of vascular invasion. This study attempted to address the other side of the problem: overestimation of arterial involvement in patients with pancreatic cancer.