Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Humans , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous/pathology , Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous/drug therapy , Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous/surgery , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/pathology , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/surgery , Survival Rate , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Prognosis , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Pancreatic Intraductal Neoplasms/pathology , Pancreatic Intraductal Neoplasms/surgery , Pancreatic Intraductal Neoplasms/drug therapyABSTRACT
Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) accounted for 5.0%~7.5% of pancreatic tumors and 21%~33% of cystic tumors. It usually occurs in people aged 60 to 70. The main treatment is surgical excision. The operation method is different according to the location of lesion, so we try our best to achieve accurate treatment. Here, we provide endoscopic ultrasonography combined with ERCP and eyeMax three endoscopic systems, so as to achieve accurate treatment of IPMN, which is recommended to the majority of endoscopists.(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Aged , Pancreatic Intraductal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Pancreatic Intraductal Neoplasms/drug therapy , Incidence , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Inpatients , Physical ExaminationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is limited data on the efficacy of adjuvant therapy (AT) in patients with invasive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas (IPMN). This single center retrospective cohort study aims to assess the impact of AT on survival in these patients. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgery for invasive IPMN between 1993 and 2018 were included in the study. We compared the clinicopathologic features and evaluated overall survival (OS) using multivariate Cox regression adjusting for adjuvant therapy, age, T and N stage, perineural and lymphovascular invasion. We also assessed survival differences between surgery alone and AT in node negative (N0) and node positive (N+) subgroups. RESULTS: 103 patients were included in the study; 69 underwent surgery alone while 34 also received AT. Patients in the AT group were significantly younger, presented at higher T and N stages and had more perineural and lymphovascular invasion. Median OS in the surgery alone group was 134 months and 65 months in the AT group, p = 0.052. On multivariate analysis, AT was not associated with improved OS; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.03 (0.52-2.05). In N0 patients, compared to surgery alone, AT was associated with a worse median OS (65 vs 167 months, p = 0.03), whereas in N+ patients there was a non-significant improvement (50.5 vs 20.4 months, p = 0.315). CONCLUSION: AT did not improve survival in the overall cohort even after multivariate analysis. N0 patients have excellent survival, and AT should probably be avoided in them, whereas it may be considered in patients with N+ disease.