Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Indian Journal of Gastroenterology 2/2017

01-03-2017 | Original Article

Reporting the margin in pancreaticoduodenectomies: R0 versus R1

Authors: Chandralekha Shyamsunder Tampi, Somesh Nilkanth, Palepu Jagannath

Published in: Indian Journal of Gastroenterology | Issue 2/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Aim

This study was conducted to analyze the changes in margin positivity in pancreaticoduodenectomies, on using a standardized protocol, which bread loafs the pancreas and duodenum in the axial plane for adenocarcinomas arising in the pancreatic head, ampulla, terminal common bile duct (CBD), and duodenum, and then to assess whether these tumor subsets involve the margins in different ways.

Methods

The analysis was performed on 70 consecutive specimens, the pre-protocol specimens serving as the control group.

Results and Conclusions

Tumors originating from the pancreatic head, ampulla, terminal CBD, and duodenum showed a consistent increase in their R1 incidence, post-protocol. Ampullary tumors showed the greatest upward change in R1 positivity. The highest incidence of margin positivity was seen in pancreatic head adenocarcinomas (80%), then distal CBD tumors (60%), and finally the ampullary tumors (39%). In pancreatic head adenocarcinomas, R1 increased from 55% to 80%, distal CBD from 50% to 60%, and ampullary from 17% to 39%. Duodenal adenocarcinomas had no R1 in both pre- and post-protocol groups. The tumors also had different patterns of margin involvement. Ampullary tumors involved only the posterior margin, pancreatic adenocarcinomas involved the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) groove more often than the posterior margin, and distal CBD tumors involved the posterior margin and SMV groove equally. The size of the tumor made a significant difference in pancreatic head carcinomas with tumor size less than or equal to 2 cm, showing an R1 incidence of 38%, while those above 2 cm had an R1 incidence of 68%.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Allema JH, Reinders ME, van Gulik TM, et al. Prognostic factors for survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with carcinoma of the pancreatic head region. Cancer. 1995;15:2069–76. Allema JH, Reinders ME, van Gulik TM, et al. Prognostic factors for survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with carcinoma of the pancreatic head region. Cancer. 1995;15:2069–76.
2.
go back to reference Allema JH, Reinders ME, van Gulik TM, et al. Results of pancreaticoduodenectomy for ampullary carcinoma and analysis of prognostic factors for survival. Surgery. 1995;117:247–53.CrossRefPubMed Allema JH, Reinders ME, van Gulik TM, et al. Results of pancreaticoduodenectomy for ampullary carcinoma and analysis of prognostic factors for survival. Surgery. 1995;117:247–53.CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
go back to reference Hishinuma S, Ogata Y, Tomikawa M, Ozawa I, Hirabayashi K, Igarashi S. Patterns of recurrence after curative resection of pancreatic cancer, based on autopsy findings. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10:511–8.CrossRefPubMed Hishinuma S, Ogata Y, Tomikawa M, Ozawa I, Hirabayashi K, Igarashi S. Patterns of recurrence after curative resection of pancreatic cancer, based on autopsy findings. J Gastrointest Surg. 2006;10:511–8.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Sohn TA, Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, et al. Resected adenocarcinoma of the pancreas—616 patients: results, outcomes, and prognostic indicators. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000;4:567–79.CrossRefPubMed Sohn TA, Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, et al. Resected adenocarcinoma of the pancreas—616 patients: results, outcomes, and prognostic indicators. J Gastrointest Surg. 2000;4:567–79.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Sobin LH. TNM: evolution and relation to other prognostic factors. Semin Surg Oncol. 2003;21:3–7.CrossRefPubMed Sobin LH. TNM: evolution and relation to other prognostic factors. Semin Surg Oncol. 2003;21:3–7.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Hermanek P, Wittekind C. Residual tumor (R) classification and prognosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1994;10:12–20.CrossRefPubMed Hermanek P, Wittekind C. Residual tumor (R) classification and prognosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1994;10:12–20.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Wittekind C, Compton CC, Greene FL, Sobin LH. TNM residual tumor classification revisited. Cancer. 2002;94:2511–6.CrossRefPubMed Wittekind C, Compton CC, Greene FL, Sobin LH. TNM residual tumor classification revisited. Cancer. 2002;94:2511–6.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Casson AG, Darnton SJ, Subramanian S, Hiller L. What is the optimal distal resection margin for esophageal carcinoma? Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;69:205–9.CrossRefPubMed Casson AG, Darnton SJ, Subramanian S, Hiller L. What is the optimal distal resection margin for esophageal carcinoma? Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;69:205–9.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Renton SC, Gazet JC, Ford HT, Corbishley C, Sutcliffe R. The importance of the resection margin in conservative surgery for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1996;22:17–22.CrossRefPubMed Renton SC, Gazet JC, Ford HT, Corbishley C, Sutcliffe R. The importance of the resection margin in conservative surgery for breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1996;22:17–22.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Adam U, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet. 1994;344:707–11.CrossRefPubMed Adam U, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet. 1994;344:707–11.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, et al. Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1729–34.CrossRefPubMed Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, et al. Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1729–34.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:6–15. Samaratunga H, Montironi R, True L, et al. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Working group 1: specimen handling. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:6–15.
14.
go back to reference Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Amin MB, et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinoma of the prostate gland. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:1568–76.PubMed Srigley JR, Humphrey PA, Amin MB, et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinoma of the prostate gland. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:1568–76.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Revesz E, Khan SA. What are safe margins of resection for invasive and in situ breast cancer? Oncology (Williston Park). 2011;25:890–5. Revesz E, Khan SA. What are safe margins of resection for invasive and in situ breast cancer? Oncology (Williston Park). 2011;25:890–5.
16.
go back to reference Cao D, Humphrey PA, Gao F, Tao Y, Kibel AS. Ability of linear length of positive margin in radical prostatectomy specimens to predict biochemical recurrence. Urology. 2011;77:1409–14.CrossRefPubMed Cao D, Humphrey PA, Gao F, Tao Y, Kibel AS. Ability of linear length of positive margin in radical prostatectomy specimens to predict biochemical recurrence. Urology. 2011;77:1409–14.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Verbeke CS, Menon KV. Redefining resection margin status in pancreatic cancer. HPB (Oxford). 2009;11:282–9.CrossRef Verbeke CS, Menon KV. Redefining resection margin status in pancreatic cancer. HPB (Oxford). 2009;11:282–9.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Chen JWC, Bhandari M, Astill DS, et al. Predicting patient survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignancy: histopathological criteria based on perineural infiltration and lymphovascular invasion. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12:101–8.CrossRef Chen JWC, Bhandari M, Astill DS, et al. Predicting patient survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for malignancy: histopathological criteria based on perineural infiltration and lymphovascular invasion. HPB (Oxford). 2010;12:101–8.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Menon KV, Gomez D, Smith AM, Anthoney A, Verbeke CS. Impact of margin status on survival following pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer: the Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP). HPB (Oxford). 2009;11:18–24.CrossRef Menon KV, Gomez D, Smith AM, Anthoney A, Verbeke CS. Impact of margin status on survival following pancreatoduodenectomy for cancer: the Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP). HPB (Oxford). 2009;11:18–24.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Verbeke CS, Leitch D, Menon KV, McMahon MJ, Guillou PJ, Anthoney A. Redefining the R1 resection in pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 2006;93:1232–7.CrossRefPubMed Verbeke CS, Leitch D, Menon KV, McMahon MJ, Guillou PJ, Anthoney A. Redefining the R1 resection in pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg. 2006;93:1232–7.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Verbeke CS. Resection margins and R1 rates in pancreatic cancer—are we there yet? Histopathology. 2008;52:787–96.CrossRefPubMed Verbeke CS. Resection margins and R1 rates in pancreatic cancer—are we there yet? Histopathology. 2008;52:787–96.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Esposito I, Kleeff J, Bergmann F, et al. Most pancreatic cancer resections are R1 resections. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:1651–60.CrossRefPubMed Esposito I, Kleeff J, Bergmann F, et al. Most pancreatic cancer resections are R1 resections. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:1651–60.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Schlitter AM, Esposito I. Definition of microscopic tumor clearance (r0) in pancreatic cancer resections. Cancers (Basel). 2010;2:2001–10. Schlitter AM, Esposito I. Definition of microscopic tumor clearance (r0) in pancreatic cancer resections. Cancers (Basel). 2010;2:2001–10.
24.
go back to reference Verbeke CS, Knapp J, Gladhaug IP. Tumour growth is more dispersed in pancreatic head cancers than in rectal cancer: implications for resection margin assessment. Histopathology. 2011;59:1111–21.CrossRefPubMed Verbeke CS, Knapp J, Gladhaug IP. Tumour growth is more dispersed in pancreatic head cancers than in rectal cancer: implications for resection margin assessment. Histopathology. 2011;59:1111–21.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Cluzeau F, Littlejohns P, Grimshaw J, et al. Standards and minimum datasets for reporting cancers. Minimum dataset for the histopathological reporting of pancreatic, ampulla of Vater and bile duct carcinoma. London: The Royal College of Pathologists; 2002. Cluzeau F, Littlejohns P, Grimshaw J, et al. Standards and minimum datasets for reporting cancers. Minimum dataset for the histopathological reporting of pancreatic, ampulla of Vater and bile duct carcinoma. London: The Royal College of Pathologists; 2002.
26.
go back to reference Chang DK, Johns AL, Merrett ND, et al. Margin clearance and outcome in resected pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2855–62.CrossRefPubMed Chang DK, Johns AL, Merrett ND, et al. Margin clearance and outcome in resected pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2855–62.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Zhang Y, Frampton AE, Cohen P, et al. Tumor infiltration in the medial resection margin predicts survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1875–82.CrossRefPubMed Zhang Y, Frampton AE, Cohen P, et al. Tumor infiltration in the medial resection margin predicts survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1875–82.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Delpero JR, Turrini O. Ductal adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: a critical study of R1 resection rates. Bull Cancer. 2008;95:1193–8.PubMed Delpero JR, Turrini O. Ductal adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas: a critical study of R1 resection rates. Bull Cancer. 2008;95:1193–8.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Reporting the margin in pancreaticoduodenectomies: R0 versus R1
Authors
Chandralekha Shyamsunder Tampi
Somesh Nilkanth
Palepu Jagannath
Publication date
01-03-2017
Publisher
Springer India
Published in
Indian Journal of Gastroenterology / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0254-8860
Electronic ISSN: 0975-0711
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12664-017-0742-8

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Indian Journal of Gastroenterology 2/2017 Go to the issue
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.