Skip to main content
Log in

Surgical Outcome and Prognostic Factors in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

  • Invited Commentary
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript



The clinicopathologic features and surgical outcome of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma are not fully understood.


Fifty-six consecutive patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma who underwent surgical resection at the National Cancer Center Hospital East between October 1992 and July 2007 were retrospectively analyzed. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas were subdivided into solitary tumors and tumors with intrahepatic metastasis.


Complete tumor removal (R0 resection) was performed in 42 patients (75%). The 5-year survival rate for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 56), patients with a solitary tumor (n = 46), and patients with intrahepatic metastasis (n = 10) were 32, 38, and 0%, respectively. There was a significant difference in survival between patients with a solitary tumor and those with intrahepatic metastasis (p < 0.0001). The 5-year survival rate for patients with stage I (n = 3), II (n = 9), III (n = 15), and IV disease (n = 26) was 100, 67, 37, and 0%, respectively. There was a significant difference in survival between stage I and stage IV (p = 0.011), between stage II and stage IV (p = 0.0002), and between stage III and stage IV (p = 0.0015). The most frequent site of recurrence was the liver. Univariate analysis showed that intrahepatic metastasis, portal vein invasion, hepatic duct invasion, lymph node metastasis, perineural invasion, and positive surgical margin (R1) were significantly associated with poor survival. Multivariate analysis confirmed that intrahepatic metastasis was a significant and independent prognostic indicator after surgical resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (p = 0.001). No patient with intrahepatic metastasis survived more than 10 months in this study.


Intrahepatic metastasis was the strongest predictor of poor survival in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3


  1. Ikai I, Arii S, Okazaki M et al (2007) Report of the 17 th nationwide follow-up study of primary liver cancer. Hepatol Res 37:676–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wood R, Brewster DH, Fraser LA et al (2003) Do increases in mortality from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma reflect a genuine increase in risk? Insights from cancer registry data in Scotland. Eur J Cancer 39:2087–2092

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Taylor-Robinson SD, Toledano MB, Arora S et al (2001) Increase in mortality rates from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in England and Wales 1968–1998. Gut 48:816–820

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Patel T (2001) Increasing incidence and mortality of primary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States. Hepatology 33:1353–1357

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Welzel TM, Graubard BI, El-Serag HB et al (2007) Risk factors for intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the United States: a population-based case-control study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 5:1221–1228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Madariaga JR, Iwatsuki S, Todo S et al (1998) Liver resection for hilar and peripheral cholangiocarcinoma: a study of 62 cases. Ann Surg 227:70–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Weber SM, Jarnagin WR, Klimstra D et al (2001) Inrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: resectability, recurrence pattern, and outcomes. J Am Coll Surg 193:384–391

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Uenishi T, Hirohashi K, Kubo et al (2001) Histological factors affecting prognosis following hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholamgiocarcinoma. World J Surg 25:865–869

  9. Nakagohri T, Asano T, Kinoshita H et al (2003) Aggressive surgical resection for hilar-invasive and peripheral intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. World J Surg 23:289–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tajima Y, Kuroki T, Fukuda K et al (2004) An intraductal papillary component is associated with prolonged survival after hepatic resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Br J Surg 91:99–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Urahashi T, Yamamoto M, Ohtsubo T et al (2007) Hepatopancreatoduodenectomy could be allowed for patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Hepatogastroenterology 54:346–349

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Weimann A, Varnholt H, Sclitt HJ et al (2000) Retrospective analysis of prognostic factors after liver resection and transplantation for cholangiocellular carcinoma. Br J Surg 87:1182–1187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Knox JJ, Hedley D, Oza A et al (2005) Combining gemcitabine and capecitabine in patients with advanced biliary cancer: a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 23:2332–2338

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kim ST, Park JO, Lee J et al (2006) A Phase II study of gemcitabine and cisplatin in advanced biliary tract cancer. Cancer 106:1339–1346

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Furuse J, Okusaka T, Funakoshi A et al (2006) Early phase II study of uracil-tegafur plus doxorubicin in patients with unresectable advanced biliary tract cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 36:552–556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ohtsuka M, Ito H, Kimura F et al (2002) Results of surgical treatment for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and clinicopathological factors influencing survival. Br J Surg 89:1525–1531

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (2003) General rules for the clinical and pathological study of primary liver cancer, 2nd English edn. Kanehara, Tokyo, pp 16–17

    Google Scholar 

  18. Nakagawa T, Kamiyama T, Kurauchi N et al (2005) Number of lymph node metastases is a significant prognostic factor in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. World J Surg 29:728–733

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lang H, Sotiropoulos GC, Fruhauf NR et al (2005) Extended hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma (ICC): when is it worthwhile? Single center experience with 27 resections in 50 patients over a 5-year period. Ann Surg 241:134–143

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Inoue K, Makuuchi M, Takayama T et al (2000) Long-term survival and prognostic factors in the surgical treatment of mass-forming type cholangiocarcinoma. Surgery 127:498–505

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Shimada K, Sano T, Sakamoto Y et al (2007) Clinical impact of the surgical margin status in hepatectomy for solitary mass-forming type intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma without lymph node metastases. J Surg Oncol 96:160–165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sobin LH, Wittekind CH (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 6th edn. Wiley, Weat Sussex, pp 81–83

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yamamoto M, Takasaki K, Yoshikawa T (1999) Extended resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in Japan. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 6:117–121

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Miwa S, Miyagawa S, Kobayashi A et al (2006) Predictive factors for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma recurrence in the liver following surgery. J Gastroenterol 41:893–900

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nakagohri T, Konishi M, Inoue K et al (2000) Extended right hepatic lobectomy with resection of inferior vena cava and portal vein for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 7:599–602

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Toshio Nakagohri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nakagohri, T., Kinoshita, T., Konishi, M. et al. Surgical Outcome and Prognostic Factors in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma. World J Surg 32, 2675–2680 (2008).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: