Intraductal dissemination of ampullary carcinoma after pancreatoduodenectomy
- 16 Downloads
Clinical evidence of intraductal dissemination through the pancreatic duct has been rare. We herein describe a case of ampullary carcinoma that disseminated in the remnant pancreas through the pancreatic duct.
A 68-year-old woman underwent SSPPD for ampullary carcinoma. The tumor was diagnosed as adenocarcinoma without lymph node metastasis (T2N0M0, stage IB). Computed tomography (CT) performed 3 years later revealed a 14-mm tumor near the site of the pancreaticojejunal anastomosis. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration showed adenocarcinoma that was morphologically similar to the specimen from the first surgery. We diagnosed recurrence of ampullary carcinoma in the remnant pancreas. A total remnant pancreatectomy was performed. We found a white solid tumor at the 20-mm distal side of pancreaticojejunal anastomosis. The tumor was morphologically similar and immunostaining showed a pattern identical to that of the original tumor, suggesting that the two tumors were of the same origin.
The recurrent lesion was most likely the result of tumor cells leaving the tumor and implanting in the remnant pancreatic duct epithelium. Intraductal dissemination of adenocarcinoma is thought to be a cause of remnant recurrence after SSPPD in cases of obstruction of the pancreatic duct or an iatrogenic procedure.
KeywordsAmpullary carcinoma Adenocarcinoma Pancreatectomy Intraductal dissemination
Carbohydrate antigen 19-9
Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography
Magnetic resonance imaging
Positron emission tomography/computed tomography
Subtotal stomach preserving pancreatoduodenectomy
Intraductal dissemination through the pancreatic duct is a unique mechanism of dissemination. Clinical evidence of this form of dissemination is scant, described only in case reports. Here, we describe a case of ampullary carcinoma that disseminated and implanted in the remaining pancreas through the pancreatic duct after subtotal stomach preserving pancreatoduodenectomy (SSPPD).
A 68-year-old woman was referred to our hospital for further examination of jaundice. She had no remarkable past history.
Laboratory findings were notable for carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level within normal limits; however, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level was slightly high (65.9 U/mL), and liver enzyme levels were elevated: aspartate aminotransferase, 155 IU/L; alanine aminotransferase, 98 IU/L; γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, 1620 IU/L; alkaline phosphatase, 1980 IU/L; and total-bilirubin, 5.3 mg/dL.
The tumor was diagnosed as an ampullary carcinoma, and SSPPD with modified Child reconstruction was performed. The operating time was 353 min, and total blood loss was 195 mL.
The patterns of postoperative recurrence of ampullary carcinoma are locoregional recurrence and metastasis to the liver, peritoneum, lymph node, lung, or bone [1, 2, 3]. In many cases, there are simultaneous multiple metastases at recurrence; therefore, surgery (e.g., residual pancreatectomy) is seldom considered an option to for curative treatment. The risk factors for locoregional recurrence are the presence of pancreatic invasion and tumor size. By contrast, lymph node metastasis is the risk factor for distant recurrence . There are few reports of ampullary carcinoma duplicated with pancreatic cancer.
Implantation of cholangiocarcinoma and lung cancer may occur. Transductal dissemination of pancreatic cancer has been observed in an animal model . Intraductal dissemination of ampullary carcinoma was rare; however, some cases have been reported. Ban speculated that an identical acinar cell carcinoma suggested intraductal dissemination from the pancreatic tail to the pancreatic head . Matsubara reported an adenocarcinoma that had disseminated to the pancreatic duct in a retrograde manner and recurred in the remnant pancreas after pancreaticoduodenectomy; the authors claimed that the case of intraductal dissemination would require confirmation of a non-invasive primary cancer of the pancreatic duct, with no invasion of lymphatic and venous duct, and multiple foci .
In our case, the pathological findings of the first operation showed no invasion in the pancreatic parenchyma, and the resection stump was negative for carcinoma. At the first operation, there was no obvious peritoneal dissemination or lymph node metastasis and no evidence suggesting lymphatic vessel invasion or vein invasion.
There are several pieces of evidence that suggests intraductal dissemination. First, the cancerous lesion was located at a site distant from the pancreatojejunal anastomosis. There were no malignant cells between the anastomosis and the tumor. Second, this tumor was identical to the original primary with respect to histology and immunohistochemistory. Third, there was a possibility of iatrogenic cancer implantation caused by the previous endoscopic biliary stenting prior to the first operation. The obstruction of the pancreatic duct or an iatrogenic procedure (ERCP) could have caused tumor cell implantation in the pancreatic duct epithelium in retrograde fashion.
It is unclear whether the tumor in this case was caused by tumor implantation or blood-borne metastasis. This tumor showed invasive growth to both the pancreatic parenchyma and to the epithelium of the main pancreatic duct. Therefore, the origin of the recurrent lesion remains unclear. Furthermore, because the growth rate of the ampullary carcinoma after implantation is unknown, the period from the first surgery to recurrence is not useful to determine the cause of recurrence.
Intraductal dissemination of ampullary carcinoma is a cause of recurrence in the pancreatic remnant after pancreaticoduodenectomy in cases of obstruction of the pancreatic duct or an iatrogenic procedure preoperatively.
KH and TK performed the first operation. KM and KH performed the second operation. KM was responsible for writing this manuscript. KH made critical revisions to this article for important intellectual content. KM gave the final approval of the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
No funding sources.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Consent for publication
Informed consent was obtained from the patient for the publication of this case report.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.