Progression Patterns in the Remnant Pancreas after Resection of Non-Invasive or Micro-Invasive Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms (IPMN)
- 326 Downloads
Although IPMN are thought to represent a whole-gland disease, segmental resection remains the most frequently performed treatment. We sought to determine the rates, patterns, and predictors of IPMN progression in the pancreatic remnant following segmental resection of noninvasive or microinvasive IPMN.
A prospectively maintained database was queried to identify all patients who underwent resection of noninvasive or microinvasive IPMN (≤ 10 mm of invasive component) between 1989 and 2015. Progression (recurrence) was defined as either the development of cancer, a new IPMN cystic lesion > 1 cm or ≥ 50% increase in the diameter of residual IPMN lesions in the remnant. Univariate and multivariate cox regression models were created to determine predictors of progression.
A total of 319 patients underwent resection for noninvasive and microinvasive IPMN. The median age was 68, 53% had branch-duct (BD) IPMN, and 6% had microinvasive disease. After a median follow-up of 42 months, 71 patients (22%) experienced IPMN progression. Within this group of 71 patients, 11 (16% of recurrence) developed invasive cancer in the pancreatic remnant after a median of 28 months. Twelve patients (17%) experienced progression > 5 years following initial resection. On multivariate analysis, a distal location of the initial lesion was associated with an increased risk of progression (multivariate hazards ratio = 2.43, confidence interval 1.47–4.0, p < 0.001).
In this study, 22% of patients had disease progression following resection of noninvasive or microinvasive IPMN; 16% of these progressions represented invasive disease. These patients represent a high-risk group and should undergo long-term radiographic surveillance.
Supported in part by Marshall and Therese Sonenshine Foundation
Study conception and design: MAE, MAA, AAE, MG, MID, RPD, TPK, VB, WRJ, PJA. Acquisition of data: MAE, MAA. Analysis and interpretation of data: MAE, AAE, MG, PJA. Drafting of the manuscript: MAE, PJA. Critical revision: MAE, MAA, AAE, MG, OB, DK, MID, RPD, TPK, VB, WRJ, PJA.
Authors have nothing to disclose.
- 5.Adsay V, Mino-Kenudson M, Furukawa T, Basturk O, Zamboni G, Marchegiani G, et al. Pathologic evaluation and reporting of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas and other tumoral intraepithelial neoplasms of pancreatobiliary tract: recommendations of Verona consensus meeting. Ann Surg. 2016;263(1):162-77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Yogi T, Hijioka S, Imaoka H, Mizuno N, Hara K, Tajika M, et al. Risk factors for postoperative recurrence of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms of the pancreas based on a long-term follow-up study: proposals for follow-up strategies. J Hepato-biliary-pancreatic Sci. 2015;22(10):757-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar