Abstract
Introduction: Our objective was to compare the efficacy of CT alone to CT followed by laparoscopy in determining resectability of pancreatic nonfunctioning islet (NFI) cell tumors.
Methods: A retrospective analysis from 1993 to 1999 revealed 48 patients who underwent surgical evaluation for NFI cell tumors. Of these, 34 (71%) patients underwent laparoscopy and CT for either diagnostic purposes or tumor staging. CT and laparoscopic criteria for curative resectability were defined and the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of both modalities in determining resectability were calculated.
Results: The most frequent tumor location and presenting symptoms were pancreatic head (n = 27, 56%) and abdominal pain (n = 31, 65%), respectively. Median tumor size was 4.0 cm. In the laparoscopy group, curative resection was performed in 20 cases (59%). CT followed by laparoscopy was more sensitive than CT alone in predicting resectability (93% vs. 50%, P = 0.03) with similar specificity (both 100%). The predictive value for tumor resectability was 74% for CT alone and 95% for CT followed by laparoscopy. Reasons for unresectability identified at laparoscopy but not indicated by CT were liver metastases (n = 6) or nodal disease (n = 1). Four of these patients were spared a laparotomy while the other three patients underwent surgical palliation and all are alive with disease (AWD). In those not undergoing laparoscopy (n = 14), curative resection was performed in 64% (n = 9). Four of these patients underwent resection, despite having metastases, and three are AWD.
Conclusions: NFI cell tumors of the pancreas present as large masses with frequent metastases. Despite metastatic disease, prolonged survival is often achieved with or without open surgical treatment. Laparoscopy can be used in diagnosis and accurately identifies metastases not seen on CT, thus sparing laparotomy in some patients.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Kimura W, Kuroda A, Morioka Y. Clinical pathology of endocrine tumors of the pancreas. Dig Dis Sci 1991; 36: 933–42.
Thompson GB, Van Heerden JA, Grant CS, Carney A, Ilstrup DM. Islet cell carcinomas of the pancreas: A twenty-year experience. Surgery 1988; 104: 1011–7.
Evans DB, Skibber JM, Lee JE, et al. Nonfunctioning islet cell carcinoma of the pancreas. Surgery 1993; 114: 1175–82.
Legaspi A, Brennan MF. Management of islet cell carcinoma. Surgery 1988; 104: 1018–23.
LoCY, Van Heerden JA, Thompson GB, Grant CS, Soreide JA, Harmsen WS. Islet cell carcinoma of the pancreas. World J Surg 1996; 20: 878–84.
Conlon KC, Dougherty E, Klimstra DS, Coit DG, Turnbull ADM, Brennan MF. The value of minimal access surgery in the staging of patients with potentially resectable peripancreatic malignancy. Ann Surg 1996; 223: 134–40.
Fernandez-del Castillo C, Rattner DW, Warshaw AL. Further experience with laparoscopy and peritoneal cytology in staging for pancreatic cancer. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 1127–9.
Cheslyn-Curtis S, Sitaram V, Williamson RCN. Management of non-functioning neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas. Br J Surg 1993; 80: 625–7.
Venkatesh S, Ordonez NG, Ajani J, et al. Islet cell carcinoma of the pancreas. Cancer 1990; 65: 354–7.
Prinz RA, Badrinath K, Chejfec G, Freeark RJ, Greenlee HB. “Nonfunctioning” islet cell carcinoma of the pancreas. Am Surg 1983; 49: 345–9.
Jarnagin WR, Bodniewicz J, Dougherty E, Conlon K, Blumgart LH, Fong Y. A prospective analysis of staging laparoscopy in patients with primary and secondary hepatobiliary malignancies. J Gastrointest Surg 2000; 4: 34–43.
Merchant NB, Conlon KC. Laparoscopic evaluation in pancreatic cancer. Semin Surg Oncol 1998; 15: 155–65.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hochwald, S.N., Weiser, M.R., Colleoni, R. et al. Laparoscopy Predicts Metastatic Disease and Spares Laparotomy in Selected Patients With Pancreatic Nonfunctioning Islet Cell Tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 8, 249–253 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0249-4
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-001-0249-4