Abstract
Background
Liver resection is the only curative therapeutic option for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), but the approach to recurrent ICC is controversial. This study analysed the outcome of liver resection in patients with recurrent ICC.
Methods
Demographic, radiological, clinical, operative, surgical pathological and follow‐up data for all patients with a final surgical pathological diagnosis of ICC treated in a tertiary referral centre between 2001 and 2015 were collected retrospectively and analysed.
Results
A total of 190 patients had liver resection for primary ICC. The 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year overall survival (OS) rates were 74·8, 56·6 and 37·9 per cent respectively. Independent determinants of OS were age 65 years or above (hazard ratio (HR) 2·18, 95 per cent c.i. 1·18 to 4·0; P = 0·012), median tumour diameter 5 cm or greater (HR 2·87, 1·37 to 6·00; P = 0·005), preoperative biliary drainage (HR 2·65, 1·13 to 6·20; P = 0·025) and local R1–2 status (HR 1·90, 1·02 to 3·53; P = 0·043). Recurrence was documented in 87 patients (45·8 per cent). The mean(s.d.) survival time after recurrence was 16(17) months. Independent determinants of recurrence were median tumour diameter 5 cm or more (HR 1·71, 1·09 to 2·68; P = 0·020), high‐grade (G3–4) tumour (HR 1·63, 1·04 to 2·55; P = 0·034) and local R1 status (HR 1·70, 1·09 to 2·65; P = 0·020). Repeat resection with curative intent was performed in 25 patients for recurrent ICC, achieving a mean survival of 25 (95 per cent c.i. 16 to 34) months after the diagnosis of recurrence. Patients deemed to have unresectable disease after recurrence received chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy alone, and had significantly poorer survival.
Conclusion
Patients with recurrent ICC may benefit from repeat surgical resection.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
; Büchler, M W 1 ; Mehrabi, A 1
1 Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany; Liver Cancer Centre Heidelberg, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
2 Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
3 Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
4 Institute of Pathology, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany; Liver Cancer Centre Heidelberg, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany
5 Department of Internal Medicine, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany; Liver Cancer Centre Heidelberg, Ruprecht‐Karls University, Heidelberg, Germany





