4.7 Article

Observation versus Resection for Small Asymptomatic Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Matched Case-Control Study

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 4, 页码 1361-1370

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4986-1

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R21 CA158267, R21-CA158267, P30 CA008748] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To analyze the natural history of small asymptomatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) and to present a matched comparison between groups who underwent either initial observation or resection. Management approach for small PanNET is uncertain. Incidentally discovered, sporadic, small (< 3 cm), stage I-II PanNET were analyzed retrospectively between 1993 and 2013. Diagnosis was determined either by pathology or imaging characteristics. Intention-to-treat analysis was applied. A total of 464 patients were reviewed. Observation was recommended for 104 patients (observation group), and these patients were matched to 77 patients in the resection group based on tumor size at initial imaging. The observation group was significantly older (median 63 vs. 59 years, p = 0.04) and tended towards shorter follow-up (44 vs. 57 months, p = 0.06). Within the observation group, 26 of the 104 patients (25 %) underwent subsequent tumor resection after a median observation interval of 30 months (range 7-135). At the time of last follow-up of the observation group, the median tumor size had not changed (1.2 cm, p = 0.7), and no patient had developed evidence of metastases. Within the resection group, low-grade (G1) pathology was recorded in 72 (95 %) tumors and 5 (6 %) developed a recurrence, which occurred after a median of 5.1 (range 2.9-8.1) years. No patient in either group died from disease. Death from other causes occurred in 11 of 181 (6 %) patients. In this study, no patient who was initially observed developed metastases or died from disease after a median follow-up of 44 months. Observation for stable, small, incidentally discovered PanNET is reasonable in selected patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据