4.0 Article

Operative management and long-term survival in patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas - Experience with 144 patients

期刊

DEUTSCHE MEDIZINISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT
卷 132, 期 5, 页码 195-200

出版社

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-959309

关键词

pancreatic endocrine tumors; surgical therapy; long-term survival

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objective: To evaluate the outcome of patients with pancreatic endocrine tumors (PETs) in a tertiary referral centre. Methods: 144 patients with PETs that underwent surgery between 1987 and 2005 at our institution were retrospectively evaluated. The diagnosis of gastrinoma, insulinoma, vipoma and non-functioning PETs was based on clinical symptoms, biochemical tests and histopathology. Results: 144 patients were identified for this study, 20% with a MEN1-syndrome. 172 operations were performed, 122 initial operations and 50 reoperations. Enucleation of the tumor and distal pancreatic resections were the main type of operations. In 23 patients liver metastases were resected. After a median follow up of 67 months (range 1-339), 74 of 144 (51%) patients are still alive without evidence of disease. No patient with a benign tumor and no MEN1-patients died because of PETs. The 5, 10, and actuarial 20-year survival rate for patients with malignant tumors were 75%, 70% and 65%, respectively. The survival rate was significantly related to the type of tumor (benign vs. malignant: p = 0.0002), the patients age at time of initial operation (< 50 years vs. > 50 years: p = 0.0007), the genetic background of the tumor (sporadic vs. MEN1: p = 0.0312) and the development of metastases after the initial operation (none or lymph node metastases vs. distant metastases: p = 0.01). Conclusion: We show that an aggressive surgical approach leads to cure in patients with benign PETs. Although long-term cure can only be achieved in a proportion of patients with malignant PETs, significant long-term palliation can be achieved.

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

4.0
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