Project description:Long term prognosis and 5-year survival for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains suboptimal. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided RFA (EUS-RFA) is an emerging technology and limited data exist regarding safety and long-term outcomes. The aim of this study is to report safety-profile, feasibility and outcomes of EUS-RFA for advanced PDAC. Prospective review of patients with diagnosis of locally-advanced or metastatic PDAC undergoing EUS-RFA between October 2016 to March 2018 with long-term follow up (> 30 months). Study patients underwent a total of 1-4 RFA sessions. All patients were enrolled in longitudinal cohort study and received standard of care chemotherapy. 10 patients underwent EUS-RFA. Location of the lesions was in the head(4), neck(2), body(2), and tail(2). 22 RFA sessions were performed with a range of 1-4 sessions per patient. There were no major adverse events (bleeding, perforation, infection, pancreatitis) in immediate (up to 72 h) and short-term follow up (4 weeks). Mild worsening of existing abdominal pain was noted during post-procedure observation in 12/22 (55%) of RFA treatments. Follow-up imaging demonstrated tumor progression in 2 patients, whereas tumor regression was noted in 6 patients (> 50% reduction in size in 3 patients). Median survival for the cohort was 20.5 months (95% CI, 9.93-42.2 months). Currently, 2 patients remain alive at 61 and 81 months follow-up since initial diagnosis. One patient had 3 cm PDAC with encasement of the portal confluence, abutment of the celiac axis, common hepatic and superior mesenteric artery. This patient had significant reduction in tumor size and underwent standard pancreaticoduodenectomy. In our experience, EUS-RFA was safe, well-tolerated and could be concurrently performed with standard chemotherapy. In this select cohort, median survival was improved when compared to published survival based upon SEER database and clinical trials. Future prospective trials are needed to understand the role of EUS-RFA in overall management of PDAC.
Project description:Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) with worrisome features or high-risk stigmata (WF/HRS) has been evaluated in few series with short-term outcomes. This study's primary endpoint was to assess the long-term efficacy of EUS-RFA in patients with NETs or pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) over at least 3 years. Patients and methods Twelve patients had 14 NETs with a mean 13.4-mm size (10-20) and 17 patients had a cystic tumor (16 IPMN, 1 MCA) with a 29.1-mm mean size (9-60 were included. They were treated with EUS-guided RFA, evaluated prospectively at 1 year, and followed annually for at least 3 years. Results The mean duration of follow-up was 42.9 months (36-53). Four patients died during follow-up (17-42 months) from unrelated diseases. At 1-year follow-up, and 85.7 % complete disappearance was seen in 12 patients with 14 NETs. At the end of follow-up (45.6 months), complete disappearance of tumors was seen in 85.7 % of cases. One case of late liver metastasis occurred in a patient with initial failure of EUS-RFA. At 1-year follow-up, a significant response was seen in 70.5 % of 15 patients with PCNs. At the end of the follow-up, there was a significant response in 66.6 % with no mural nodules. Two cases of distant pancreatic adenocarcinoma unrelated to IPMN occurred. Conclusions EUS-RFA results for pancreatic NETs or PCNs appear to be stable during 42 months of follow-up.
Project description:EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and ethanol ablation (EA) for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) have recently been reported with good outcomes. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of EUS-RFA and EUS-EA in the treatment of PNETs. A comprehensive search of multiple databases (through October 2020) was performed to identify studies that reported outcomes of EUS-RFA and EUS-EA of PNETs. Outcomes assessed included clinical success, technical success, and adverse events (AEs). A total of 181 (100 EUS-RFA, 81 EUS-EA) patients (60.7 ± 9.2 years) with 204 (113 EUS-RFA, 91 EUS-EA) PNETs (mean size 15.1 ± 4.7 mm) were included from 20 studies. There was no significant difference in the rates of technical success (94.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 88.5-97.3, I2 = 0] vs. 96.7% [95% CI: 90.8-98.8, I2 = 0]; P = 0.42), clinical success (85.2% (95% CI: 75.9-91.4, I2 = 0) vs. 82.2% [95% CI: 68.2-90.8, I2 = 10.1]; P = 0.65), and AEs (14.1% [95% CI: 7.1-26.3, I2 = 0] vs. 11.5% [95% CI: 4.7-25.4, I2 = 63.5]; P = 0.7) between EUS-RFA and EUS-EA, respectively. The most common AE was pancreatitis with the rate of 7.8% and 7.6% (P = 0.95) for EUS-RFA and EUS-EA, respectively. On meta-regression, the location of PNETs in head/neck of pancreas (P = 0.03) was a positive predictor of clinical success for EUS-RFA. EUS-RFA and EUS-EA have similar effectiveness and safety for PNETs ablation. Head/neck location of PNETs was a positive predictor for clinical success after EUS-RFA.
Project description:Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs) are rare tumors, but their incidental diagnosis has significantly increased due to the widespread use of imaging studies. Therefore, most PanNENs are now diagnosed when completely asymptomatic and in early stages. PanNENs are classified according to their grade (Ki-67 index) and can be functional (F-) or nonfunctional (NF-) depending on the presence or absence of a clinical, hormonal hypersecretion syndrome. The mainstay treatment of PanNENs is a surgery that is mostly curative but also associated with significant short- and long-term adverse events. Therefore, less invasive alternative locoregional treatment modalities are warranted. Recently, few case reports and two case series have described EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) for the treatment of patients with both F-PanNENs and NF-PanNENs. If for F-PanNENs EUS-RFA can very easily become the standard of care, for NF-PanNENEs it is still controversial how to select patients for EUS-RFA. A balance between overtreatment (i.e., RFA/surgery in patients who will not progress) and undertreatment (locoregional treatments in patients with undetected metastases) needs to be found based on solid data. The decision should also take into account patients' comorbidity and risk of postoperative death, life expectancy, tumor location, risk of postoperative fistula and postoperative morbidity, and risk of long-term exocrine and/or endocrine insufficiency. To answer the important question on which a patient should be treated with EUS-RFA, properly designed studies to evaluate the efficacy of this treatment in large cohorts of patients with NF-PanNENs and to establish prognostic factors associated with treatment response are urgently needed.
Project description:ObjectiveInsulinomas are rare, life-threatening pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Surgical removal continues to be the treatment of choice, yet it is associated with considerable risk of morbidity. Here, we describe our patient with insulinoma who was successfully treated with radiofrequency ablation.MethodsThe patient was a 56-year-old man with no history of diabetes mellitus. He presented with recurrent episodes of transient ischemic attacks and stroke over the last 3 years. Some changes in his behavior and memory were noticed by family members. During his hospital stay for the second transient ischemic attack, frequent hypoglycemia was documented, which was asymptomatic. Insulinoma was confirmed biochemically. Radiological findings were also compatible with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Treatment modalities were explained to the patient. However, he strongly refused surgery. Meanwhile, he was admitted because of a stroke and concurrent hypoglycemia again. In view of his refusal of the surgical treatment and due to his presentation with acute stroke and high-risk status for surgery, radiofrequency ablation was finalized.ResultsRadiofrequency ablation of the pancreatic tumor using 40.75 Gy over fractions was performed with a favorable outcome. The patient has achieved biochemical normalization and remained euglycemic during his follow- up. Computed tomography scan of the abdomen during follow-up showed a mild regression of the size of the tumor.ConclusionThis report shows a treatment challenge that required the use of an alternative treatment option other than the standard of care. It highlights the evolving evidence of radiofrequency as a therapeutic modality for patients with insulinoma.
Project description:Pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) are being increasingly detected because of rapid advances in radiologic technology and an increased imaging demand. The management of PCNs is challenging as most of these neoplasms are asymptomatic, but have malignant potential, and surgical resection has substantial perioperative morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided ablation, as a minimally invasive treatment, has received increasing attention in the past few years. However, the resolution after EUS-guided ablative therapy still needs to be improved. In this case report, EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation combined with lauromacrogol ablation was applied for the first time in the treatment of PCN, and it showed complete resolution at a 3-month follow-up.
Project description:The strategy for treating small borderline malignant pancreatic neoplasms--such as neuroendocrine tumor (NET) and solid pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN)--is surgical resection. However, pancreatic resection of these lesions still causes significant morbidity. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided ethanol ablation to treat small solid pancreatic neoplasms. A total of 8 patients with small borderline malignant pancreatic neoplasms and co-morbidities who refused surgery were included. We identified 2 cases of nonfunctioning NET, 3 cases of insulinomas, 1 case of gastrinoma, and 2 cases of SPN. EUS-guided ethanol ablation was performed, and treatment outcomes were assessed with clinical symptom, hormone assay, and imaging study. The mean tumor diameter was 15 ?mm (range, 7-29 ?mm), and the median volume of injected ethanol was 2.8 ?mL (range, 1.2-10.5 ?mL). There was 1 severe acute pancreatitis after EUS-guided ethanol ablation with 20-gauge CPN needle. During follow-up (median 16.5 months), 6 patients achieved treatment success; however, 2 patients (1 nonfunctioning NET and 1 SPN) still had persistent tumors. The patient with persistent SPN underwent surgical resection and the histopathological results showed peripancreatic infiltration with perineural invasion. Among 6 patients who achieved initial treatment success, 1 patient experienced tumor recurrence within 15 months and underwent repeated EUS-guided ethanol ablation. In conclusion, EUS-guided ethanol ablation therapy is a promising option for patients with small solid pancreatic neoplasm. Multiple sessions or surgical interventions may be required if there is a recurrent or persistent mass, and procedure-related adverse events must be carefully monitored.