EUS-guided ethanol ablation of metastatic functional insulinoma
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Altonbary A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8503933 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7570976 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7730508 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC5291564 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9258014 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesEUS-guided ethanol ablation has emerged as an alternative method for pancreatic lesions. Recently, paclitaxel was added to ethanol to assess ablative effects in pancreatic lesions. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on EUS-guided ethanol ablation (EUS E) versus EUS-guided ethanol with paclitaxel (EUS EP) ablation for the management of pancreatic lesions.MethodsComprehensive search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Web of Science databases (from inception to May 2020). The primary outcome evaluated complete ablation of the lesions radiologically and the secondary outcome evaluated adverse events (AEs).ResultsFifteen studies on 524 patients were included in our analysis. The pooled complete ablation rate was 58.89% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 38.72-77.80, I2 = 91.76%) and 55.99% (95% CI = 44.66-67.05, I2 = 0) in the EUS E and EUS EP groups (P = 0.796), respectively. The pooled AE rates were 13.92% (95% CI = 4.71-26.01, I2 = 83.43%) and 31.62% (95% CI = 3.36-68.95, I2 = 87.9%) in the EUS E and EUS EP groups (P = 0.299), respectively. The most common AE was abdominal pain at 7.27% (95% CI = 1.97-14.6, I2 = 68.2%) and 12.44% (95% CI = 0.00-39.24, I2 = 81.1%) in the EUS E and EUS EP groups (P = 0.583), respectively. Correlation coefficient (r) was ‒0.719 (P = 0.008) between complete ablation and lesion size.ConclusionComplete ablation rates were comparable among both groups. AE rates were higher in the EUS EP group. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.
| S-EPMC9688138 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7482177 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC9530230 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endoscopic ultrasonography with fine needle infusion (EUS-FNI) of alcohol is the most reported method for EUS-guided tumor ablation. Several studies have reported successful EUS-guided ablation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. However, these tumors have been relatively small (< 3 cm). In this report, a 50-year-old man with a metastatic carcinoid tumor with a large porta hepatis mass was referred to our clinic for EUS-guided ethanol ablation. After two separate EUS-FNI ablations, there was a 36 % reduction in tumor size (9.0 × 11.4 cm to 6.7 × 9.8 cm) with associated tumor lysis syndrome. Chromogranin A levels decreased from 460 to 132 ng/mL. The patient reported complete resolution of abdominal pain within 2 weeks, but only mild improvement in flushing and diarrhea. In conclusion, large metastatic neuroendocrine tumors can be successfully treated with EUS-guided ethanol ablation. Evidence-based guidelines are needed with regard to the appropriate volume of ethanol injected in EUS-guided ablation to promote the efficacy and safety of this emerging procedure.
| S-EPMC4423311 | biostudies-other
Project description:Surgical resection is considered the standard of care in the management of symptomatic insulinoma. In this video, we describe the successful management of a symptomatic insulinoma by using linear array endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ethanol ablation in a poor surgical candidate. EUS-guided ethanol ablation of insulinoma offers a safer, effective, and less invasive alternative to surgery.
| S-EPMC4977744 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6714479 | biostudies-literature