Inoperable Primary Retroperitoneal Sarcomas: Clinical Characteristics and Reasons Against Resection at a Single Referral Institution.
Journal
Annals of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1534-4681
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9420840
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2021
Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
04
03
2020
accepted:
12
06
2020
pubmed:
8
7
2020
medline:
28
4
2021
entrez:
8
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The outcome of patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) depends mainly on tumor biology and completeness of surgical resection. However, some patients are deemed not resectable for various reasons. This study analyzed a series of primary RPS patients to describe rate and reasons of primary inoperability at a large referral center. All consecutive patients affected by primary localized RPS referred for surgical treatment at our institution between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2017 were analyzed. Patients were split in two groups: those who underwent surgical resection with curative intent, and those who were not resected. A total of 322 patients were available for the current analysis: 285 (88.5%) underwent resection with curative intent, and 37 (11.5%) did not. Twenty of 322 (6.2%) patients who did not undergo resection had a technically unresectable tumor, whereas the remaining 18 of 322 (5.6%) were not amenable to a major surgical procedure due to comorbidities/poor performance status. The dominant technical reason was involvement of the celiaco-mesenteric vessels. At a median follow-up from the diagnosis of 34 months, 24 of 37 (64.9%) nonoperated and 48 of 285 (16.8%) operated patients died. The corresponding 4-year overall survival were 10.3% and 83.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). Roughly, 10% of patients who presented with localized primary RPS at a large referral institution were not resected. An attempt to standardize the definition of resectability for primary localized RPS should be made considering anatomic, biologic, and patient-related factors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The outcome of patients with retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) depends mainly on tumor biology and completeness of surgical resection. However, some patients are deemed not resectable for various reasons. This study analyzed a series of primary RPS patients to describe rate and reasons of primary inoperability at a large referral center.
METHODS
METHODS
All consecutive patients affected by primary localized RPS referred for surgical treatment at our institution between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2017 were analyzed. Patients were split in two groups: those who underwent surgical resection with curative intent, and those who were not resected.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 322 patients were available for the current analysis: 285 (88.5%) underwent resection with curative intent, and 37 (11.5%) did not. Twenty of 322 (6.2%) patients who did not undergo resection had a technically unresectable tumor, whereas the remaining 18 of 322 (5.6%) were not amenable to a major surgical procedure due to comorbidities/poor performance status. The dominant technical reason was involvement of the celiaco-mesenteric vessels. At a median follow-up from the diagnosis of 34 months, 24 of 37 (64.9%) nonoperated and 48 of 285 (16.8%) operated patients died. The corresponding 4-year overall survival were 10.3% and 83.4%, respectively (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Roughly, 10% of patients who presented with localized primary RPS at a large referral institution were not resected. An attempt to standardize the definition of resectability for primary localized RPS should be made considering anatomic, biologic, and patient-related factors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32632883
doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-08789-9
pii: 10.1245/s10434-020-08789-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1151-1157Références
Mastrangelo G, Coindre JM, Ducimetière F, Dei Tos AP, Fadda E, Blay JY, et al. Incidence of soft tissue sarcoma and beyond. Cancer. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27555 .
doi: 10.1002/cncr.27555
pubmed: 22517534
Gronchi A, Miceli R, Allard MA, Callegaro D, Le Péchoux C, Fiore M, et al. Personalizing the approach to retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma: histology-specific patterns of failure and postrelapse outcome after primary extended resection. Ann Surg Oncol. (2015). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4130-7 .
doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4130-7
pubmed: 26148756
Dingley B, Fiore M, Gronchi A. Personalizing surgical margins in retroperitoneal sarcomas: an update. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2019.1625774 .
doi: 10.1080/14737140.2019.1625774
pubmed: 31159625
Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn PCW, Mertens F. WHO classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone, 4th edn 2013. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2013.
Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM, Rouesse J, Bui NB, De Mascarel A, et al. Soft-tissue sarcomas of adults; study of pathological prognostic variables and definition of a histopathological grading system. Int J Cancer. 1984. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.2910330108 .
doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910330108
pubmed: 6693192
Deanna N, Burtenshaw S, Olteanu A, Gladdy R, Brar S, Chung P, et al. Why were non-metastatic primary retroperitoneal sarcoma not resected? Abstr Book, CTOS Meet 2018:508–9.
Gronchi A, Lo Vullo S, Fiore M, Mussi C, Stacchiotti S, Collini P, et al. Aggressive surgical policies in a retrospectively reviewed single-institution case series of retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma patients. J Clin Oncol. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.17.8871 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.8871
pubmed: 19273692
Bonvalot S, Rivoire M, Castaing M, Stoeckle E, Le Cesne A, Blay JY, et al. Primary retroperitoneal sarcomas: a multivariate analysis of surgical factors associated with local control. J Clin Oncol. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.18.0802 .
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.0802
pubmed: 19273692
Macneill AJ, Gronchi A, Miceli R, Bonvalot S, Swallow CJ, Hohenberger P, et al. Postoperative morbidity after radical resection of primary retroperitoneal sarcoma. Ann Surg. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002250 .
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002250
pubmed: 28394870
Wortmann M, Alldinger I, Böckler D, Ulrich A, Hyhlik-Dürr A. Vascular reconstruction after retroperitoneal and lower extremity sarcoma resection. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.10.029 .
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.10.029
pubmed: 27914772
Luu HY, Wang ED, Syed SM, Xu X, Hansen SL, Eichler CM, et al. Outcomes of arterial bypass preceding resection of retroperitoneal masses involving major vessels. J Surg Res. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.04.039 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2018.04.039
pubmed: 30100037
Burlaka A, Vasiliev O, Kolesnik O. Resection and simultaneous reconstruction of the infrarenal aorta and inferior vena cava (case report). Pol Przegl Chir. 2019. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0013.1031 .
doi: 10.5604/01.3001.0013.1031
pubmed: 31243169
Bertrand MM, Carrère S, Delmond L, Mehta S, Rouanet P, Canaud L, et al. Oncovascular compartmental resection for retroperitoneal soft tissue sarcoma with vascular involvement. J Vasc Surg. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2016.04.006 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.04.006
pubmed: 27374069
Han A, Ahn S, Min S-K. Oncovascular surgery: essential roles of vascular surgeons in cancer surgery. Vasc Spec Int. 2019. https://doi.org/10.5758/vsi.2019.35.2.60 .
doi: 10.5758/vsi.2019.35.2.60
Bonds M, Rocha FG. Contemporary review of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. J Clin Med. 2019. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8081205 .
doi: 10.3390/jcm8081205
pubmed: 31409042
pmcid: 6722979
Varadhachary GR, Tamm EP, Abbruzzese JL, Xiong HQ, Crane CH, Wang H, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: definitions, management, and role of preoperative therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1245/aso.2006.08.011 .
doi: 10.1245/ASO.2006.08.011
pubmed: 16865597
Katz MHG, Pisters PWT, Evans DB, Sun CC, Lee JE, Fleming JB, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: the importance of this emerging stage of disease. J Am Coll Surg. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.12.020 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.12.020
pubmed: 18926458
pmcid: 5901743
Isaji S, Mizuno S, Windsor JA, Bassi C, Fernández-del Castillo C, Hackert T, et al. International consensus on definition and criteria of borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma 2017. Pancreatology. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pan.2017.11.011 .
doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2017.11.011
pubmed: 29793839
pmcid: 6748871
Almond LM, Tirotta F, Tattersall H, Hodson J, Cascella T, Barisella M, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous biopsy in retroperitoneal sarcoma. Br J Surg. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11064 .
doi: 10.1002/bjs.11064
pubmed: 30675910