Neuroendocrine Gastroenteropancreatic Tumors: Where Are We?

AIMS: Neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors are infrequently found neoplasms. Our objective was to analyze the survival rates for all sites that they occur in by studying different variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was carried out using records for a 7-year period from January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2014 on neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors patients diagnosed at the Pontevedra-Salnés Hospital Complex. The variables used were as follows: age at diagnosis, tumor size, presence or absence of metastases at diagnosis, cell proliferation index, Ki-67 of each tumor, treatments received, postdiagnosis survival time, existence or not of tumor progression, and time from diagnosis to progression and from diagnosis to mortality. In relation to treatments, the information recorded was whether the treatment was endoscopic, surgical, or pharmacological. RESULTS: Ninety-three neuroendocrine tumors made up a ratio of 4.42 cases per 100,000 inhabitants per annum. The median patient follow-up time was 44 months. The overall 5-year survival rate for patients who were followed up for a minimum of 60 months (49 patients) was 65.3%. The progression-free survival was 75.6% for 41 patients who were followed up for a minimum of 60 months. The survival rate for patients receiving endoscopic treatment was 100%, as there was no patient mortality recorded for those treated by endoscopic resection during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors may be managed conservatively in elderly patients by either monitoring them with imaging studies or treating them with somatostatin analogs. In the case of digestive tract tumors (stomach, duodenum, and rectum) that meet the criteria for endoscopic resection, this is a reliable and safe technique in the long term.

EUS-guided drainage and stent placement for postoperative intra-abdominal and pelvic fluid collections in oncological surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the role and benefits of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in the management of postoperative intra-abdominal fluid collections after attempted curative surgery for abdominal cancer. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analysed the Endobase from 1 July 2007 to 30 January 2011 for patients with a postoperative intra-abdominal fluid collection who had undergone EUS-guided drainage and the placement of a stent. The data analysed included the demographics, type of surgery and clinical indications of each patient as well as their clinical and radiological findings. RESULTS: Six patients (three men and three women; mean age, 61.8 years [range, 38-78 years]) with intra-abdominal and pelvic fluid collections after abdominal surgery for cancer had undergone EUS-guided internal drainage. All procedures had been performed using linear EUS guidance and 8-Fr stent drainage catheters ('one step device', Giovannini, NWOA system Needle-Wire, Cook). The collection types included perigastric abscess (n = 3), perigastric hematoma and rectal hematoma (n = 1), perirectal biloma (n = 1), and perirectal abscess (n = 1). Patients had undergone the following types of surgery: lower-anterior rectal resection (n = 2), Whipple's duodenopancreatectomy type (n = 1), total gastrectomy (n = 1), splenectomy (n = 1), and distal pancreatectomy (n = 1). The number of stents inserted for each collection was one (five patients) and two (one patient). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided drainage and stenting provide another option for the management of postoperative collections. It allows access to areas that are difficult to reach with the CT-guided approach and it can be performed accurately, efficiently and safely. In addition to this, the internal nature of the drainage offers patients more comfort.