Preview

Grekov's Bulletin of Surgery

Advanced search

DIFFICULTIES OF DIAGNOSTICS AND CHOICE OF SURGICAL APPROACH IN PATIENTS WITH DUCTAL CHOLANGIOCARCINOMA

https://doi.org/10.24884/0042-4625-2017-176-1-56-59

Abstract

Diagnostics and treatment of ductal cholangiocarcinoma is an actual and complicated problem of modern hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. The data of preoperative examination using modern methods weren’t always well-defined. This fact didn’t allow clinicians to choose the common treatment strategy and improve the prognosis. The main problem of diagnostic stage was a low morphological verification of the disease, so the diagnosis was confirmed in 17,5% patients. The article presents the results of examination and surgical treatment of 40 patients with suggested diagnosis of ductal cholangiocarcinoma. Indications to operation were based on examination data (CT, MRI, cholangiography, angiography, tumor markers tests) and signs of complications (jaundice, cholangitis, liver abscess). The absence of morphological verification couldn’t be the reason for rejection from the operation. Radical operative intervention had a distinctive advantage. The surgery gave the chance for positive long-term prognosis in case of cancer and allowed doctors to cure patients in case of benign tumor. Functional state of the liver and morphological changes of the removed share should be considered in case of hilus carcinoma. This approach has to be strictly individual and medical care should be applied in special medical centers.

About the Authors

D. A. Granov
Russian research Centre of Radiology and Surgical Technologies
Russian Federation


I. V. Timergalin
Russian research Centre of Radiology and Surgical Technologies
Russian Federation


References

1. Бурякина С. А., Кармазановский Г. Г. Опухоль Клацкина: современные аспекты дифференциальной диагностики // Анналы хир. гепатол. 2012. № 1. С. 100-109.

2. Вишневский В. А., Тарасюк Т. И., Икрамов Р. З. Радикальные операции при раке проксимальных желчных протоков // Анналы хир. гепатол. 2005. № 3. С. 35-42.

3. Щеголев А. И., Дубова Е. А., Павлов К. А. Современная TNMклассификация опухолей печени и желчных протоков // Мед. визуализация. 2011. № 2. С. 8-12.

4. Ahrendt S. A., Nakeeb A., Pitt H. A. Cholangiocarcinoma // Clin. Liver Dis. 2001. Vol. 5, № 1. P. 191-218.

5. Are С., Gonen M., D’Angelica M. Differential diagnosis of proximal biliary obstruction // Surgery. 2006. Vol. 140. P. 756-763.

6. Corvera C. U., Blumgart L. H., Darvishian F. Clinical and pathologic features of proximal biliary strictures masquerading as hilar cholangiocarcinoma // J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2005. Vol. 201. P. 862-869.

7. Jarnagin W. R., Fong Y., DeMatteo R. P. Staging, resectability, and outcome in 225 patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma // Ann. Surg. 2001. Vol. 234. P. 507-517.

8. Kawasaki S., Imamura H., Kobayashi A. Results of surgical resection for patients with hilar bile duct cancer // Ann. Surg. 2003. Vol. 238, № 1. P. 84-92.

9. Kim H. M., Park J. Y., Kim K. S. et al. Intraductal ultrasonography combined with percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy for the preoperative evaluation of longitudinal tumor extent in hilar cholangiocarcinoma // J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2010. Vol. 25, № 2. P. 286-292.

10. Tamada K., Ushio J., Sugano K. Endoscopic diagnosis of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma: advances and current limitations // World J. Clin. Oncol. 2011. № 2. P. 203-216.


Review

For citations:


Granov D.A., Timergalin I.V. DIFFICULTIES OF DIAGNOSTICS AND CHOICE OF SURGICAL APPROACH IN PATIENTS WITH DUCTAL CHOLANGIOCARCINOMA. Grekov's Bulletin of Surgery. 2017;176(1):56-59. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24884/0042-4625-2017-176-1-56-59

Views: 464


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 0042-4625 (Print)
ISSN 2686-7370 (Online)