Surgical Treatment of Neuroendocrine Tumors of the Terminal Ileum or Cecum: Ileocecectomy Versus Right Hemicolectomy. Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract Li, M. X., Lopez-Aguiar, A. G., Poultsides, G., Rocha, F., Weber, S., Fields, R., Idrees, K., Cho, C., Maithel, S. K., Zhang, X. F., Pawlik, T. M. 2022


Simple ileocecectomy and right hemicolectomy are two potential operative approaches to treat patients with neuroendocrine neoplasm in the terminal ileum and/or cecum (IC-NENs). We sought to define the long-term outcome of patients undergoing ileocecectomy versus right hemicolectomy for IC-NENs, as well as characterize number of nodes evaluated and lymph node metastasis (LNM) associated with each procedure.Patients who underwent curative-intent resections for IC-NENs between 2000 and 2016 were identified from a multi-institutional database. The clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical procedures, and the overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared among patients who underwent formal right hemicolectomy versus ileocecectomy only.Among 127 patients with IC-NENs, median size of the largest tumor size was 2.0 (IQR 1.2-2.9) cm; 35 (27.6%) patients had multiple lesions. At the time of surgery, 93 (73.2%) patients underwent a right hemicolectomy, whereas 34 (26.8%) had ileocecectomy only. Every patient had a lymph node dissection (LND) with a median number of 16 (IQR 12-22) nodes evaluated. A majority (n?=?110, 86.6%) of patients had LNM with a median number of 3 (IQR 2-5) LNM. Patients who underwent hemicolectomy had more lymph nodes evaluated versus patients who had an ileocecectomy only (median, 18 vs. 14, p?=?0.004). Patients who underwent formal right hemicolectomy versus ileocecectomy had a similar OS (median OS, 101.9 vs. 144.5 months, p?=?0.44) and RFS (median RFS, 70.3 vs. not attained, p?=?0.80), respectively.Ileocecectomy had similar long-term outcomes versus right hemicolectomy in treatment of IC-NENs despite a difference in the lymph node harvest.

View details for DOI 10.1007/s11605-022-05269-1

View details for PubMedID 35149952