Abstract

Introduction

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is a rare malignancy originating from the intrahepatic biliary tree proximal to the second-order bile ducts. A complete surgical resection is performed in about 20% of patients with iCCA, with a 5-year survival rate of 30.4% ¹ . Most patients present with locally advanced disease or distant metastasis ² .

The presence of positive lymph nodes (LNs) is a poor prognostic factor for iCCA ³ . In the 7 ^th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for iCCA, N status was determined by the location of a positive LN; N1 for regional LN and N2 for extraregional LN (including aortocaval and celiac) ⁴ . In the 8 ^th edition, N stage only reflects the number of regional positive LNs, whereas extraregional positive LNs are classified with all other distant metastases (i.e., stage IV). Positive extraregional LNs are a contraindication to surgical resection in most patients ⁵ .

Approximately 40% of patients who undergo iCCA resection are found to have positive regional LNs ⁶ . These patients also have a poor median overall survival (OS)after surgical resection of only 18 months versus 45 months if LNs are negative ¹ . The 5-year cancer-specific survival for patients with LN metastases is 13.1% compared with 44.9% for no LN metastasis ⁷ . This poor OS may not justify a major liver resection, especially in patients with high surgical risk ⁸ . Endoscopic ultrasound with tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) could confirm positive regional LN in these patients and avoid surgical exploration.

Cross-sectional imaging with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has limited accuracy for detection of positive LNs ⁹ . In other gastrointestinal malignancies such as esophageal cancer, EUS-TA is often performed to evaluate LN status ^{10 11 12} . Several studies have reported promising results for use of EUS in the preoperative setting for cholangiocarcinoma ^{10 11 13 14} . The recently published clinical practice guidelines on management of iCCA by the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and International Liver Cancer Association (ILCA) recommend that patients with apparent resectable iCCA undergo LN sampling by EUS-TA during staging evaluation, if a positive result would alter management ¹⁵ . However, data on the use of preoperative LN staging in the setting of iCCA are limited to one study and the impact on clinical decision making is still unclear ¹¹ . Therefore, our objective was to assess the yield and its impact on clinical decision making of EUS-TA of LN in patients with potentially resectable iCCA.

Patients and methods

Regional and extraregional LN locations

LN locations were defined according to the 8 ^th AJCC edition ( Table 1 ) ^{4 16} . Regional and extraregional LNs were defined differently for iCCA located in the left or right hemi-liver ( Fig. 1 ). LN locations not covered by the AJCC classification were noted separately and considered extraregional if located distally from the furthest possible regional LN for left- or right-sided iCCA.

Table 1 AJCC staging system classification regarding LN status for iCCA.

	7th edition		8th edition
	N1	M1	N1	M1
CBD, common bile duct; CD, cystic duct; CO, celiac; GH, gastrohepatic; HA, hepatic artery; IP, inferior phrenic; LN, lymph node; LNM, lymph node metastasis; Nx, regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed; N0, no regional lymph node metastasis; PA, periaortic; PC, pericaval; PD, periduodenal; PP, peripancreatic; PV, portal vein.
Left liver iCCA (segment 2–4)	≥1 LNM in the regional LNs (hilar, CD, CBD, HA, PV, IP or GH LNs)	Distant metastasis (includes LNM in the CO, PA or PC LNs)	≥1 LNM in the regional LNs (hilar, CD, CBD, HA, PV, IP or GH LNs)	Distant metastasis (includes LNM in the CO, PA or PC LNs)
Right liver iCCA (segment 5–8)	≥1 LNM in the regional LNs (hilar, CD, CBD, HA, PV, PD or PP LNs)	Distant metastasis (includes LNM in the CO, PA or PC LNs)	≥1 LNM in the regional LNs (hilar, CD, CBD, HA, PV, PD or PP LNs)	Distant metastasis (includes LNM in the CO, PA or PC LNs)

Open in a separate window

Open in a separate window

Fig. 1

Figure showcasing the locations of regional and extraregional LN for both left- and right-sided iCCA.

Results

Yield of EUS-TA

EUS-TA showed malignancy in 21 of 55 LNs (38%), no malignancy in 30 LNs (55%), and was nondiagnostic in four LNs (7%). Positive extraregional LNs were identified by EUS-TA in 15 of 56 patients (27%) and positive regional LNs in five of 56 patients (9%). Overall, in 19 of 56 patients (34%) EUS-TA identified malignancy in LN because one patient had both ( Table 4 ). Fig. 2 shows the clinical course of all patients. After EUS, 17 patients (30%) were precluded from surgical exploration due to positive EUS-TA ( Table S1 ) and 15 patients (27%) were precluded from surgery for various other reasons, as shown in Fig. 2 .

Table 4 Characteristics of all identified LNs based on EUS characteristics.

Described LN on EUS	#	No EUS-TA		Successful EUS-TA			Pathology results
		Not possible	Not performed	FNA	FNB	Both	Positive	Negative	Non diagnostic*
EUS, endoscopic ultrasound; EUS-TA, EUS-guided tissue acquisition; FNA, fine-needle aspiration; FNB, fine-needle biopsy; LN, lymph node. *All nondiagnostic pathology results were from FNA.
Regional
Suspicious	26	1	8	14	3		5	11	1
Not suspicious	3		2	1				1
Extraregional
Suspicious	36	2	2	31	3	2	16	17	3
Not suspicious	2	1	1

Open in a separate window

Open in a separate window

Fig. 2

Flowchart of patients included in this study, according to EUS findings. *Surgery refusal (n = 3), disease progression during work-up showing unresectable disease (n = 2) and distant thoracic metastasis identified during work-up by percutaneous biopsy (n = 1). §Surgery refusal (n = 3), disease progression during work-up showing unresectable disease (n = 3), liver metastasis identified during work-up (n = 1), distant abdominal malignant LN identified by percutaneous biopsy (n = 1) and suspected Fasciola Hepatica diagnosis (n = 1). **Without positive regional LN at pathology assessment. ***Positive regional LN located next to the left liver lobe in which the iCCA was located (n = 1) and positive extraregional LN peri-pancreatic in a left-sided iCCA (n = 1)

Finally, 24 patients (43%) underwent surgical exploration of whom two patients had prior EUS-TA-proven positive LN. These two patients with preoperatively confirmed positive LNs (one regional and one extraregional) underwent surgical exploration, but in both patients, multiple extraregional positive LN were found and the resection was thus cancelled.

Among the remaining 22 patients who underwent surgical exploration, in 14 patients (63.6%) no complete resection was performed. This was due to occult metastasis in the liver or peritoneum (n=5), locally advanced (i.e. unresectable) disease (n=4), in whom one patient had severely enlarged suspicious regional LNs behind the portal vein on palpation but biopsy was not safely possible and patient preference to refrain from further surgical treatment after separate staging surgery (n=2). In three patients, positive regional LNs were identified during the procedure. Further resection was not performed in these patients as all three had high surgical risk due to comorbidities.

Finally, in eight of the 22 patients (36%) a complete resection was performed, without nodal involvement. In one patient with a resection, final pathology showed no malignancy but sarcoidosis.

Discussion

EUS-TA confirmed positive LNs in 34% of patients with potentially resectable iCCA and suspicious LNs on cross-sectional imaging. Positive extraregional LNs were found in 27% of patients. Because of positive LNs confirmed with EUS-TA, surgical exploration was withheld in 30% of patients. These patients could proceed with more appropriate palliative systemic treatment and avoid staging laparoscopy or surgical exploration.

In a recent retrospective study by Malikowski et al., LNs were visualized during EUS in 20 of 24 iCCA patients (83%) ¹¹ . EUS-TA identified positive LNs in six of 49 (12%) LNs biopsied, withholding surgical exploration in four of 24 patients (17%). The authors performed EUS-TA in all identified LNs after systematic mapping. However, this study did not distinguish between regional and extraregional LNs, or the location of the primary iCCA ¹¹ . Patients with positive extraregional LNs have stage IV disease and are unlikely to benefit from surgical resection of iCCA. This concerned 79% of patients in the present study. Patients with positive regional LNs, however, can expect an OS after surgical resection that is considerably worse than with negative regional LNs, but still better than a median OS of 17 months with palliative treatment ^{1 17} . An individual approach with shared decision making is required to consider both surgical risk and potential oncological benefit of surgical resection.

In patients without preoperative confirmation of positive LNs, positive regional LNs were identified during surgical staging in 13.6% of patients. This rate is not directly comparable with the study of Malikowski et al. due to the abovementioned differences in study design. Malikowski et al. report the number of missed LNs for all cholangiocarcinoma subtypes ¹¹ . Of the 130 patients without positive LNs by EUS-TA, 80 (62%) proceeded to staging laparotomy, with identification of positive LNs in four patients (5%). False-negative LN assessment can be explained by inadequate EUS, false-negative TA, or progression of disease in the time between EUS and the staging procedure. A recent study found that positive extraregional LNs precluding complete resection were identified in 11% of patients at surgical staging when EUS was not performed ¹⁸ .

This study is the first study on the yield and impact of preoperative EUS in patients with potentially resectable iCCA, distinguishing extraregional from regional LNs. The study population included all potentially resectable iCCAs on cross-sectional imaging with suspicious LN, rather than only patients with resected iCCA. Therefore, the impact of preoperative EUS-TA on clinical decision making could be assessed. This study also has several limitations. First, the retrospective nature of the study limited the data availability on LN location on cross-sectional imaging, EUS, and during surgery. Therefore, diagnostic test characteristics for each specific LN location could not be compared across imaging modalities. Use of four different needle sizes could potentially have a confounding effect, but we were unable to highlight the relative results regarding diagnostic accuracy. Second, not all consecutive patients with potentially resectable iCCA were included at the treatment centers, but only the patients in whom an EUS was performed. The indication for EUS was mostly lymphadenopathy on cross-sectional imaging. Therefore, the yield and effect on clinical decision making has likely been overestimated, compared with an approach in which all patients would undergo EUS-TA, regardless of lymphadenopathy seen on cross-sectional imaging. We were unable to include patients with presumed resectable iCCA who did not undergo EUS. Third, at the time of the EUS procedures included in this study, not all LNs were systematically assessed during EUS, making comparison with available results in the literature challenging ¹¹ .

Conclusions

In conclusion, the yield of EUS-TA to confirm positive LN in patients with potentially resectable iCCA was 38% and surgical exploration was withheld based on this result in 30% of patients. Prospective studies should be performed using a systematic approach with accurate description of LN location for each imaging modality. Such a clinical trial has started in the Netherlands, based on the results of this study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05678218).

Footnotes

References