The mainstay of appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm (aNEN) treatment is surgery, based on simple appendectomy or right-sided hemicolectomy with lymphadenectomy (RHC). The majority of aNENs are adequately treated with appendectomy, but current guidelines have poor accuracy in terms of selecting patients requiring RHC, especially in aNENs 1–2 cm in size. Simple appendectomy is curative for appendiceal NETs (G1–G2) < 1 cm (if the resection status is R0), whereas RHC with lymph node dissection is recommended in tumors ≥ 2 cm in diameter, based on the high risk of nodal metastases in these cases. The clinical management of aNENs 1–2 cm in size is more controversial because lymph node or distant metastases are uncommon but possible. In our opinion, patients with tumor size > 15 mm or with grading G2 (according to WHO 2010) and/or lympho-vascular invasion should be referred for radicalization with RHC. However, decision-making in these cases should include discussion within a multidisciplinary tumor board at referral centers with the aim of offering each patient a tailored treatment, also considering that relatively young patients with long-life expectancy represent the majority of cases.

An Update on Appendiceal Neuroendocrine Tumors

Andrini E.;Ricci C.;Campana D.
2023

Abstract

The mainstay of appendiceal neuroendocrine neoplasm (aNEN) treatment is surgery, based on simple appendectomy or right-sided hemicolectomy with lymphadenectomy (RHC). The majority of aNENs are adequately treated with appendectomy, but current guidelines have poor accuracy in terms of selecting patients requiring RHC, especially in aNENs 1–2 cm in size. Simple appendectomy is curative for appendiceal NETs (G1–G2) < 1 cm (if the resection status is R0), whereas RHC with lymph node dissection is recommended in tumors ≥ 2 cm in diameter, based on the high risk of nodal metastases in these cases. The clinical management of aNENs 1–2 cm in size is more controversial because lymph node or distant metastases are uncommon but possible. In our opinion, patients with tumor size > 15 mm or with grading G2 (according to WHO 2010) and/or lympho-vascular invasion should be referred for radicalization with RHC. However, decision-making in these cases should include discussion within a multidisciplinary tumor board at referral centers with the aim of offering each patient a tailored treatment, also considering that relatively young patients with long-life expectancy represent the majority of cases.
2023
Andrini E.; Lamberti G.; Alberici L.; Ricci C.; Campana D.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Andrini_2023.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 654.39 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
654.39 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/952190
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact