No abstract

When do you need to take biopsies of the liver, and what information will you get is the topic of this review on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). If, clinically, the differential diagnosis of HCC after imaging is suggested, a biopsy has become obligatory as a diagnostic confirmation of HCC in the non-cirrhotic liver prior to definitive therapeutic interventions, as well as in a palliative therapy concept. In the case of hepatic lesions with an uncharacteristic contrast uptake, a biopsy should be performed immediately to confirm the diagnosis of HCC. After diagnosing HCC, a treatment strategy is evaluated. Further, the biopsy, or in case of surgical treatment, the resected tissue, shows us the different subtypes of HCC, with the steatohepatitic subtype being the most common and the lymphocyte-rich subtype being the least common. Further, the histological grade of HCC is determined according to the grading system of the WHO or the Edmonson and Steiner System. Through biopsies, HCC can be differentiated from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma or combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma or metastases of other malignant tumors, especially metastases of the gastrointestinal tract. In summary, biopsies are fundamental in the diagnosis of HCC.

No abstract

No abstract

e16241 Background: Clinical guidelines and their adherence are important instruments to ensure quality in diagnosis and treatment, especially when treating rare diseases like pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET). However, data on guideline adherence and its impact on outcome in PanNET is limited. Methods: Cases of PanNET according to 2017 WHO definition at our university hospital between 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Adherence to ENETS guideline 2007/2012 and the German S2k guideline was evaluated among four categories (diagnostics: chromogranin A (CgA) testing, somatostatin receptor imaging, discussion in an interdisciplinary tumor board; pathology: reporting of grading, Ki67 and synaptophysin expression; surgical treatment; systemic treatment including aftercare). Guideline adherence within these categories was valued with one point per fulfilled criterion and a final score between 0-8 points was calculated. Data was analyzed using Student’s t-test, Chi-square test and Spearman’s correlation coefficient test. Results were considered significant at α = 0.05. Results: Overall, 115 patients (47% female) with a diagnosis of PanNET were identified. Mean age was 61 (±13.5) years. Mean overall survival (OS) was 45 months, mean recurrence free survival (RFS) was 47 months. During the study period 21 patients (18%) had died, 6 patients (5%) were lost-to-follow-up and 11 patients (10%) had a recurrent disease after initially curative resection. 24 patients (21%) presented with metastatic disease upon diagnosis. Guideline adherence concerning pathology reports (97%) as well as systemic (91%) and surgical treatment (75%) was high, while complete adherence in diagnostic modalities was low (5%). However, the latter was mainly driven by lack of CgA testing (31%), and somatostatin receptor imaging (11%) not being performed on initial diagnosis, but in most cases during follow-up. Subsequently, complete guideline adherence (8/8) across all categories was rare (3%). However, a higher overall score was associated with survival (p = 0.032, V = 0.321). Long term survivors had a higher mean overall adherence score (5.6 vs. 6.1; p = 0.05). In addition, the composite score of surgical and systemic therapy was significantly correlated with RFS (ρ = 0.254, p = 0.016). Conclusions: The quality in diagnosis and treatment of PanNET in our cohort was high. These are the first data to demonstrate a positive impact of guideline adherence on survival and RFS in PanNET.