@article{ATM3533,
author = {Atsushi Nanashima and Hajime Isomoto and Takafumi Abo and Takashi Nonaka and Tomohito Morisaki and Junichi Arai and Katsunori Takagi and Ken Ohnita and Hiroyuki Shoji and Shigetoshi Urabe and Takemasa Senoo and Goshi Murakami and Takeshi Nagayasu},
title = {How to access photodynamic therapy for bile duct carcinoma},
journal = {Annals of Translational Medicine},
volume = {2},
number = {3},
year = {2014},
keywords = {},
abstract = {Background: Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising treatment option for local control of remnant cancer after surgical resection or biliary stenosis by the unresectable tumor in patients with bile duct carcinomas (BDC). To achieve effective tumor necrosis, an appropriate approach to laser irradiation is necessary.
Methods: The efficacy of endoscopy-guided PDT using porfimer (n=12) or talaporfin sodium (n=13) was investigated by evaluating the transhepatic biliary routes and endoscopic retrograde biliary (ERB) routes in 25 patients with BDC.
Results: Diseases included perihilar intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) in four patients, extrahepatic BDCs in 19 and ampular carcinoma (AC) in two patients. Adjuvant PDT after surgical resection was performed in 18 patients, and PDT for tumor biliary stenosis was performed in seven. In patients undergoing surgical resections, the mean period between the operation and PDT was 87±42 days. In patients who underwent prior surgical resections, the transhepatic route was used in five (28%), the jejunal loop was used in 11 (61%), the T-tube route was used in one, and the endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) route via papilla Vater was used in one. In unresectable BDC, the ERC route was used in four patients (57%), and the transhepatic biliary route was used in three (43%). Endoscopic-guided PDT could not be performed in one patient because of a technical failure. Except for the complication of photosensitivity, endoscopy-related complications were not observed in any patients. Patients undergoing PDT with porfimer sodium had a significantly longer admission period compared to patients undergoing PDT with talaporfin sodium (36 vs. 5 days, respectively) (P},
issn = {2305-5847}, url = {https://atm.amegroups.org/article/view/3533}
}