• Users Online:245
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 207-209

Pancreatic cancer: Does it work if EUS and laser ablation get married?

1 Department of Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University; Key Laboratory of Precision Diagnosis and Treatment for Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Tumor of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China
2 Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Intervention Center, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China
3 Key Laboratory of Precision Diagnosis and Treatment for Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Tumor of Zhejiang Province; State Key Laboratory for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, Collaborative Innovation Center for Diagnosis and Treatment of Infectious Diseases, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China

Date of Submission28-Nov-2016
Date of Acceptance22-Dec-2017
Date of Web Publication10-May-2018

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Tian'an Jiang
Department of Ultrasound, The First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/eus.eus_28_17

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Jiang T, Deng Z, Li J, Tian G. Pancreatic cancer: Does it work if EUS and laser ablation get married?. Endosc Ultrasound 2018;7:207-9

How to cite this URL:
Jiang T, Deng Z, Li J, Tian G. Pancreatic cancer: Does it work if EUS and laser ablation get married?. Endosc Ultrasound [serial online] 2018 [cited 2022 Dec 8];7:207-9. Available from: http://www.eusjournal.com/text.asp?2018/7/3/207/232125

EUS has been evolved into potential therapeutic method, which initially was only a diagnostic tool.[1] Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a clinically fatal disease with genetic susceptibility and familial aggregation.[2] The poor prognosis mainly resulted from a locally advanced or metastatic stage, low resection rates, and insensitive to radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

Here we reported a case of a 61 yearold male with pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed by biopsy, who underwent FOLFOXIRI (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 d1, irinotecan 165 mg/m2 d1, 5FU 400 mg/m2 d1 iv, and continuous micropump infusion of 2400 mg/m2 for 46 h, repeated every 2 weeks) between December 2014 and February 2015, GS (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on d1 and d8, tegafurgimeraciloteracil potassium 1000 mg/m2 d114, repeated every 3 weeks) from October 2015 to May 2016, and DX (docetaxel 40 mg/m2 d1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 d110, repeated every 2 weeks) from June 2016 to August 2016. This case has a 20 year history of smoking and alcohol. On admission, he complained of abdominal pain, and computed tomography presented a mass of 5.3 cm × 4.6 cm in size in the pancreatic head. After fasting for 8 h, the case underwent the left lateral position examination by oral intake of lidocaine hydrochloride and mild sedation. We used a curved linear array echoendoscope (Olympus Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) orally. We detected pancreatic tail lesions in the upper part of the cardia and gastric body, checking pancreatic body lesions in the lower part of the stomach and gastric antrum, observing uncinate process lesions near pancreatic head and ditch lesions. Color doppler ultrasonography was used to observe the blood flow around the puncture site. After determining the depth, 22G aspiration needle was punctured, then we pulled out the needle core and inserted 3-meter thin laser fibers into the center of tumor away from the lower capsule wall (approximately 1.3 cm), which have a wave length of 800-1064 nm, core diameter of 300 μm, and minimum bend radius of 36 mm. In the initial ablation, the Nd: YAG ablation (Echolaser X4, ESAOTE, Italy) was conducted about energy of 4000 J under EUS guidance. In this process, we ablated the lesion three times using one fiber at 1.3 cm to the edge of the tumor. We firstly performed the ablation with 1000J energy, then withdrawing 1.5 cm and having another 500J. After parallelly adjusting puncture needle about 1 cm away from previous ablation, we secondly ablated the lesion about 1000J energy. Then by repeating parallel puncture and needle procedures, we repeated additional 1500J for this tumor. But two days after initial ablation, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) showed an abnormal residual near the left of the tumor. Then, after 6 day-follow up, the target tumor was repeatedly ablated by another EUS-guided multiple ablation of 14,000 J energy. At 2 day followup, CEUS image revealed that no enhancement was detectable in the tumor, which meant complete necrosis. Moreover, 2 months later after two ablations, CEUS showed the tumor nearly complete necrosis and shrunk [Figure 1].
Figure 1: A 61 yearold male with pancreatic cancer. Preoperative computed tomography scan and contrastenhanced ultrasound image showed a tumor measuring 5.3 cm × 4.6 cm in size in the pancreatic head (ad) (arrowheads). Endoscopic ultrasonography real timely guided laser fiber being inserted into the center of tumor away from the capsule wall (approximately 1.3 cm) (e and f). Two days later, contrastenhanced ultrasound showed an abnormal residual near the left of the tumor (g). Then, after 6 days, another endoscopic ultrasonographyguided laser ablation was performed for target tumor (h), and the followup contrastenhanced ultrasound image showed the mass was completed necrosis without enhancement (i). And 2 months later after two ablations, contrastenhanced ultrasound showed the tumor nearly complete necrosis and shrunk (j)

Click here to view

There were no serious procedurerelated complications. In 2month followup, alpha fetoprotein (AFP), carbohydrate antigen 199 (CA 199), and CA 125 levels were normal (AFP: Before: 3.8 ng/mL; after: 3.6 ng/mL; CA 199: Before: 11.3 U/mL; after: 4.7 U/mL; CA 125: Before: 15.6 U/mL; after: 14.2 U/mL), but pre- and postoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) concentration was beyond the reference value (CEA: Before: 46.2 ng/mL; after: 63.9 ng/mL). The patient's abdominal pain was relieved.

The development of lineararray EUS in the 1990s enabled fineneedle aspiration biopsy under EUS guidance. Currently, EUSguided treatment could be alternatives of the laparotomy, laparoscopic, or transcutaneous ways. Subsequently, a preliminary study showed that EUSguided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in porcine models was successful in destroying pancreatic tissue.[3] It was reported that EUSRFA was performed successfully in all 6 cases with PC located in the head or body of the pancreas.[4] Complications after these procedures might include abdominal pain, duodenal bleeding, jaundice, and duodenal stricture.[3],[5] Photodynamic therapy guided by EUS for advanced PC was technically feasible in a porcine model [6],[7] and PC patients.[8] EUS techniques with fineneedle injection (FNI) have the potential to directly allow high dose of antitumor agents for limiting tumor growth in patients with unresectable PC. Irisawa et al. treated seven patients with advanced PC by injection of 10 billion or more immature DCs at 2–3 sites through EUSFNI. No significant complications were detectable, and median survival was 9.9 months.[9] In addition, adenovirus such as TNFerade [10] and ONYX-015[11] may be delivered into the tumor for a potential antitumor therapy. However, there need more samples to confirm these findings.

Laser ablation (LA) is a minimally invasive thermal therapy for local malignant tumor. Endosonography could be the optimal approach to real timely display the pancreas, and it allowed targeting tumor easily wherever they were situated in the pancreas. Among ablative methods, LA offered higher focal temperature decreasing splitting or falling off for ablation area. It clinically enabled controlled energy with output power of 1–7 w comparing with 10–100 w in RFA and microwave ablation (MWA). It reported that massive energy input may account for neoplasm recurrence and rapid growth.[12],[13] Thus, better prognosis will be feasible within the lower power and energy. In addition, unambiguous and thin boundary between the ablative zone and the surrounding normal tissues was available in LA while not in RFA and MWA.[14] Moreover, CEUS could immediately show the clearer focal zone and reduce the number of incomplete treatments and re-treatments, which was deemed as accurate as other imaging modalities for estimating post-treatment technical success, and had better cost-effectiveness than the standard procedure.[15],[16] Based on these, they could increase the probability of PC being successfully treated by LA. It suggested that EUSguided LA could be feasible and effective, which could be a promising alternative to surgery in selected cases. However, more largescale prospective studies with longterm followup are necessary to confirm this finding in the future.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form the patient has given his consent for his images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patient understands that his name and initial will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal his identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Financial support and sponsorship

This study was supported by the Foundation of Zhejiang Health Committee (2017KY346).

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

  References Top

DiMagno EP, Buxton JL, Regan PT, et al. Ultrasonic endoscope. Lancet 1980;1:629-31.  Back to cited text no. 1
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65:5-29.  Back to cited text no. 2
Carrara S, Arcidiacono PG, Albarello L, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided application of a new hybrid cryotherm probe in porcine pancreas: A preliminary study. Endoscopy 2008;40:321-6.  Back to cited text no. 3
Song TJ, Seo DW, Lakhtakia S, et al. Initial experience of EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation of unresectable pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;83:440-3.  Back to cited text no. 4
Arcidiacono PG, Carrara S, Reni M, et al. Feasibility and safety of EUS-guided cryothermal ablation in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;76:1142-51.  Back to cited text no. 5
Chan HH, Nishioka NS, Mino M, et al. EUS-guided photodynamic therapy of the pancreas: A pilot study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:95-9.  Back to cited text no. 6
Yusuf TE, Matthes K, Brugge WR. EUS-guided photodynamic therapy with verteporfin for ablation of normal pancreatic tissue: A pilot study in a porcine model (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2008;67:957-61.  Back to cited text no. 7
Choi JH, Oh D, Lee JH, et al. Initial human experience of endoscopic ultrasound-guided photodynamic therapy with a novel photosensitizer and a flexible laser-light catheter. Endoscopy 2015;47:1035-8.  Back to cited text no. 8
Irisawa A, Takagi T, Kanazawa M, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle injection of immature dendritic cells into advanced pancreatic cancer refractory to gemcitabine: A pilot study. Pancreas 2007;35:189-90.  Back to cited text no. 9
Senzer N, Mani S, Rosemurgy A, et al. TNFerade biologic, an adenovector with a radiation-inducible promoter, carrying the human tumor necrosis factor alpha gene: A phase I study in patients with solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:592-601.  Back to cited text no. 10
Hecht JR, Bedford R, Abbruzzese JL, et al. Aphase I/II trial of intratumoral endoscopic ultrasound injection of ONYX-015 with intravenous gemcitabine in unresectable pancreatic carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2003;9:555-61.  Back to cited text no. 11
Dong S, Kong J, Kong F, et al. Insufficient radiofrequency ablation promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition of hepatocellular carcinoma cells through Akt and ERK signaling pathways. J Transl Med 2013;11:273.  Back to cited text no. 12
Brunello F, Carucci P, Gaia S, et al. Local tumor progression of hepatocellular carcinoma after microwave percutaneous ablation: A preliminary report. Gastroenterology Res 2012;5:28-32.  Back to cited text no. 13
Ahmed M, Brace CL, Lee FT Jr., et al. Principles of and advances in percutaneous ablation. Radiology 2011;258:351-69.  Back to cited text no. 14
Mauri G, Cova L, De Beni S, et al. Real-time US-CT/MRI image fusion for guidance of thermal ablation of liver tumors undetectable with US: Results in 295 cases. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2015;38:143-51.  Back to cited text no. 15
Mauri G, Porazzi E, Cova L, et al. Intraprocedural contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in liver percutaneous radiofrequency ablation: Clinical impact and health technology assessment. Insights Imaging 2014;5:209-16.  Back to cited text no. 16


  [Figure 1]

This article has been cited by
1 Associations between serum uric acid and hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancer: A cohort study
Chong-Fei Huang,Jun-Jun Huang,Ning-Ning Mi,Yan-Yan Lin,Qiang-Sheng He,Ya-Wen Lu,Ping Yue,Bing Bai,Jin-Duo Zhang,Chao Zhang,Teng Cai,Wen-Kang Fu,Long Gao,Xun Li,Jin-Qiu Yuan,Wen-Bo Meng
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2020; 26(44): 7061
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Dependence of Photothermal Responses on Wavelengths
Jinoh Bak,Han Jae Pyo,Jong Man Choi,Seok Jeong,Hyun Wook Kang
Journal of the Korean Physical Society. 2019; 74(3): 224
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Endoscopic Palliation for Biliary and Pancreatic Malignancies: Recent Advances
Zaheer Nabi,D. Nageshwar Reddy
Clinical Endoscopy. 2019; 52(3): 226
[Pubmed] | [DOI]


Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

  In this article
   Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded258    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal