Intraductal neoplasm of the intrahepatic bile duct: Clinicopathological study of 24 cases

Table 1 Clinicopathological features of 24 patients with intraductal neoplasm of the intrahepatic bile duct

Age (yr), median (mean ± SD)	64.0 (63.0 ± 8.1)
Gender, n (%)
Male	12 (50)
Female	12 (50)
Location, n (%)
Left lobe	16 (67)
Right lobe	8 (33)
Tumor size (cm), median (mean ± SD)	30 (42.2 ± 26.6)
Macroscopic findings of bile duct, n (%)
Duct-ectatic	5 (21)
Cystic	19 (79)
Macroscopic mucin hypersecretion, n (%)
Present	19 (79)
Absent	5 (21)
Histological structure pattern, n (%)
Papillary	20 (83)
Tubular and papillary	4 (17)
Histological grade, n (%)
Malignant	16 (67)
Borderline	3 (12)
Adenoma	5 (21)
Microinvasion, n (%)
Present	4 (17)
Absent	20 (83)

Table 2 Clinicopathological findings of intraductal neoplasm of the intrahepatic bile duct with papillary and tubular structure in four patients

	Case 1	Case 2	Case 31	Case 4
Age (yr)	77	49	63	52
Gender	Male	Female	Male	Male
Location	Left lobe
Tumor size (cm)	10	2	6	2.6
Mucin produced	Absent			Present
macroscopically
Macroscopic findings	Duct-ectatic type			Cystic
Histopathological grade	Malignant	Borderline	Adenoma	Adenoma
Microinvasion	Absent
Mucin immunohistochemistry
MUC1	3+	-	-	1+
MUC2	-	-	-	-
MUC5AC	-	1+	-	-
MUC6	3+	3+	+	3+

¹Has been reported as biliary papillomatosis.

Table 3 Immunohistochemical features of 24 cases of intraductal neoplasm of the intrahepatic bile duct

	Malignantn (16.67%)	Borderline n (3.12%)/adenoma n (5.21%)
MUC11
3+ (38%)	9 (56)	0
2+ (0%)	0	0
1+/- (62%)	7 (44)	8 (100)
MUC2
3+ (13%)	1 (6)	2 (25)
2+ (4%)	1 (6)	0
1+/- (83%)	14 (88)	6 (75)
MUC5AC
3+ (46%)	7 (44)	4 (50)
2+ (12%)	2 (12)	1 (13)
1+/- (42%)	7 (44)	3 (37)
MUC6
3+ (46%)	4 (25)	5 (63)
2+ (12%)	4 (25)	1 (22)
1+/- (44%)	8 (50)	2 (25)
Proliferation
Ki-67 (LI, %, mean ± SD)2	22.2 ± 15.5	7.5 ± 6.3
Genetic status
TP53 overexpression	0	0
β-catenin nuclear expression (17%)3	2 (13)	0

¹MUC1 expression was exhibited only in the malignant group (P = 0.0095);

² Ki-67 was significantly higher in malignant cases than in borderline/adenoma patients (P < 0.01);

³β-catenin expression was observed only in the cases with MUC1 expression. LI: Labeling index.