Journals / Turkish Journal of Surgery / 2018 / Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 2

Survival outcomes after D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy with R0 resection in stage II–III gastric cancer: Longitudinal follow-up in a single center

Pages
125–130
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Themedian overall survival (OS) was 22.0±3.7 mo. for the D1 and 31.0±5.4 mo. for the D2 group (p=0.13).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: D2 lymphadenectomy (D2-LND) with curative resection (R0) is the cornerstone of gastric cancer treatment.In this study, we compared survival outcomes of D2-LDN with D1-LDN in patients who had undergone curativeresection for Stages II and III primary gastric adenocarcinoma.Material and Methods: Between April 1996 and March 2014, 153 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of thestomach underwent total gastrectomy with D1-LND or D2-LND.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Among those, 118 patients (38 D1 vs. 80 D2) with acomplete history and having been followed for at least 1 year after surgery were enrolled.Both groups were comparedin terms of demographic and clinico-pathologic characteristics.Results: The mean follow-up was 42.6±52.5 months (mo.).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Themedian overall survival (OS) was 22.0±3.7 mo. for the D1 and 31.0±5.4 mo. for the D2 group (p=0.13).
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: D2 lymphadenectomy (D2-LND) with curative resection (R0) is the cornerstone of gastric cancer treatment.In this study, we compared survival outcomes of D2-LDN with D1-LDN in patients who had undergone curativeresection for Stages II and III primary gastric adenocarcinoma.Material and Methods: Between April 1996 and March 2014, 153 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of thestomach underwent total gastrectomy with D1-LND or D2-LND. Among those, 118 patients (38 D1 vs. 80 D2) with acomplete history and having been followed for at least 1 year after surgery were enrolled.Both groups were comparedin terms of demographic and clinico-pathologic characteristics.Results: The mean follow-up was 42.6±52.5 months (mo.). The demographic characteristics of the groups weresimilar. The Tumor, Node and Metastases (TNM) stage distribution was 25% for Stage II and 75% for Stage III for bothgroups. Eighteen patients (47.4%) in the D1 and 47 patients (58.8%) in the D2 group were free from locoregionalrecurrence. The median disease-free survival was 22.0±4.1 mo. for the D1 and 28.0±4.3 mo. for the D2 group(p=0.36). Eight patients (21%) in the D1 and 39 patients (49%) in the D2 group were alive at the last follow-up. Themedian overall survival (OS) was 22.0±3.7 mo. for the D1 and 31.0±5.4 mo. for the D2 group (p=0.13). The 5-yeardisease-free survival and OS by the Kaplan–Meier estimates were 41% vs. 51% and 30% vs.42% in the D1 and D2groups, respectively. The median 5-year OS for patients with Stages IIIB and IIIC tumors was 14.0±2.2 mo.for the D1and 20.0±5.0 mo. for the D2 group, respectively (p: 0.048).Conclusion: When compared to D1-LND, D2-LND with R0 resection have yielded a trend toward a better outcome inpatients with primary gastric adenocarcinoma.

🔖

Cite This Article

USLU, A., ZENGEL, B., İLHAN, E., AYKAS, A., ŞİMŞEK, C., ÜREYEN, O., DURAN, A., OKUT, G. (2018). Survival outcomes after D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy with R0 resection in stage II–III gastric cancer: Longitudinal follow-up in a single center. Turkish Journal of Surgery, Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 2, 125–130. https://ajindex.com/articles/376509

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Roukos DH. Current status and future perspectives in gastric cancer management. Cancer Treat Rev 2000
  2. [CrossRef] Kajitani T. The general rules for the gastric cancer study in surgery and pathology. Jpn J Surg 1981
  3. [CrossRef] Okines A, Verheij M, Allum W, Cunningham D, Cervantes A, ESMO Guidelines Working Group. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2010
  4. v50-v54. [CrossRef] Edwards P, Blackshaw G R JC, Lewis WG, Barry JD, Allison MC, Jones DRB. Prospective comparison of D1 vs modified D2 gastrectomy for carcinoma. Br J Cancer 2004
  5. [CrossRef] Noguchi M, Miyazaki I. Prognostic significance and surgical management of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer. Br J Surg 1996
  6. [CrossRef] Songun I, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, Sasako M, van de Velde CJ. Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1 D2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2010
  7. [CrossRef] Cuschieri A, Weeden S, Fielding J, Bancewicz J, Craven J, Joypaul V, et al. Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: Long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group. Br J Cancer 1999
  8. [CrossRef] Jiang L, Yang KH, Chen Y, Guan QL, Zhao P, Tian JH, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of extended lymphadenectomy in patients with resectable gastric cancer. Br J Surg 2014
  9. [CrossRef] Washington K. 7th. Edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: Stomach. Ann Surg Oncol 2010
  10. [CrossRef] Kajitani T. Japanese Research Society for the Study of Gastric Cancer: The general rules for gastric cancer study in surgery and pathology. Jpn J Surg 1981
  11. [CrossRef] Uslu A, Batı H, Postacı H, Nart A, Eliyatkın N, Yetiş H, et al. Impact of histopathology on the outcome of D1/D2 gastrectomies with R0 resection. Digestion 2012
  12. [CrossRef] Morgan JW, Ji L, Friedman G, Senthil M, Dyke C, Lum SS. The role of the cancer center when using lymph node count as a quality measure for gastric cancer surgery. JAMA Surg 2015
  13. [CrossRef] Roukos DH, Kappas AM. Perspectives in the treatment of gastric cancer. Nat Clin Pract Oncol 2005
  14. [CrossRef] McCulloch P, Nita ME, Kazi H, Gama-Rodrigues J. Extended versus limited lymph nodes dissection technique for adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Cochrane Databas