Clinical significance of the largest histopathological metastatic lymph node size for postoperative course of patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer.
gastric cancer
lymph node metastasis
lymph node size
postoperative complication
survival
Journal
Frontiers in surgery
ISSN: 2296-875X
Titre abrégé: Front Surg
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101645127
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
23
11
2022
accepted:
31
01
2023
entrez:
6
3
2023
pubmed:
7
3
2023
medline:
7
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the largest metastatic lymph node (MLN) size on postoperative outcomes of patients with stage II-III gastric cancer (GC). A total of 163 patients with stage II/III GC who underwent curative surgery were included in this single-center retrospective study. The lymph nodes were counted, each lymph node was analyzed for metastatic involvement by histopathological examination, and the diameter of the largest metastatic lymph node was recorded. The severity of postoperative complications was assessed by Clavien-Dindo classification system. Two groups of 163 patients were defined according to ROC analysis with cut-off value of histopathologically maximum MLN diameter. A comparative analysis of demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of the patients and their postoperative outcomes were performed. The median hospital stay was significantly longer in patients with major complications compared to patients without major complications [18 days (IQR: 13-24) vs. 8 days (IQR: 7-11); ( The largest metastatic lymph node size had a significant association with survival outcomes. Particularly, MLN size over 1.05 cm was associated with worse survival outcomes. However, the largest MLN was not shown to have any effect on major complications. Further prospective and large-scale studies are required to draw more precise conclusions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36874461
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1105189
pmc: PMC9982115
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1105189Informations de copyright
© 2023 Omeroglu, Gulmez, Yazici, Demir, Guven, Capkinoglu, Uzun, Senger, Polat and Duman.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The reviewer EB declared a past co-authorship with the author SO to the handling editor.
Références
J Am Coll Surg. 2005 Jan;200(1):20-8
pubmed: 15631916
Open Med (Wars). 2020 Aug 03;15(1):754-762
pubmed: 33336033
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Apr 14;20(14):3967-75
pubmed: 24744586
World J Surg Oncol. 2022 Apr 27;20(1):135
pubmed: 35477526
J Chin Med Assoc. 2020 Aug;83(8):691-692
pubmed: 32520769
Ann Surg Oncol. 2002 Dec;9(10):1010-6
pubmed: 12464595
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999 Aug;173(2):365-7
pubmed: 10430138
Br J Surg. 2003 Dec;90(12):1522-30
pubmed: 14648731
J Int Med Res. 2010 Jan-Feb;38(1):22-33
pubmed: 20233510
J Gastrointest Oncol. 2021 Oct;12(5):2022-2034
pubmed: 34790370
World J Surg. 2008 Feb;32(2):262-6
pubmed: 18064519
Gastric Cancer. 2021 Jan;24(1):214-223
pubmed: 32601909
J Surg Oncol. 2021 Mar;123(4):911-922
pubmed: 33400838
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2003 Apr;46(1):59-100
pubmed: 12672518
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Mar;67(2):93-99
pubmed: 28094848