Nodal Yield <15 Is Associated With Reduced Survival in Esophagectomy and Is a Quality Metric.


Journal

The Annals of thoracic surgery
ISSN: 1552-6259
Titre abrégé: Ann Thorac Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 15030100R

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2023
Historique:
received: 11 08 2022
revised: 03 02 2023
accepted: 28 02 2023
medline: 26 6 2023
pubmed: 15 3 2023
entrez: 14 3 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy remains the cornerstone of curative management of esophageal adenocarcinoma and is frequently used for squamous cell carcinoma. The optimal extent of lymphadenectomy and whether increasing lymph node yields confer a survival benefit remains unclear. Guidelines suggest resecting and examining a minimum of 15 lymph nodes at esophagectomy. This study assessed the impact of lymph node yield and lymph node ratio (LNR) on survival, identifying factors influencing nodal yield and radicality of resection. All patients undergoing esophagectomy with curative intent at a single institution (stage 1-4 inclusive) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, were reviewed. Clinical and pathologic variables were interrogated. LNR was calculated by dividing positive lymph nodes by the total nodes resected. Esophagectomy was performed in 397 patients, with 288 undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Margin status (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.15-2.83; P < .01), nodal yield <15 (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29-3.04; P = .002), and elevated LNR (HR, 8.16; 95% CI, 2.89-23.06; P < .001) predicted survival. MIE had higher nodal yields compared with open procedures (30.7 vs 25.3, P < .001). Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy had lower nodal yields compared with those with no neoadjuvant therapy and those with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (26.4 vs 30.6 vs 36.8, respectively; P < .001). Regression analysis determined a LNR of <0.05 was associated with a survival benefit. Textbook lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival. Low lymph node yield and a high LNR are associated with reduced overall survival. A LNR of <0.05 is associated with significant survival benefit. A minimum nodal yield of 15 should remain the standard of care.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy remains the cornerstone of curative management of esophageal adenocarcinoma and is frequently used for squamous cell carcinoma. The optimal extent of lymphadenectomy and whether increasing lymph node yields confer a survival benefit remains unclear. Guidelines suggest resecting and examining a minimum of 15 lymph nodes at esophagectomy. This study assessed the impact of lymph node yield and lymph node ratio (LNR) on survival, identifying factors influencing nodal yield and radicality of resection.
METHODS
All patients undergoing esophagectomy with curative intent at a single institution (stage 1-4 inclusive) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, were reviewed. Clinical and pathologic variables were interrogated. LNR was calculated by dividing positive lymph nodes by the total nodes resected.
RESULTS
Esophagectomy was performed in 397 patients, with 288 undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Margin status (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.15-2.83; P < .01), nodal yield <15 (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29-3.04; P = .002), and elevated LNR (HR, 8.16; 95% CI, 2.89-23.06; P < .001) predicted survival. MIE had higher nodal yields compared with open procedures (30.7 vs 25.3, P < .001). Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy had lower nodal yields compared with those with no neoadjuvant therapy and those with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (26.4 vs 30.6 vs 36.8, respectively; P < .001). Regression analysis determined a LNR of <0.05 was associated with a survival benefit.
CONCLUSIONS
Textbook lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival. Low lymph node yield and a high LNR are associated with reduced overall survival. A LNR of <0.05 is associated with significant survival benefit. A minimum nodal yield of 15 should remain the standard of care.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36918078
pii: S0003-4975(23)00254-0
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2023.02.053
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

130-136

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Jarlath C Bolger (JC)

Division of Thoracic Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. Electronic address: jarlath.bolger@uhn.ca.

Pablo Perez Castro (PP)

Division of Thoracic Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Anindita Marwah (A)

Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Iran Tavakoli (I)

Division of Thoracic Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Osvaldo Espin-Garcia (O)

Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Biostatistics, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Gail E Darling (GE)

Division of Thoracic Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Jonathan C Yeung (JC)

Division of Thoracic Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH