Should we remove splenic hilus lymph nodes for esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma?

Hartgrink, Henk H.

doi:10.1007/s10120-013-0237-y

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10 lymphadenectomy for Siewert type II and III AEG is fairly controversial. 9 , 10 Several recent studies have indicated that tumor diameter not only is prognostic in gastric cancer but also correlates with LNM. 11 , 12 The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association and the Japan Esophageal Society assessed the status of LNM in AEG with a tumor diameter <4 cm and developed a flow diagram to identify the extent of the lymphadenectomy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should Splenic Hilar Lymph Nodes be Dissected for Siewert Type II and III Esophagogastric Junction Carcinoma Based on Tumor Diameter?

Huang

Zheng

et al. 2016

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study is to identify the value of a spleen-preserving No. 10 lymphadenectomy (SPL) for Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG).From January 2007 to June 2014, 694 patients undergoing radical total gastrectomy for Siewert type II/III AEG were analyzed. Oncologic outcomes were compared between SPL and no SPL (No. 10D+ and No. 10D–) groups.The incidence of No. 10 lymph node metastasis (LNM) was 12.3%. No significant differences in the incidence of No. 10 LNM were found between Siewert type II AEG with tumor diameters of <4 cm and ≥4 cm (P = 0.071). However, Siewert type III AEG with a tumor diameter ≥4 cm showed a significantly higher frequency of No. 10 LNM compared with a tumor diameter <4 cm (P < 0.001). The No. 10D+ group had superior 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates compared with the No. 10D− group (P = 0.030 and P = 0.005, respectively). For patients with Siewert type II and type III AEG with a tumor diameter <4 cm, the 3-year OS and DFS rates were similar between the 2 groups. However, the No. 10D+ group had better 3-year OS (66.6% vs 51.1%, P = 0.019) and DFS (63.2% vs 45.9%, P = 0.007) rates for Siewert type III AEG with a tumor diameter ≥4 cm. A multivariate Cox regression showed that SPL was an independent prognostic factor in Siewert type III AEG with a tumor diameter ≥4 cm.SPL may improve the prognosis of Siewert type III AEG with a tumor diameter ≥4 cm, whereas SPL may be omitted without decreasing survival in patients with Siewert type II or type III AEG with a tumor diameter <4 cm.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should Splenic Hilar Lymph Nodes be Dissected for Siewert Type II and III Esophagogastric Junction Carcinoma Based on Tumor Diameter?

Huang

Zheng

et al. 2016

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Priority of lymph node dissection for advanced esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma with the tumor center located below the esophagogastric junction

Cai

et al. 2019

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To clarify the priority of lymph node dissection (LND) in advanced Siewert type II and III AEG, in which the center of the tumor is located below the esophagogastric junction (EGJ). Data in 395 patients with advanced Siewert type II or III AEG was analyzed retrospectively. The index of estimated benefit from LND (IEBLD) was used to evaluate the efficacy of LND for each nodal station. The mean number of dissected LNs did not differ significantly between patients with type II and III AEG, nor did the mean number of retrieved LNs at each station significantly differ between the 2 groups. According to the IEBLD, the dissection of parahiatal LNs (No.19 and 20) and LNs along the distal portion of the stomach (No.5, 6, and 12a) seemed unlikely to be beneficial, whereas the dissection of Nos.1–3, 7, 9 and 11p yielded high therapeutic benefit (IEBLD>3.0) in both groups. The IEBLDs of No.4d, 8a, and 10 were much higher in type III than in type II AEG cases. No.10 LND may improve survival for type III AEG cases (IEBLD = 2.9), especially for subgroups with primary tumors invading the serosa layer, undifferentiated cancers, macroscopic type 3–4 tumors and tumors ≥50 mm in size (all IEBLDs > 4.0). For advanced AEG located below the EGJ, the dissection of paracardial LNs, lesser curvature LNs, and LNs around the celiac axis would promote higher survival benefits regardless of the Siewert subtype. Patients with type III AEG, especially those with serosa-invasive tumors, undifferentiated tumors, macroscopic type 3–4 tumors and tumors ≥50 mm in size may obtain relatively higher survival benefits from No. 10 lymphadenectomy.

show abstract

Should we remove splenic hilus lymph nodes for esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma?

Cited by 2 publications

References 17 publications

Should Splenic Hilar Lymph Nodes be Dissected for Siewert Type II and III Esophagogastric Junction Carcinoma Based on Tumor Diameter?

Should Splenic Hilar Lymph Nodes be Dissected for Siewert Type II and III Esophagogastric Junction Carcinoma Based on Tumor Diameter?

Priority of lymph node dissection for advanced esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma with the tumor center located below the esophagogastric junction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About