4.6 Article

Survival After Surgical Resection of Stage IV Esophageal Cancer

期刊

ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY
卷 103, 期 1, 页码 261-266

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.06.070

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Five-year survival of stage IV esophageal cancer is rare. The treatment of advanced esophageal cancer is typically palliative and the role of surgery remains controversial. We sought to understand the impact of curative surgery on survival and identify any favorable tumor or patient characteristics that might make surgical resection appropriate when treating stage IV esophageal cancer. Methods. A retrospective review of 3,500 esophagectomies performed at our institution from 1985 to 2013 identified 52 (1.5%) patients with stage IV esophageal cancer who underwent surgical resection with intent for cure. In 46 (88.5%) patients, M1 disease was discovered at the time of surgery and 6 (11.5%) patients had known M1 disease prior to surgery. Results. Median age at the time of surgery was 60 years (range, 31 to 81 years). The majority of patients were men (82.7%) with adenocarcinoma (88.5%). Neoadjuvant therapy was used in 18 (34.6%) patients; all patients operated on after 1999 received neoadjuvant therapy. An Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was performed in 39 (75%) patients. Follow-up was complete in all patients for a median of 324 days (range, 4 days to 8.5 years). Overall, 1-year survival was 29% and 5-year survival was 6%. There was no significant difference in survival between patients with known preoperative versus intraoperative discovery of M1 disease. Factors associated with improved survival included neoadjuvant treatment, low T stage, and lack of alcohol use. Conclusions. Few patients with stage IV esophageal cancer survive long term after surgical resection, though 5-year survival can occur. Our current recommendation is that esophagectomy should not be performed for stage IV disease. (C) 2017 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据