4.5 Article

Predictive value of lymph node metastases and extracapsular extension for the risk of distant metastases in laryngeal carcinoma

期刊

LARYNGOSCOPE
卷 116, 期 11, 页码 2067-2070

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlg.0000240263.05198.a0

关键词

laryngeal carcinoma; extracapsular extension (ECE); lymph node metastasis; distant metastasis; incidence

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. The objective of this retrospective chart analysis was to determine the prognostic value of the lymph node status and extracapsular lymph node extension (ECE) of the neck for the development of distant metastases in squamous cell carcinoma of the larynx. Methods: One hundred sixty-five patients treated for laryngeal carcinoma with a neck dissection with histologic evaluation were included. Primary study end point was distant metastasis-free survival. Univariate analysis with the Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival for the whole group and for groups according to ECE/lymph node status. Patients were classified as 1) no metastatic lymph nodes, 2) metastatic lymph nodes without ECE, or 3) metastatic lymph nodes with ECE. Univariate Cox regression was performed with outcome distant metastasis-free survival. Results. The median overall survival for the whole group was 5.1 years and the 5-year survival rate was 51%. The median distant metastasis-free survival for the whole group could not be calculated and the 5-year metastasis-free survival rate was 78%. The hazard ratio was 3.4 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0-12.1) for patients with positive nodes and without ECE and 10.5 (95% CI = 3.6-30.8) for the patients with metastatic nodes and with ECE compared with the patients without metastatic lymph nodes. Conclusion: The presence of ECE in metastatic lymph nodes augments the risk of distant metastasis by nine times in laryngeal carcinoma. Metastatic lymph nodes without ECE show a risk three times greater.

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

4.5
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