4.2 Article

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction in China according to Siewert's classification

期刊

JAPANESE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 36, 期 6, 页码 364-367

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyl042

关键词

adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction; resection; adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus; true carcinoma of cardia; subcardial carcinoma

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There had never been a clear definition of the cancer of cardia before Siewert's classification, which was proposed in 1996 and approved in 1997 at the second International Gastric Cancer Congress in Munich. On the basis of the classification, this study aims to research into the clinicopathological characteristics and surgical modes of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction in China. Methods: The study reviewed the data of the distal esophageal cancer, the cancer of cardia and the proximal gastric cancer at the First Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University from January 1995 to December 1999. Surgical patients were defined and classified according to Siewert's classification, and 203 patients were up to the classification. Then the study compared and analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics and the survival rates of the three types of the tumor. Results: Among the 203 patients, there were 29 patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus (Type I); 80 patients with true carcinoma of cardia (Type II); and 94 patients with subcardial carcinoma (Type III). Obvious differences were found in the clinicopathological characteristics of the three types, but no significant difference of the 5-year survival rates was found among the three types of patients with curative resection. Conclusion: On the data, the distribution of the three types of tumor was found to be different from that reported in Western countries and in Japan; and the three types of patients who had undergone curative resection were found to have similar 5-year survival rates.

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

4.2
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