4.3 Article

Clinicopathological features of patients with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma

期刊

ANZ JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 72, 期 10, 页码 739-742

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING ASIA
DOI: 10.1046/j.1445-2197.2002.02523.x

关键词

Borrmann type IV; curative resection; early detection

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To determine whether there is a specific pattern of clinicopathological features that could be used to distinguish Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma from other types of gastric carcinoma. Methods: We retrospectively analysed the clinicopathological features of patients with Borrmann type IV carcinoma of the stomach. The results were compared with the features of patients who had other types of gastric carcinoma. Results: The incidence of Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma was 11.0% (199 patients). A poorly differentiated tumour was found in 120 out of 199 patients (60.3%) with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma. The positive lymph node metastasis was found in 150 out of 199 patients (75.4%) with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma (P < 0.0001). The incidence of serosal invasion (91.5%) and peritoneal dissemination (37.7%) was significantly higher in these patients. Of the patients with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma, 161 patients (80.9%) were classified as either stage III or IV at initial diagnosis. The curative resection rate of patients with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma was lower than that of patients with other types of gastric carcinoma (P < 0.001). The survival rate was higher in patients with a curative resection (P < 0.001). The 5-year survival rate of patients with Borrmann type IV tumour was lower than that of patients with other types of gastric carcinoma (P < 0.001). The 5-year survival rates were 90.9% for stage I patients with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma and 39.5%, 18.6% and 8.7% for stages II, III and IV, respectively (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Improving the prognosis for patients with Borrmann type IV gastric carcinoma requires early detection and a curative resection.

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

4.3
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