4.7 Article

Prognostic determinants of patients with lateral nodal involvement by rectal cancer

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGERY
卷 234, 期 2, 页码 190-197

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200108000-00008

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To clarify the characteristics related to long-term survival in patients with lateral nodal involvement. Summary Background Data Few reports have addressed the prognostic determinants in patients with actual lateral nodal involvement, which are important in determining treatment. Methods Review of a prospective colorectal database at a single institution for a 10-year period (1987-1996) identified 53 patients with lateral nodal involvement. Results All nine patients who underwent resection of synchronous distant metastases developed recurrence and died within 3 years. Of the 44 patients without distant metastases, 25 (57%) developed locoregional recurrence, and the overall 5-year survival rate was 32%. Multivariate analysis showed that age, total number of Involved nodes (mesorectal and lateral), and circumferential surgical margin involvement had Independently predicted postoperative survival. Patients with three or fewer nodes involved accounted for one third of lateral-positive patients, with a 5-year survival rate of 75%, whereas the 18 patients with four or more involved nodes had a 5-year survival rate of 4%. Ali eight patients with circumferential margin involvement died of carcinoma, and seven developed locoregional recurrences. Involvement of other pelvic organs had no effect on prognosis, nor were adverse prognostic outcomes noted by the region of lateral involvement. Conclusions For patients with lateral involvement, the most important prognostic variables are distant metastases, the total number of nodes involved, circumferential margin involvement, and age. Selection of patients based on these variables may lead to the identification of a subgroup for whom lateral nodal dissection could be the first treatment choice.

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

4.7
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