Suppr超能文献

胆囊癌:明确原发性根治性切除术和根治性再次切除术的适应证。

Gallbladder cancer: Defining the indications for primary radical resection and radical re-resection.

作者信息

Foster Jason M, Hoshi Hisakazu, Gibbs John F, Iyer Renuka, Javle Miland, Chu Quyen, Kuvshinoff Boris

机构信息

Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, State University of New York at Buffalo, Elm & Carlton Streets, Buffalo, New York 14263-0001, USA.

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Feb;14(2):833-40. doi: 10.1245/s10434-006-9097-6. Epub 2006 Nov 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The role of radical resection for gallbladder cancer is an ongoing area of debate. In this review, we present our experience managing gallbladder cancer at a tertiary center by using an aggressive surgical approach for T2 or greater disease, reserving simple cholecystectomy only for T1 lesions.

METHODS

Seventy-six patients with histologically confirmed gallbladder cancer were identified from our cancer registry. Estimated survival distributions were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and comparisons were made by using the log-rank test. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the effect on survival of T stage, nodal status, age, and margins.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients were assessable for this study. Simple cholecystectomy was the only procedure performed in 10 T2 and 15 T3 cases. Radical cholecystectomy was performed as the primary procedure in two T2, two T3, and six T4 cases. Radical re-resection was accomplished in seven T2 and two T3 cases. Excluding the T4 group, there was a significant survival advantage (P = .007) for the radical resection group (n = 13; median survival not yet reached) compared with the simple cholecystectomy group (n = 25; median survival, 17 months; 95% confidence interval, 7-27 months). Analysis of the 13 T2 and T3 patients who underwent radical resections revealed that the radical re-resection group (n = 9) had an overall survival similar to that of the primarily resected group (n = 4). All T2N(+) and T3N(-) patients are still alive and disease free after 5 years of follow-up, whereas none of the T3N(+) or T4 patients survived beyond 24 months. Increasing T stage and age (>65 years) were independent predictors of a poor prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Radical resection for T2 and T3 disease resulted in a significant survival advantage compared with simple cholecystectomy. Patients who undergo radical re-resection after an incidentally discovered gallbladder cancer experience the same survival benefit as primarily resected patients. Radical resection for T2N(-), T2N(+), and T3N0 cases can achieve long-term survival. Conversely, the prognosis for T3N(+) and T4 patients is poor, and improved outcome for this group will likely depend on the development of multi-institutional neoadjuvant clinical trials that can identify effective systemic regimens.

摘要

背景

胆囊癌根治性切除术的作用一直是一个存在争议的领域。在本综述中,我们介绍了我们在一家三级中心处理胆囊癌的经验,即对T2期及以上病变采用积极的手术方法,仅对T1期病变行单纯胆囊切除术。

方法

从我们的癌症登记处确定了76例经组织学证实的胆囊癌患者。采用Kaplan-Meier方法计算估计生存分布,并使用对数秩检验进行比较。采用Cox比例风险模型确定T分期、淋巴结状态、年龄和切缘对生存的影响。

结果

64例患者可纳入本研究。在10例T2期和15例T3期病例中,仅进行了单纯胆囊切除术。在2例T2期、2例T3期和6例T4期病例中,根治性胆囊切除术作为主要手术进行。在7例T2期和2例T3期病例中完成了根治性再次切除术。排除T4组,根治性切除组(n = 13;中位生存期未达到)与单纯胆囊切除术组(n = 25;中位生存期,17个月;95%置信区间,7 - 27个月)相比,有显著的生存优势(P = 0.007)。对13例接受根治性切除术的T2期和T3期患者的分析显示,根治性再次切除组(n = 9)的总生存期与初次切除组(n = 4)相似。所有T2N(+)和T3N(-)患者在随访5年后仍存活且无疾病,而T3N(+)或T4患者均未存活超过24个月。T分期增加和年龄(>65岁)是预后不良的独立预测因素。

结论

与单纯胆囊切除术相比,T2期和T3期疾病的根治性切除术具有显著的生存优势。偶然发现胆囊癌后接受根治性再次切除术的患者与初次切除患者具有相同的生存获益。T2N(-)、T2N(+)和T3N0病例的根治性切除术可实现长期生存。相反地,T3N(+)和T4患者的预后较差,该组患者预后的改善可能取决于多机构新辅助临床试验的开展,这些试验能够确定有效的全身治疗方案。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验