Park Jong Seob, Huh Jung Wook, Park Yoon Ah, Cho Yong Beom, Yun Seong Hyeon, Kim Hee Cheol, Lee Woo Yong, Chun Ho-Kyung
1Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea 2Department of Surgery, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2014 Aug;57(8):933-40. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000171.
There is ongoing debate about the appropriate criterion for defining a positive circumferential resection margin after radical surgery for rectal cancer.
The purpose of this work was to determine the importance of the extent of the circumferential resection margin with regard to outcomes in patients with rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision with and without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data.
The study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital.
We reviewed the medical charts of 780 patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery from 2004 to 2009. There were 599 patients (76.8%) who did not receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 181 patients (23.2%) who did.
The relationship between the extent of the circumferential resection margin (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 mm) and recurrence and survival was assessed.
Among circumferential resection margins ≤0.5, ≤1.0, ≤2.0, and ≤3.0 mm, the HR was highest and disease-free survival was longest for a circumferential resection margin ≤1 mm in both the chemoradiotherapy and nonchemoradiotherapy groups. A circumferential resection margin ≤1 mm, lymphatic invasion, histology, pathologic T category, pathologic N category, preoperative CEA, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent predictors of disease-free survival in the nonchemoradiotherapy group. In the chemoradiotherapy group, a circumferential resection margin ≤1 mm and histology were independent predictors of disease-free survival. Multivariate analysis revealed that a circumferential resection margin ≤1 mm was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival in both of the 2 groups.
This was a single-institution, retrospective study.
A circumferential resection margin of ≤1 mm had a strong association with disease-free survival compared with circumferential resection margins ≤0.5, ≤2.0, and ≤3 mm. A circumferential resection margin ≤1 mm was an independent predictor of a poor outcome in both the nonchemoradiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy groups.
对于直肠癌根治术后切缘阳性的合适定义标准,目前仍存在争议。
本研究旨在确定环周切缘范围对于接受全直肠系膜切除术且接受或未接受新辅助放化疗的直肠癌患者预后的重要性。
这是一项对前瞻性收集数据的回顾性研究。
该研究在一家三级医疗中心进行。
我们回顾了2004年至2009年间接受根治性手术的780例直肠癌患者的病历。其中599例(76.8%)未接受新辅助放化疗,181例(23.2%)接受了新辅助放化疗。
评估环周切缘范围(0.5、1.0、2.0和3.0毫米)与复发及生存之间的关系。
在环周切缘≤0.5毫米、≤1.0毫米、≤2.0毫米和≤3.0毫米的患者中,放化疗组和非放化疗组中环周切缘≤1毫米时风险比最高且无病生存期最长。在非放化疗组中,环周切缘≤1毫米、淋巴管侵犯、组织学类型、病理T分期、病理N分期、术前癌胚抗原和辅助化疗是无病生存的独立预测因素。在放化疗组中,环周切缘≤1毫米和组织学类型是无病生存的独立预测因素。多因素分析显示,环周切缘≤1毫米是两组总生存的独立预后因素。
这是一项单中心回顾性研究。
与环周切缘≤0.5毫米、≤2.0毫米和≤3毫米相比,环周切缘≤1毫米与无病生存密切相关。在非放化疗组和放化疗组中,环周切缘≤1毫米都是预后不良的独立预测因素。