Suppr超能文献

胰腺癌根治性切除率和切缘评估的荟萃分析。

Meta-analysis of radical resection rates and margin assessment in pancreatic cancer.

机构信息

National Health and Medical Research Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.

Discipline of Surgery, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

出版信息

Br J Surg. 2015 Nov;102(12):1459-72. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9892. Epub 2015 Sep 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

R0 resection rates (complete tumour removal with negative resection margins) in pancreatic cancer are 70-80 per cent when a 0-mm margin is used, declining to 15-24 per cent with a 1-mm margin. This review evaluated the R0 resection rates according to different margin definitions and techniques.

METHODS

Three databases (MEDLINE from 1946, PubMed from 1946 and Embase from 1949) were searched to mid-October 2014. The search terms included 'pancreatectomy OR pancreaticoduodenectomy' and 'margin'. A meta-analysis was performed with studies in three groups: group 1, axial slicing technique (minimum 1-mm margin); group 2, other slicing techniques (minimum 1-mm margin); and group 3, studies with minimum 0-mm margin.

RESULTS

The R0 rates were 29 (95 per cent c.i. 26 to 32) per cent in group 1 (8 studies; 882 patients) and 49 (47 to 52) per cent in group 2 (6 studies; 1568 patients). The combined R0 rate (groups 1 and 2) was 41 (40 to 43) per cent. The R0 rate in group 3 (7 studies; 1926 patients) with a 0-mm margin was 72 (70 to 74) per cent The survival hazard ratios (R1 resection/R0 resection) revealed a reduction in the risk of death of at least 22 per cent in group 1, 12 per cent in group 2 and 23 per cent in group 3 with an R0 compared with an R1 resection. Local recurrence occurred more frequently with an R1 resection in most studies.

CONCLUSION

Margin clearance definitions affect R0 resection rates in pancreatic cancer surgery. This review collates individual studies providing an estimate of achievable R0 rates, creating a benchmark for future trials.

摘要

背景

当使用 0 毫米切缘时,胰腺癌的 R0 切除率(肿瘤完全切除且切缘无肿瘤细胞)为 70-80%,而使用 1 毫米切缘时,切除率下降至 15-24%。本综述评估了根据不同切缘定义和技术的 R0 切除率。

方法

从 1946 年的 MEDLINE、PubMed 和 1949 年的 Embase 三个数据库中检索文献,检索时间截至 2014 年 10 月中旬。检索词包括“胰切除术或胰十二指肠切除术”和“切缘”。对三组研究进行荟萃分析:组 1,轴向切片技术(最小 1 毫米切缘);组 2,其他切片技术(最小 1 毫米切缘);组 3,最小 0 毫米切缘的研究。

结果

组 1(8 项研究,882 例患者)的 R0 率为 29(95%可信区间 26-32)%,组 2(6 项研究,1568 例患者)的 R0 率为 49(47-52)%。组 1 和组 2 的联合 R0 率为 41(40-43)%。组 3(7 项研究,1926 例患者)的 0 毫米切缘的 R0 率为 72(70-74)%。与 R1 切除相比,R0 切除的生存风险比(R1 切除/R0 切除)在组 1 中降低了至少 22%,在组 2 中降低了 12%,在组 3 中降低了 23%。在大多数研究中,R1 切除后局部复发更为常见。

结论

切缘清除定义影响胰腺癌手术的 R0 切除率。本综述汇总了提供可实现 R0 率估计的个体研究,为未来的试验提供了基准。

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