Suppr超能文献

不同结直肠癌肝转移切缘阳性定义对预后的影响。

The Prognostic Value of Varying Definitions of Positive Resection Margin in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Second Department of Propedeutic Surgery, "Laiko" General Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

出版信息

J Gastrointest Surg. 2018 Aug;22(8):1350-1357. doi: 10.1007/s11605-018-3748-3. Epub 2018 Apr 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Varying definitions of resection margin clearance are currently employed among patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM). Specifically, a microscopically positive margin (R1) has alternatively been equated with an involved margin (margin width = 0 mm) or a margin width < 1 mm. Consequently, patients with a margin width of 0-1 mm (sub-mm) are inconsistently classified in either the R0 or R1 categories, thus obscuring the prognostic implications of sub-mm margins.

METHODS

Six hundred thirty-three patients who underwent resection of CRLM were identified. Both R1 definitions were alternatively employed and multivariable analysis was used to determine the predictive power of each definition, as well as the prognostic implications of a sub-mm margin.

RESULTS

Five hundred thirty-nine (85.2%) patients had a margin width ≥ 1 mm, 42 had a sub-mm margin width, and 52 had an involved margin (0 mm). A margin width ≥ 1 mm was associated with improved survival vs. a sub-mm margin (65 vs. 36 months; P = 0.03) or an involved margin (65 vs. 33 months; P < 0.001). No significant difference in survival was detected between patients with involved vs. sub-mm margins (P = 0.31). A sub-mm margin and an involved margin were both independent predictors of worse OS (HR 1.66, 1.04-2.67; P = 0.04, and HR 2.14, 1.46-3.16; P < 0.001, respectively) in multivariable analysis. Importantly, after combining the two definitions, patients with either an involved margin or a sub-mm margin were associated with worse OS in multivariable analysis (HR 1.94, 1.41-2.65; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with involved or sub-mm margins demonstrated a similar inferior OS vs. patients with a margin width > 1 mm. Consequently, a uniform definition of R1 as a margin width < 1 mm should perhaps be employed by future studies.

摘要

背景

目前,在结直肠癌肝转移(CRLM)患者中,不同的切缘定义被应用。具体而言,一种替代的微观阳性切缘(R1)已被等同于受累切缘(切缘宽度=0mm)或切缘宽度<1mm。因此,切缘宽度为 0-1mm(亚毫米)的患者在 R0 或 R1 分类中不一致,从而掩盖了亚毫米切缘的预后意义。

方法

确定了 633 例接受 CRLM 切除术的患者。两种 R1 定义被交替使用,多变量分析用于确定每种定义的预测能力,以及亚毫米切缘的预后意义。

结果

539 例(85.2%)患者的切缘宽度≥1mm,42 例患者的切缘宽度为亚毫米,52 例患者的切缘宽度为受累切缘(0mm)。切缘宽度≥1mm与亚毫米切缘(65 vs. 36 个月;P=0.03)或受累切缘(65 vs. 33 个月;P<0.001)相比,生存率有所提高。受累切缘与亚毫米切缘患者的生存率无显著差异(P=0.31)。亚毫米切缘和受累切缘都是 OS 的独立预测因素(HR 1.66,1.04-2.67;P=0.04,和 HR 2.14,1.46-3.16;P<0.001)。重要的是,在多变量分析中,将两种定义结合后,有受累切缘或亚毫米切缘的患者 OS 较差(HR 1.94,1.41-2.65;P<0.001)。

结论

受累或亚毫米切缘患者的 OS 与切缘宽度>1mm 的患者相似较差。因此,未来的研究可能应该采用 R1 的统一定义,即切缘宽度<1mm。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验