Suppr超能文献

新辅助治疗还是 upfront 手术?T2N0 食管癌治疗选择的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Neoadjuvant therapy or upfront surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis of T2N0 esophageal cancer treatment options.

机构信息

Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, Sao Paulo School of Medicine, Brazil.

Esophageal Surgery Group, Digestive Surgery Division, Department of Gastroenterology, Sao Paulo School of Medicine, Brazil.

出版信息

Int J Surg. 2018 Jun;54(Pt A):176-181. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.04.053. Epub 2018 May 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Esophageal carcinoma usually shows poor long-term survival rates, even when esophagectomy, the standard curative treatment is performed. As a result, there has been increasing interest in the neoadjuvant therapy, which could potentially downstage cancer, eliminate micrometastasis and ergo increase resectability and curative (R0) resection. Currently, for the earliest stage esophageal cancers, most guidelines point out to the role of endoscopic treatment, and for T1bN0 upfront surgery. For locally advanced cases, several studies have demonstrated the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy to increase resectability. For clinical stage T2N0 esophageal cancer, there is no consensus as to the optimal treatment strategy.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare neoadjuvant therapy with surgery alone on clinical stage T2N0 esophageal cancer patients, concerning overall survival, recurrence, post-operative mortality, anastomotic leak, and R0 resection rate.

RESULTS

For overall survival at the mean follow-up point, the neoadjuvant therapy was not associated to a higher probability of survival than upfront surgery in cT2N0 patients (risk difference: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.09, 0.09). There was no difference between neoadjuvant therapy and primary surgery concerning recurrence (risk difference: 0.21; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.45); perioperative mortality (risk difference: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.02, 0.01); and risk for anastomotic leak (risk difference: -0.08; 95% CI: -0.21, 0.05). Pooled data showed that neoadjuvant therapy was associated to a higher risk for positive margins after resection (risk difference: 0.04; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

This review showed that neoadjuvant therapy is not associated to better results than surgery alone, for the management of clinical stage T2N0 esophageal cancer patients, concerning overall survival, recurrence rate, perioperative mortality, anastomotic leak, and seems to be associated to a higher risk for resection with positive margins.

摘要

背景

食管癌患者的长期生存率通常较差,即使接受了标准的根治性手术 - 食管切除术,也是如此。因此,新辅助治疗的应用越来越受到关注,因为它有可能降低癌症分期、消除微转移灶,从而提高可切除性和根治性(R0)切除率。目前,对于最早期的食管癌,大多数指南都指出内镜治疗的作用,对于 T1bN0 期患者则直接进行手术。对于局部晚期病例,多项研究已经证明了新辅助治疗的益处,可以提高可切除性。对于临床分期为 T2N0 的食管癌,对于最佳治疗策略尚无共识。

方法

我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,以比较新辅助治疗与单纯手术治疗对临床分期为 T2N0 食管癌患者的影响,主要评估指标包括总生存率、复发率、术后死亡率、吻合口漏和 R0 切除率。

结果

在平均随访点的总生存率方面,新辅助治疗与直接手术相比,并未显著提高 cT2N0 患者的生存率(风险差异:0.00;95%CI:-0.09,0.09)。新辅助治疗与直接手术相比,在复发率(风险差异:0.21;95%CI:-0.03,0.45)、围手术期死亡率(风险差异:0.00;95%CI:-0.02,0.01)和吻合口漏的风险(风险差异:-0.08;95%CI:-0.21,0.05)方面无显著差异。汇总数据显示,新辅助治疗与术后阳性切缘的风险增加相关(风险差异:0.04;95%CI:0.02,0.06)。

结论

本综述表明,与单纯手术相比,新辅助治疗在管理临床分期为 T2N0 食管癌患者时并未带来更好的结果,包括总生存率、复发率、围手术期死亡率、吻合口漏等,而且似乎与更高的阳性切缘切除风险相关。

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