• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
Effects of standard and total two-field lymph node dissection on prognosis of patients undergoing Esophagectomy.标准和全两野淋巴结清扫对食管癌切除术患者预后的影响。
Pak J Med Sci. 2022 Mar-Apr;38(4Part-II):950-954. doi: 10.12669/pjms.38.4.4031.
2
Three-field versus two-field lymph node dissection for thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched comparison.胸段食管鳞状细胞癌三野与二野淋巴结清扫术的倾向评分匹配比较
J Thorac Dis. 2018 May;10(5):2924-2932. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.05.69.
3
[A comparative study of the short-term efficacy and long-term efficacy of systematic lymph node dissection and elective lymph node dissection in patients with early esophageal cancer].[早期食管癌患者系统性淋巴结清扫与选择性淋巴结清扫的短期疗效及长期疗效比较研究]
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2018 Sep 1;56(9):706-711. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2018.09.012.
4
[Efficacy comparison of Sweet versus Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in the treatment of middle-lower esophageal squamous cell carcinoma].[Sweet术式与Ivor-Lewis术式治疗中下段食管鳞状细胞癌的疗效比较]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2016 Sep 25;19(9):979-984.
5
Mucin 1 and vascular endothelial growth factor C expression correlates with lymph node metastatic recurrence in patients with N0 esophageal cancer after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.Mucin 1 和血管内皮生长因子 C 的表达与 Ivor-Lewis 食管癌根治术后 N0 食管癌患者的淋巴结转移复发相关。
World J Surg. 2011 Jan;35(1):70-7. doi: 10.1007/s00268-010-0829-1.
6
BRF2 as a promising indicator for radical lymph-node dissection surgery in patients with cN0 squamous cell carcinoma of the middle thoracic esophagus.BRF2作为胸段中段食管cN0鳞状细胞癌患者根治性淋巴结清扫手术的一个有前景的指标。
Surg Today. 2019 Feb;49(2):158-169. doi: 10.1007/s00595-018-1711-2. Epub 2018 Sep 4.
7
[Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with two-field lymph node dissection for squamous cell carcinoma of the lower thoracic esophagus].[经腹-右胸两切口食管癌根治术联合二野淋巴结清扫治疗胸段下段食管鳞癌]
Ai Zheng. 2007 Mar;26(3):307-11.
8
Prophylactic Cervical Lymph Node Dissection in Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Increases Postoperative Complications and Does Not Improve Survival.预防性颈淋巴结清扫术在胸腔镜食管癌根治术中增加术后并发症,但不能提高生存率。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 Sep;26(9):2899-2904. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07499-1. Epub 2019 Jun 11.
9
[Effects of robotic and laparoscopic-assisted surgery on lymph node dissection and short-term outcomes in patients with Siewert II adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction].[机器人手术与腹腔镜辅助手术对食管胃交界部Siewert II型腺癌患者淋巴结清扫及短期预后的影响]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019 Feb 25;22(2):156-163.
10
[Progress in surgical treatment of carcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus].[胸段食管癌外科治疗的进展]
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 1995 Jun;22(7):855-62.

引用本文的文献

1
Biomarkers of lymph node metastasis in esophageal cancer.食管癌淋巴结转移的生物标志物。
Front Immunol. 2024 Sep 27;15:1457612. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1457612. eCollection 2024.
2
Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound combined with MRI for cervical hyperplastic, tuberculosis-infected, and metastatic lymph nodes.超声造影联合MRI对颈椎增生、结核感染及转移性淋巴结的诊断价值。
Pak J Med Sci. 2023 Jul-Aug;39(4):950-955. doi: 10.12669/pjms.39.4.7572.

本文引用的文献

1
Pattern of subcarinal lymph node metastasis and dissection strategy for thoracic esophageal cancer.胸段食管癌隆突下淋巴结转移模式及清扫策略
J Thorac Dis. 2020 Oct;12(10):5667-5677. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-1776.
2
Lymph node dissection and recurrent laryngeal nerve protection in minimally invasive esophagectomy.微创食管切除术的淋巴结清扫和喉返神经保护。
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2020 Dec;1481(1):20-29. doi: 10.1111/nyas.14427. Epub 2020 Jul 15.
3
Isolated tumor cells in the regional lymph nodes in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus are rarely observed but often represent part of a true metastasis.在食管鳞状细胞癌患者的区域淋巴结中很少观察到孤立肿瘤细胞,但这些细胞通常代表真正转移的一部分。
Ann Diagn Pathol. 2020 Apr;45:151478. doi: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2020.151478. Epub 2020 Feb 14.
4
Trends in treatment and overall survival among patients with proximal esophageal cancer.近端食管癌患者的治疗趋势和总体生存率。
World J Gastroenterol. 2019 Dec 21;25(47):6835-6846. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i47.6835.
5
Lymph Node Progression and Optimized Node Dissection of Middle Thoracic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the Latest Therapeutic Surgical Strategy.最新治疗性手术策略中,胸中段食管鳞癌的淋巴结进展和优化淋巴结清扫。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 Apr;26(4):996-1004. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07190-5. Epub 2019 Feb 8.
6
[Thoracic recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node metastasis guides the cervical lymph node dissection of patients with esophageal cancer].[胸段喉返神经淋巴结转移指导食管癌患者的颈部淋巴结清扫]
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2019 Jan 23;41(1):10-14. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3766.2019.01.003.
7
Anatomy of lymphatic drainage of the esophagus and lymph node metastasis of thoracic esophageal cancer.食管淋巴引流的解剖结构与胸段食管癌的淋巴结转移
Cancer Manag Res. 2018 Nov 26;10:6295-6303. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S182436. eCollection 2018.
8
Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in the era of multimodality management.食管癌的多模态治疗时代的外科治疗。
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018 Dec;1434(1):192-209. doi: 10.1111/nyas.13677. Epub 2018 May 15.
9
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs for esophagectomy protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.食管癌切除术术后加速康复(ERAS)方案的系统评价与荟萃分析
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Feb;97(8):e0016. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010016.
10
[Pattern of lymphatic metastasis and risk factor of esophageal carcinoma that invades less than adventitia].[侵犯未达外膜的食管癌的淋巴转移模式及危险因素]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2015 Sep;18(9):893-6.

标准和全两野淋巴结清扫对食管癌切除术患者预后的影响。

Effects of standard and total two-field lymph node dissection on prognosis of patients undergoing Esophagectomy.

作者信息

Guo Qiang, Li Hefei, Wang Haibo, Zhang Duo, Li Yonghui

机构信息

Qiang Guo, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China.

Hefei Li, Department of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University, Baoding, Hebei 071000, P.R. China.

出版信息

Pak J Med Sci. 2022 Mar-Apr;38(4Part-II):950-954. doi: 10.12669/pjms.38.4.4031.

DOI:10.12669/pjms.38.4.4031
PMID:35634593
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9121942/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effects of standard two-field lymph node dissection (2FLND) and total 2FLND on the short-term and long-term clinical efficacy and complications of patients undergoing esophagectomy.

METHODS

The clinical data of 268 patients undergoing radical Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in our hospital from January 2008 to November 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. According to different methods of lymph node dissection (LND), the patients were divided into standard 2FLND group (n = 121) and total 2FLND group (n = 147). The LND status, postoperative complications, survival rate and lymph node recurrence of the two groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

Lymph node metastasis rate showed no statistically significant difference between the standard 2FLND group and the total 2FLND group (71.1% and 63.3%, respectively, > 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was 5.8% (7/121) in the standard 2FLND group, which was lower than that in the total 2FLND group [17.0% (25/147)], with a statistically significant difference ( = 7.948, < 0.01). The 5-year survival rate of the standard 2FLND group and the total 2FLND group was 29.8% and 28.6%, respectively, without statistically significant difference ( = 0.005, > 0.05). The lymph node recurrence rate in the standard 2FLND group was 41.3% (50/121), which was higher than 19.0% (28/147) of the total 2FLND group ( = 15.959, < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Compared with standard 2FLND, total 2FLND does not improve the postoperative survival of patients with esophageal carcinoma, and the risk of complications is higher.

摘要

目的

探讨标准两野淋巴结清扫术(2FLND)与全两野淋巴结清扫术对食管癌切除术患者短期和长期临床疗效及并发症的影响。

方法

回顾性分析2008年1月至2015年11月在我院行根治性Ivor-Lewis食管癌切除术的268例患者的临床资料。根据不同的淋巴结清扫(LND)方法,将患者分为标准2FLND组(n = 121)和全2FLND组(n = 147)。分析两组的LND情况、术后并发症、生存率及淋巴结复发情况。

结果

标准2FLND组与全2FLND组的淋巴结转移率差异无统计学意义(分别为71.1%和63.3%,>0.05)。标准2FLND组术后并发症发生率为5.8%(7/121),低于全2FLND组[17.0%(25/147)],差异有统计学意义(=7.948,<0.01)。标准2FLND组和全2FLND组的5年生存率分别为29.8%和28.6%,差异无统计学意义(=0.005,>0.05)。标准2FLND组的淋巴结复发率为41.3%(50/121),高于全2FLND组的19.0%(28/147)(=15.959,<0.01)。

结论

与标准2FLND相比,全2FLND不能提高食管癌患者术后生存率,且并发症风险更高。