• 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

胃残端癌行胃系膜淋巴结清扫术可改善患者生存。

Meso-jejunal lymph node dissection has a survival benefit in patients with remnant gastric cancer.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2023 May 10;18(5):e0285554. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285554. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0285554
PMID:37163530
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10171691/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clinical benefits of the meso-jejunal lymph node (MJLN) dissection in remnant gastric cancer (RGC) patients have not been fully established. Hence, in this retrospective study, we evaluated the survival benefit of MJLN dissection and prognostic significance of MJLN metastasis in RGC patients who underwent gastrojejunostomy reconstruction after their initial gastrectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 391 patients who underwent surgery for RGC at our institution between 1996 and 2019. Among them, 60 patients had MJLN dissection. The index value of the survival benefit gained by dissection of the MJLN was calculated by multiplying the frequency of metastasis at the MJLN station and the 5-year overall survival rate (5YOS) of patients with metastasis at that station. When the metastatic rate or 5YOS exceeded 10%, dissection was recommended. An index value of dissection greater than 1.0 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Total metastatic rate of MJLN was 35% (n = 21/60). Patients with MJLN metastasis had advanced pathologic stage compared to patients in the no-metastasis group (p < 0.001). In T2-T4 RGC patients, the metastatic rate of MJLN was 48.6% (n = 17/35), and their 5YOS was 28.4%. The calculated index value was 13.8. Also, patients with MJLN metastasis had a poorer overall survival than those without metastasis. MJLN metastasis was an independent prognostic factor of overall survival in multivariate analysis (HR 6.77, 95%CI 2.21-20.79, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

MJLN dissection should be considered for advanced RGC patients who underwent gastrojejunostomy after distal gastrectomy during their initial surgery according to the index value.

摘要

背景

胃切除术后行胃肠吻合术的残胃癌(RGC)患者中,中肠间淋巴结(MJLN)清扫的临床获益尚未完全确定。因此,在本回顾性研究中,我们评估了 MJLN 清扫对 RGC 患者的生存获益,以及 MJLN 转移对 RGC 患者的预后意义。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 1996 年至 2019 年在我院行 RGC 手术的 391 例患者。其中,60 例患者行 MJLN 清扫。通过计算 MJLN 站转移的频率与该站转移患者的 5 年总生存率(5YOS)的乘积,计算获得的 MJLN 清扫的生存获益指数值。当转移率或 5YOS 超过 10%时,建议进行清扫。大于 1.0 的指数值被认为具有显著意义。

结果

MJLN 的总转移率为 35%(n = 21/60)。与无转移组相比,有 MJLN 转移的患者具有更晚期的病理分期(p < 0.001)。在 T2-T4 RGC 患者中,MJLN 的转移率为 48.6%(n = 17/35),其 5YOS 为 28.4%。计算的指数值为 13.8。此外,有 MJLN 转移的患者总生存情况较无转移的患者更差。在多因素分析中,MJLN 转移是总生存的独立预后因素(HR 6.77,95%CI 2.21-20.79,p = 0.001)。

结论

根据指数值,对于初次手术行远端胃切除术后行胃肠吻合术的晚期 RGC 患者,应考虑行 MJLN 清扫。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b8ed/10171691/893b456ede07/pone.0285554.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b8ed/10171691/893b456ede07/pone.0285554.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b8ed/10171691/893b456ede07/pone.0285554.g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Meso-jejunal lymph node dissection has a survival benefit in patients with remnant gastric cancer.胃残端癌行胃系膜淋巴结清扫术可改善患者生存。
PLoS One. 2023 May 10;18(5):e0285554. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285554. eCollection 2023.
2
Optimal extent of lymph node dissection for remnant advanced gastric carcinoma after distal gastrectomy: a retrospective analysis of more than 3000 patients from the nationwide registry of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association.远端胃癌切除术后残胃癌淋巴结清扫的最佳范围:日本胃癌协会全国登记处对 3000 多例患者的回顾性分析。
Gastric Cancer. 2020 Nov;23(6):1091-1101. doi: 10.1007/s10120-020-01081-5. Epub 2020 May 17.
3
Different prognostic effect of lymph node metastasis between remnant gastric cancers and primary proximal gastric cancers.残胃癌与原发性近端胃癌淋巴结转移的不同预后影响。
J Gastrointest Surg. 2024 Oct;28(10):1571-1577. doi: 10.1016/j.gassur.2024.06.026. Epub 2024 Jul 2.
4
Evaluating the optimal treatment strategy for early and advanced remnant gastric cancer.评估早期和晚期残胃癌的最佳治疗策略。
ANZ J Surg. 2022 Nov;92(11):2907-2914. doi: 10.1111/ans.18049. Epub 2022 Sep 19.
5
[Prognostic factors of lymph node-negative metastasis gastric cancer].[淋巴结阴性转移性胃癌的预后因素]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2017 Feb 25;20(2):190-194.
6
[Clinical value of superior mesenteric vein (No.14v) lymph node dissection in D2 gastrectomy for locally advanced distal gastric cancer].[肠系膜上静脉(第14v组)淋巴结清扫在局部进展期远端胃癌D2根治性胃切除术中的临床价值]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2018 Oct 25;21(10):1136-1141.
7
Differences of the lymphatic distribution and surgical outcomes between remnant gastric cancers and primary proximal gastric cancers.残胃癌与原发性近端胃癌的淋巴分布差异及手术结局。
J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Mar;16(3):503-8. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1804-3. Epub 2012 Jan 4.
8
Prognostic Significance of Lymph Node Dissection Along the Upper-third-stomach in Patients With Lower-third Gastric Cancer.胃下1/3癌患者上1/3胃区域淋巴结清扫的预后意义
Anticancer Res. 2019 Mar;39(3):1485-1489. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.13266.
9
[Metastasis rates of lymph nodes and distribution in advanced gastric cancer and its clinical significance].[进展期胃癌淋巴结转移率及分布情况及其临床意义]
Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2006 Nov;9(6):506-9.
10
The value of spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy in total gastrectomy for gastric and esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinomas: A long-term retrospective propensity score match study from a high-volume institution in China.保留脾脏的淋巴结清扫术在全胃切除治疗胃及胃食管结合部腺癌中的价值:来自中国一家大容量医疗机构的长期回顾性倾向评分匹配研究。
Surgery. 2021 Feb;169(2):426-435. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.07.053. Epub 2020 Sep 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2021 (6th edition).日本胃癌治疗指南 2021(第 6 版)。
Gastric Cancer. 2023 Jan;26(1):1-25. doi: 10.1007/s10120-022-01331-8. Epub 2022 Nov 7.
2
Appropriate Lymph Node Dissection Sites for Cancer in the Body and Tail of the Pancreas: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.胰腺体尾部癌的合适淋巴结清扫部位:一项多中心回顾性研究
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Sep 11;14(18):4409. doi: 10.3390/cancers14184409.
3
Comparison of long-term outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: a propensity score-matching study.
机器人与腹腔镜根治性胃切除术的长期疗效比较:倾向评分匹配研究。
Surg Endosc. 2022 Nov;36(11):8047-8059. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09245-3. Epub 2022 Jun 28.
4
Index of estimated benefit from lymph node dissection for stage I-III transverse colon cancer: an analysis of the JSCCR database.Ⅰ-Ⅲ期横结肠癌淋巴结清扫术获益指数:JSCCR 数据库分析。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2022 Aug;407(5):2011-2019. doi: 10.1007/s00423-022-02525-5. Epub 2022 May 2.
5
Cancer Statistics in Korea: Incidence, Mortality, Survival, and Prevalence in 2018.《韩国癌症统计数据:2018 年发病率、死亡率、生存率和流行率》
Cancer Res Treat. 2021 Apr;53(2):301-315. doi: 10.4143/crt.2021.291. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
6
Optimal extent of lymph node dissection for remnant advanced gastric carcinoma after distal gastrectomy: a retrospective analysis of more than 3000 patients from the nationwide registry of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association.远端胃癌切除术后残胃癌淋巴结清扫的最佳范围:日本胃癌协会全国登记处对 3000 多例患者的回顾性分析。
Gastric Cancer. 2020 Nov;23(6):1091-1101. doi: 10.1007/s10120-020-01081-5. Epub 2020 May 17.
7
Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2018 (5th edition).《日本胃癌治疗指南2018(第5版)》
Gastric Cancer. 2021 Jan;24(1):1-21. doi: 10.1007/s10120-020-01042-y. Epub 2020 Feb 14.
8
Evaluation of Optimal Lymph Node Dissection in Remnant Gastric Cancer Based on Initial Distal Gastrectomy.基于初次远端胃切除的残胃癌最佳淋巴结清扫评估
Anticancer Res. 2018 Mar;38(3):1677-1683. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.12401.
9
Effectiveness of the Korean National Cancer Screening Program in Reducing Gastric Cancer Mortality.韩国国家癌症筛查计划在降低胃癌死亡率方面的效果。
Gastroenterology. 2017 May;152(6):1319-1328.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2017.01.029. Epub 2017 Jan 29.
10
Current status in remnant gastric cancer after distal gastrectomy.远端胃切除术后残胃癌的现状
World J Gastroenterol. 2016 Feb 28;22(8):2424-33. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i8.2424.