Literature DB >> 11923599

Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.

Kevin F Birbeck1, Christopher P Macklin, Nicholas J Tiffin, Wendy Parsons, Michael F Dixon, Nicholas P Mapstone, Cedric R Abbott, Nigel Scott, Paul J Finan, David Johnston, Philip Quirke.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the potential variability in rates of circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement between different surgeons and time periods and to determine the suitability of using CRM status as an immediate predictor of outcome after rectal cancer surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: After disease stage has been taken into account, survival in rectal cancer has been shown to be very variable between surgeons and institutions. One of the major factors influencing survival is local recurrence, and this in turn is strongly related to inadequate tumor excision, particularly at the CRM.
METHODS: In a study involving 608 patients who underwent surgery for rectal cancer in Leeds during the 12-year period 1986 to 1997, the authors examined the role of CRM status as an immediate predictor of likely outcome, paying particular attention to its relationships with different surgeons and time periods.
RESULTS: Of 586 patients on whom full clinical follow-up was obtained, 165 (28.2%) had CRM involvement by carcinoma on pathologic examination. Up to the end of 1998, 105 (17.9%) patients had developed local recurrence. A significantly higher proportion (38.2%) of CRM-positive patients developed local recurrence than CRM-negative ones (10.0%). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed significant improvements in survival for CRM-negative patients over CRM-positive patients. Survival analysis in relation to two gastrointestinal surgeons and a group of other surgeons showed survival improvements that paralleled a reduction in the rates of CRM involvement for the two gastrointestinal surgeons during the period of the study. No improvement in survival or reduction in rates of CRM involvement was seen in the group of other surgeons.
CONCLUSIONS: These results show that CRM status may be used as an immediate predictor of survival after rectal cancer surgery and serves as a useful indicator of the quality of surgery. The frequency of CRM involvement can be used both for overall surgical audit and for monitoring the value of training programs in improving rectal surgery by individual surgeons. Its use in the current MRC CR07 study is valid and the best indicator of a requirement for further local therapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11923599      PMCID: PMC1422458          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200204000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  14 in total

1.  Prognostic significance of radial margins of clearance in rectal cancer.

Authors:  D F de Haas-Kock; C G Baeten; J J Jager; J A Langendijk; L J Schouten; A Volovics; J W Arends
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Local recurrence following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

Authors:  G Arbman; E Nilsson; O Hallböök; R Sjödahl
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  The prediction of local recurrence in rectal adenocarcinoma by histopathological examination.

Authors:  P Quirke; M F Dixon
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Hospital volume can serve as a surrogate for surgeon volume for achieving excellent outcomes in colorectal resection.

Authors:  J W Harmon; D G Tang; T A Gordon; H M Bowman; M A Choti; H S Kaufman; J S Bender; M D Duncan; T H Magnuson; K D Lillemoe; J L Cameron
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in prediction of tumour-free resection margin in rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  R G Beets-Tan; G L Beets; R F Vliegen; A G Kessels; H Van Boven; A De Bruine; M F von Meyenfeldt; C G Baeten; J M van Engelshoven
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-02-17       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Impact of variability among surgeons on postoperative morbidity and mortality and ultimate survival.

Authors:  C S McArdle; D Hole
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-06-22

7.  Effect of a surgical training programme on outcome of rectal cancer in the County of Stockholm. Stockholm Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Basingstoke Bowel Cancer Research Project.

Authors:  A L Martling; T Holm; L E Rutqvist; B J Moran; R J Heald; B Cedemark
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-07-08       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Total mesorectal excision in the operative treatment of carcinoma of the rectum.

Authors:  W E Enker; H T Thaler; M L Cranor; T Polyak
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  Surgical lateral clearance in resected rectal carcinomas. A multivariate analysis of clinicopathologic features.

Authors:  I O Ng; I S Luk; S T Yuen; P W Lau; C J Pritchett; M Ng; G P Poon; J Ho
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1993-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision.

Authors:  P Quirke; P Durdey; M F Dixon; N S Williams
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-11-01       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  142 in total

Review 1.  [R1 resection in rectal cancer].

Authors:  H-R Raab
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 2.  Pathologic assessment of gastrointestinal tract and pancreatic carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy.

Authors:  Reetesh K Pai; Rish K Pai
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 7.842

3.  Surgery of rectal cancer: still not a science.

Authors:  Federico Bozzetti
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2003-10-03       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 4.  Total mesorectal excision: technical aspects.

Authors:  P Terry Phang
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Colorectal Cancer OncoGuia: surgical pathology report guidelines.

Authors:  Xavier Sanjuán; Antonio Salas; Josep Lloreta; Paula Manchon Walsh
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.405

6.  Is laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery equal to open surgery? An evidence based perspective.

Authors:  Beat M Künzli; Helmut Friess; Shailesh V Shrikhande
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-04-27

7.  Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Sang Woo Lim; Jung Wook Huh; Young Jin Kim; Hyeong Rok Kim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  What is the significance of the circumferential margin in locally advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy?

Authors:  Atthaphorn Trakarnsanga; Mithat Gonen; Jinru Shia; Karyn A Goodman; Garrett M Nash; Larissa K Temple; José G Guillem; Philip B Paty; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Martin R Weiser
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  The significance of extramural venous invasion in R1 positive rectal cancer.

Authors:  N M Ormsby; H N Bermingham; H M Joshi; M Chadwick; A Samad; D Maitra; M Scott; S Kelly; K Whitmarsh; R Rajaganeshan
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Sphincter-sparing resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Kirk A Ludwig
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.