AIM: It is unclear whether Histopathological Grading (UICC, TNM Classification) affects survival after resection for gastric cancer. METHODS: To investigate the prognostic significance of Histopathological Grading after gastrectomy, 1455 patients who underwent gastric resection for gastric adenocarcinoma were reviewed. RESULTS: The R0 (UICC, R Classification) resection rate was inversely correlated with the grade (86.5% for Grade 1, 79.7% for Grade 2 and 69.2% for Grade 3) and the R1 and R2 resection rates increased with the grade. The Histopathological Grading did not influence survival in the 1119 patients who underwent R0 resection (71.0% for Grade 1, 65.7% for Grade 2 and 66.7% for Grade 3). When multivariate analysis was performed for the 1119 cases undergoing R0 resection, the Histopathological Grading was not a determinant prognostic factor. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the UICC Histopathological Grading affects R0 resection rates, but does not affect survival independently.
AIM: It is unclear whether Histopathological Grading (UICC, TNM Classification) affects survival after resection for gastric cancer. METHODS: To investigate the prognostic significance of Histopathological Grading after gastrectomy, 1455 patients who underwent gastric resection for gastric adenocarcinoma were reviewed. RESULTS: The R0 (UICC, R Classification) resection rate was inversely correlated with the grade (86.5% for Grade 1, 79.7% for Grade 2 and 69.2% for Grade 3) and the R1 and R2 resection rates increased with the grade. The Histopathological Grading did not influence survival in the 1119 patients who underwent R0 resection (71.0% for Grade 1, 65.7% for Grade 2 and 66.7% for Grade 3). When multivariate analysis was performed for the 1119 cases undergoing R0 resection, the Histopathological Grading was not a determinant prognostic factor. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the UICC Histopathological Grading affects R0 resection rates, but does not affect survival independently.