Literature DB >> 14583942

Extended versus limited lymph nodes dissection technique for adenocarcinoma of the stomach.

P McCulloch1, M E Nita, H Kazi, J Gama-Rodrigues.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgeons disagree about the merits and risks of radical lymph node clearance during gastrectomy for cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate survival and peri-operative mortality after limited or extended lymph node removal during gastrectomy for cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CancerLit, LILACS, Central Medical Journal Japanese Database and the Cochrane register, references from relevant articles and conference proceedings. We contacted known workers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies published after 1970 which reported 5 year survival or postoperative mortality rates, and clearly defined the node dissection performed, were considered. We excluded studies which overtly included patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy, and comparisons with clear systematic treatment allocation bias. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomised comparisons and observational studies were considered separately. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three reviewers selected trials for inclusion. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Results of trials of similar design were pooled. Meta-analysis was performed separately for randomised and non-randomised comparisons. MAIN
RESULTS: Two randomised and two non-randomised comparisons of limited (D1) versus extended (D2) node dissection and 11 cohort studies of either D1 or D2 resection were analysed. Meta-analysis of randomised trials did not reveal any survival benefit for extended lymph node dissection (Risk ratio = 0.95 (95% CI 0.83 - 1.09), but showed increased postoperative mortality (RR 2.23, 95% CI 1.45 - 3.45). Pre-specified subgroup analysis suggested a possible benefit in stage T3+ tumours (RR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.42-1.10). Non-randomised comparisons showed no significant survival benefit for extended dissection (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 -1.02), but decreased mortality (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45-0.93). Subgroup analysis showed apparent benefit in UICC stage II and IIIa. Observational studies of D2 resection reported much better mortality and survival than those of D1 surgery, but the settings were strikingly different. REVIEWER'S
CONCLUSIONS: D2 dissection carries increased mortality risks associated with spleen and pancreas resection, and probably with inexperience and low case volumes. Randomised studies show no evidence of overall survival benefit, but possible benefit in T3+ tumours. These results may be confounded by surgical learning curves and poor surgeon compliance. Non-randomised comparisons suggest a possible survival benefit for D2 in intermediate UICC stages. Observational studies show high 5 year survival and low operative mortality after D2 dissection in experienced units, and poor results after D1 dissection in non-specialist units. Further studies, with precautions to eliminate learning curve effects, contamination and non-compliance, are needed to evaluate D2 dissection in intermediate stage gastric cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14583942     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001964

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  15 in total

Review 1.  Gastric cancer surgery: an American perspective on the current options and standards.

Authors:  Joyce Wong; Patrick Jackson
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2011-03

Review 2.  Current management of gastric cancer.

Authors:  Ulf H Haglund; Bengt Wallner
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Comparison of effects in randomized controlled trials with observational studies in digestive surgery.

Authors:  Satoru Shikata; Takeo Nakayama; Yoshinori Noguchi; Yoshinori Taji; Hisakazu Yamagishi
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Surgical interventions for gastric cancer: a review of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Weiling He; Jian Tu; Zijun Huo; Yuhuang Li; Jintao Peng; Zhenwen Qiu; Dandong Luo; Zunfu Ke; Xinlin Chen
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

Review 5.  Treatment options for surgically resectable gastric cancer.

Authors:  Lakshmi Rajdev
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2010-06

Review 6.  Historical assumptions of lymphadenectomy.

Authors:  Paolo Morgagni; Domenico Tringali; Giuliano La Barba; Giovanni Vittimberga; Giorgio Ercolani
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-12-08

Review 7.  A meta-analysis of D1 versus D2 lymph node dissection.

Authors:  Rajini Seevaratnam; Alina Bocicariu; Roberta Cardoso; Alyson Mahar; Alex Kiss; Lucy Helyer; Calvin Law; Natalie Coburn
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 7.370

8.  Problems faced by evidence-based medicine in evaluating lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Giuseppe Verlato; Simone Giacopuzzi; Maria Bencivenga; Paolo Morgagni; Giovanni De Manzoni
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-09-28       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Receipt of appropriate surgical care for Medicare beneficiaries with cancer.

Authors:  Caprice C Greenberg; Stuart R Lipsitz; Bridget Neville; Haejin In; Nathanael Hevelone; Stacy A Porter; Christine Weeks; Ashish K Jha; Atul A Gawande; Deborah Schrag; Jane C Weeks
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2011-06-20

10.  In-hospital mortality after stomach cancer surgery in Spain and relationship with hospital volume of interventions.

Authors:  Marisa Baré; Joan Cabrol; Jordi Real; Gemma Navarro; Rafel Campo; Carles Pericay; Antonio Sarría
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-08-27       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.