AIM: To investigate the number, size, and status of lymph nodes within the mesorectum and to explore the prognostic significance of lymph node micrometastases in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with rectal cancer undergone total mesorectal excision between October 2001 and October 2002 were included. Mesorectal nodes retrieved from the resected specimens were detected with a combination of haematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining and immunohistochemistry (IHC). The relations between lymph node metastases, micrometastases and postoperative recurrence were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 548 lymph nodes were harvested, with 17.7+/-8.2 nodes per case. The average number of metastatic nodes in HE-positive patients and micrometastatic nodes in IHC-positive patients was 5.2+/-5.1 per case and 2.2+/-1.3 per case, respectively. The mean size of all nodes and metastatic nodes was 4.1+/-1.8 mm and 5.2+/-1.7 mm in diameter, respectively. The mean size of micrometastatic nodes was 3.9+/-1.4 mm in diameter. The size of the majority of mesorectal nodes (66.8%), metastatic nodes (52.6%), and micrometastatic nodes (79.5%) was less than 5 mm in diameter. During a median follow-up period of 24.6+/-4.7 mo, 5 patients (16.7%) had recurrence, of them 2 died and 3 survived. Another case died of tumor unrelated cause and was excluded. All 5 recurrent cases had 3 or more nodes involved, and one of them developed only lymph node micrometastases. The mean number of both metastatic and micrometastatic nodes per case differed significantly between the recurrent and non-recurrent groups (P<0.01 and P = 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: The majority of lymph nodes, metastatic, and micrometastatic lymph nodes within the mesorectum are smaller than 5 mm in diameter. The nodal status and the number of lymph nodes involved with tumor metastases and micrometastases are related to the rapid postoperative recurrence.
AIM: To investigate the number, size, and status of lymph nodes within the mesorectum and to explore the prognostic significance of lymph node micrometastases in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with rectal cancer undergone total mesorectal excision between October 2001 and October 2002 were included. Mesorectal nodes retrieved from the resected specimens were detected with a combination of haematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining and immunohistochemistry (IHC). The relations between lymph node metastases, micrometastases and postoperative recurrence were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 548 lymph nodes were harvested, with 17.7+/-8.2 nodes per case. The average number of metastatic nodes in HE-positive patients and micrometastatic nodes in IHC-positive patients was 5.2+/-5.1 per case and 2.2+/-1.3 per case, respectively. The mean size of all nodes and metastatic nodes was 4.1+/-1.8 mm and 5.2+/-1.7 mm in diameter, respectively. The mean size of micrometastatic nodes was 3.9+/-1.4 mm in diameter. The size of the majority of mesorectal nodes (66.8%), metastatic nodes (52.6%), and micrometastatic nodes (79.5%) was less than 5 mm in diameter. During a median follow-up period of 24.6+/-4.7 mo, 5 patients (16.7%) had recurrence, of them 2 died and 3 survived. Another case died of tumor unrelated cause and was excluded. All 5 recurrent cases had 3 or more nodes involved, and one of them developed only lymph node micrometastases. The mean number of both metastatic and micrometastatic nodes per case differed significantly between the recurrent and non-recurrent groups (P<0.01 and P = 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: The majority of lymph nodes, metastatic, and micrometastatic lymph nodes within the mesorectum are smaller than 5 mm in diameter. The nodal status and the number of lymph nodes involved with tumor metastases and micrometastases are related to the rapid postoperative recurrence.
Authors: Y Miyake; H Yamamoto; Y Fujiwara; M Ohue; Y Sugita; N Tomita; M Sekimoto; N Matsuura; H Shiozaki; M Monden Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2001-05 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: José A García-Sáenz; María C Sáenz; Lucía González; Pedro Pérez-Segura; Javier Puente; Sara López-Tarruella; Javier Sastre; Antonio Casado; José G López-Asenjo; Eduardo Díaz-Rubio Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 3.405