Literature DB >> 17477849

The impact of surgeon and pathologist on lymph node retrieval in colorectal cancer and its impact on survival for patients with Dukes' stage B disease.

M D Evans1, K Barton, A Rees, J D Stamatakis, S S Karandikar.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: An adequate lymph node harvest is necessary for accurate Dukes' stage discrimination in colorectal cancer. The aim of this study is to identify the effect of variables, including the individual surgeon and pathologist, on lymph node harvest in a single institution.
METHOD: Three hundred and eighty one consecutive patients had resection for colorectal cancer, in a single unit. Factors influencing lymph node retrieval, including individual surgeon and reporting pathologist, were subjected to uni- and multivariate analysis. Actuarial survival of all patients with Dukes' stage B and C disease was then calculated and survival compared between Dukes' stage B and C at differing levels of lymph node harvest.
RESULTS: The unit median lymph node harvest was 13 nodes/patient (95% CI 13.1-14.5). There was no difference in lymph node harvest between specialist colorectal surgeons and the pooled results of four nonspecialist consultant surgeons. However, there was a significant difference between reporting pathologists (P < 0.001). On univariate analysis, operation type, operative urgency, Dukes' stage, T-stage, reporting pathologist and use of neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer, were found to significantly affect lymph node retrieval. On multivariate analysis, operation type, T-stage, reporting pathologist and neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer remained significant variables. Patients with one or more lymph node metastasis had greater nodal harvests than those without (median 15 vs 12 P = 0.02). Survival of patients with Dukes' stage B disease was found to improve as lymph node harvest increased.
CONCLUSION: Overall lymph node harvest, in this unit, varied according to the reporting pathologist but not operating surgeon. As lymph node harvest increased to 15 per patient, the probability of identifying a metastatic node increased.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17477849     DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01225.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 1462-8910            Impact factor:   3.788


  40 in total

1.  Effect of preoperative colonoscopic tattooing on lymph node harvest in T1 colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Jeonghyun Kang; Heae Surng Park; Im-kyung Kim; Younghae Song; Seung Hyuk Baik; Seung-Kook Sohn; Kang Young Lee
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Colorectal surgical specimen lymph node harvest: improvement of lymph node yield with a pathology assistant.

Authors:  Jeffery A Reese; Christopher Hall; Kelly Bowles; Robert C Moesinger
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-05-21       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  The positive impact of surgical quality control on adequate lymph node harvest by standardized laparoscopic surgery and national quality assessment program in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Daeyoun David Won; Sung Bong Choi; Yoon Suk Lee; Seong Taek Oh; Jun Gi Kim; In Kyu Lee
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-02-11       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Pathological examination of 12 regional lymph nodes and long-term survival in stages I-III colon cancer patients: an analysis of 2,056 consecutive patients in two branches of same institution.

Authors:  Hong Hwa Chen; Dilip Chakravarty K; Jeng-Yi Wang; Chung-Rong Changchien; Reiping Tang
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Metastatic lymph node ratio as a prognostic factor after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for extraperitoneal rectal cancer.

Authors:  Marco Ettore Allaix; Alberto Arezzo; Paola Cassoni; Massimiliano Mistrangelo; Giuseppe Giraudo; Mario Morino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Extended lymphadenectomy in rectal cancer is debatable.

Authors:  Marco E Allaix; Alessandro Fichera
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Emergency surgery for colorectal cancer does not result in nodal understaging compared with elective surgery.

Authors:  Sunil V Patel; Sanjay V B Patel; Muriel Brackstone
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.089

8.  Emergency surgery for colorectal cancer does not affect nodal harvest comparing elective procedures: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Gianluca Costa; Laura Lorenzon; Giulia Massa; Barbara Frezza; Mario Ferri; Pietro Fransvea; Paolo Mercantini; Maria Cristina Giustiniani; Genoveffa Balducci
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-07-28       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 9.  Colorectal cancer and lymph nodes: the obsession with the number 12.

Authors:  Giovanni Li Destri; Isidoro Di Carlo; Roberto Scilletta; Beniamino Scilletta; Stefano Puleo
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  The lymph node ratio is a powerful prognostic factor of node-positive colon cancers undergoing potentially curative surgery.

Authors:  Gennaro Galizia; Michele Orditura; Francesca Ferraraccio; Paolo Castellano; Margherita Pinto; Anna Zamboli; Sabrina Cecere; Ferdinando De Vita; Carlo Pignatelli; Eva Lieto
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.