Literature DB >> 19082656

Factors that influence 12 or more harvested lymph nodes in early-stage colorectal cancer.

Chao-Wen Hsu1, Chieh-Hsin Lin, Jui-Ho Wang, Hsin-Tai Wang, Wen-Chieh Ou, Tai-Ming King.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The number of lymph nodes required for accurate staging is a critical component in early-stage (stage A and B) colorectal cancer (CRC). Current guidelines demand at least 12 lymph nodes to be retrieved. Results of previous studies were contradictory in factors, which influenced the number of harvested lymph nodes. This study was designed to determine the factors that influence the number of harvested lymph nodes (> or =12) in early-stage CRC in a single institution.
METHODS: Between 2003 and 2007, data on patients who underwent surgery for early-stage CRC were analyzed retrospectively. Data for a total of 470 patients were collected and all the tumor-bearing specimens were fixed with node identification performed. Several possible factors that influence 12 or more harvested lymph nodes were investigated and classified into four aspects: (1) operating surgeon, (2) examining pathologist, (3) patient (age, sex, and body mass index), and (4) disease (maximal length of tumor, length of specimen, tumor localization, tumor cell differentiation, Dukes stage, type of resection, and type of tumor).
RESULTS: A total of 289 patients (61.5%) with 12 or more harvested lymph nodes and 181 patients (38.5%) with < 12 lymph nodes were analyzed. The results demonstrate that within a single institution the maximal length of tumor, tumor localization, and depth of tumor invasion according to Dukes stage were independent influencing factors of 12 or more harvested lymph nodes. Maximal length of tumor was associated with more harvested lymph nodes (P < 0.001). Neither the operating surgeon nor the examining pathologist had significant influence on the number of harvested lymph nodes.
CONCLUSIONS: The number of harvested lymph nodes was highly variable in patients who underwent resection of early-stage CRC. Neither the operating surgeon nor the examining pathologist had significant influence on the number of harvested lymph nodes. Therefore, from the viewpoint of the surgeons, disease itself is the most important factor influencing the number of harvested lymph nodes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19082656     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-008-9850-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  23 in total

1.  Clinicopathological staging for colorectal cancer: an International Documentation System (IDS) and an International Comprehensive Anatomical Terminology (ICAT).

Authors:  L P Fielding; P A Arsenault; P H Chapuis; O Dent; B Gathright; J D Hardcastle; P Hermanek; J R Jass; R C Newland
Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  1991 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.029

2.  Number of lymph nodes examined and prognosis of TNM stage II colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Leopoldo Sarli; Giovanni Bader; Domenico Iusco; Carlo Salvemini; Davide Di Mauro; Antonio Mazzeo; Gabriele Regina; Luigi Roncoroni
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 9.162

3.  Lymph node recovery from colorectal resection specimens removed for adenocarcinoma. Trends over time and a recommendation for a minimum number of lymph nodes to be recovered.

Authors:  N S Goldstein; W Sanford; M Coffey; L J Layfield
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 2.493

4.  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.

Authors:  M D Evans; K Barton; A Rees; J D Stamatakis; S S Karandikar
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-03-07       Impact factor: 3.788

5.  For patients with Dukes' B (TNM Stage II) colorectal carcinoma, examination of six or fewer lymph nodes is related to poor prognosis.

Authors:  S Caplin; J P Cerottini; F T Bosman; M T Constanda; J C Givel
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1998-08-15       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Clinical and pathological prognostic indicators with colorectal mucinous carcinomas.

Authors:  Keisuke Kubota; Takayuki Akasu; Shin Fujita; Ken-ichi Sugihara; Yoshihiro Moriya; Seiichiro Yamamoto
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb

7.  Fluorouracil plus levamisole as effective adjuvant therapy after resection of stage III colon carcinoma: a final report.

Authors:  C G Moertel; T R Fleming; J S Macdonald; D G Haller; J A Laurie; C M Tangen; J S Ungerleider; W A Emerson; D C Tormey; J H Glick; M H Veeder; J A Mailliard
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1995-03-01       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Factors affecting the number of lymph nodes retrieved in colorectal cancer specimens.

Authors:  Michelle A Ostadi; Julie L Harnish; Stacey Stegienko; David R Urbach
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-24       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Factors influencing pathologic results after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: analysis of consecutive 100 cases.

Authors:  Seung Hyuk Baik; Nam Kyu Kim; Kang Young Lee; Seung Kook Sohn; Chang Hwan Cho; Myeong Jin Kim; Hogeun Kim; Rina K Shinn
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2007-12-05       Impact factor: 5.344

10.  Adequacy of nodal harvest in colorectal cancer: a consecutive cohort study.

Authors:  Paul M Johnson; Dickram Malatjalian; Geoff A Porter
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.267

View more
  15 in total

1.  Quality control in colorectal cancer care: how many lymph nodes should be harvested?

Authors:  John Spiliotis; Dimitrios H Roukos
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Lymph node evaluation for colon cancer in routine clinical practice: a population-based study.

Authors:  J C Del Paggio; S Nanji; X Wei; P H MacDonald; C M Booth
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Clinical, sociodemographic, and service provider determinants of guideline concordant colorectal cancer care for Appalachian residents.

Authors:  Steven T Fleming; Heath B Mackley; Fabian Camacho; Eric E Seiber; Niraj J Gusani; Stephen A Matthews; Jason Liao; Tse-Chuan Yang; Wenke Hwang; Nengliang Yao
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 4.333

4.  The re-evaluation of optimal lymph node yield in stage II right-sided colon cancer: is a minimum of 12 lymph nodes adequate?

Authors:  Yibo Cai; Guoping Cheng; Xingang Lu; Haixing Ju; Xiu Zhu
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2020-01-30       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Improved lymph node harvest from resected colon cancer specimens did not cause upstaging from TNM stage II to III.

Authors:  Kristian Storli; Karl Søndenaa; Bjørg Furnes; Sabine Leh; Idunn Nesvik; Tore Bru; Einar Gudlaugsson; Ida Bukholm; Solveig Norheim-Andersen; Geir Eide
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 6.  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

7.  The optimal number of lymph nodes examined in stage II colorectal cancer and its impact of on outcomes.

Authors:  Hok Kwok Choi; Wai Lun Law; Jensen T C Poon
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 4.430

8.  Adequacy of lymph node examination in colorectal surgery: contribution of the hospital versus the surgeon.

Authors:  Kim F Rhoads; Leland K Ackerson; Justine V Ngo; Florette K Gray-Hazard; S V Subramanian; R Adams Dudley
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.983

9.  Lymph node harvest in colon cancer: influence of microsatellite instability and proximal tumor location.

Authors:  Kjetil Søreide; Bjørn Steinar Nedrebø; Jon Arne Søreide; Aida Slewa; Hartwig Kørner
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 10.  Stage migration vs immunology: The lymph node count story in colon cancer.

Authors:  Bruno Märkl
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-11-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.