OBJECTIVE: The Siewert classification system differentiates between adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and that of the distal esophagus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there were differences in the location and prevalence of lymph node metastases, type of recurrence, and survival with these tumors that warrant distinguishing between them in clinical practice. METHODS: Records of all patients who underwent resection for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction from 1987 to 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. Based on the endoscopic location of the epicenter of the tumor in relation to the gastroesophageal junction, tumors were categorized in 301 patients as being of the distal esophagus and in 208 as being of the gastroesophageal junction. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, or body mass index between patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus were more likely to have reflux symptoms (75% vs 53%, P < .0001) and peritumoral intestinal metaplasia (73% vs 51%, P < .0001) and be in a surveillance program (54% vs 9%, P = .0005) compared with patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction. However, the prevalence and location of nodal metastases was similar, and in node-positive patients mediastinal node involvement was present in more than 40% of the patients in each group (distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, 47%; gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 41%). Survival was similar (5 years: distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, 45%; gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 38%; P = .14), as was the prevalence and type of recurrence. CONCLUSION: The prevalence and distribution of lymph node metastases in patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction were similar, and after esophagectomy, there was no difference in overall survival or recurrence. Efforts to differentiate between these tumors are unnecessary, and both are effectively treated with esophagectomy.
OBJECTIVE: The Siewert classification system differentiates between adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and that of the distal esophagus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there were differences in the location and prevalence of lymph node metastases, type of recurrence, and survival with these tumors that warrant distinguishing between them in clinical practice. METHODS: Records of all patients who underwent resection for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction from 1987 to 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. Based on the endoscopic location of the epicenter of the tumor in relation to the gastroesophageal junction, tumors were categorized in 301 patients as being of the distal esophagus and in 208 as being of the gastroesophageal junction. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, or body mass index between patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus were more likely to have reflux symptoms (75% vs 53%, P < .0001) and peritumoral intestinal metaplasia (73% vs 51%, P < .0001) and be in a surveillance program (54% vs 9%, P = .0005) compared with patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction. However, the prevalence and location of nodal metastases was similar, and in node-positive patients mediastinal node involvement was present in more than 40% of the patients in each group (distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, 47%; gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 41%). Survival was similar (5 years: distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, 45%; gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 38%; P = .14), as was the prevalence and type of recurrence. CONCLUSION: The prevalence and distribution of lymph node metastases in patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction were similar, and after esophagectomy, there was no difference in overall survival or recurrence. Efforts to differentiate between these tumors are unnecessary, and both are effectively treated with esophagectomy.
Authors: Brechtje A Grotenhuis; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Jan Werner Poley; John J Hermans; Katharina Biermann; Manon C W Spaander; Marco J Bruno; Hugo W Tilanus; J Jan B van Lanschot Journal: World J Surg Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Bala Başak Öven Ustaalioğlu; Metin Tilki; Ali Sürmelioğlu; Ahmet Bilici; Can Gönen; Recep Ustaalioğlu; Özlem Balvan; Mehmet Aliustaoğlu Journal: Turk J Surg Date: 2017-03-01