Literature DB >> 22351873

Variation in lymph node examination after esophagectomy for cancer in the United States.

Ryan P Merkow1, Karl Y Bilimoria, Warren B Chow, Justin S Merkow, Michael J Weyant, Clifford Y Ko, David J Bentrem.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the quality of lymph node examination after esophagectomy for cancer in the United States based on current treatment guidelines (15 nodes) and to assess the association of patient, tumor, and hospital factors with the adequacy of lymph node examination.
DESIGN: Retrospective observational study from 1998 to 2007.
SETTING: National cancer database. PATIENTS: Patients with stage I through III esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy and not treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Rate of adequate lymph node examination (15 nodes).
RESULTS: A total of 13 995 patients were identified from 639 hospitals. Overall, 4014 patients (28.7%) had at least 15 lymph nodes examined, which increased from 23.5% to 34.4% during the study period. At the hospital level, only 45 centers (7.0%) examined a median of at least 15 lymph nodes. In the most recent period (2005-2007), at least 15 nodes were examined in 38.9% of patients at academic centers vs 28.0% at community hospitals and in 44.1% at high-volume centers vs 29.3% at low-volume centers. On multivariable analysis, hospital type, surgical volume status, and geographic location remained significant predictors of having at least 15 lymph nodes examined.
CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than one-third of patients and fewer than 1 in 10 hospitals met the benchmark of examining at least 15 lymph nodes. Hospitals should perform internal process improvement activities to improve guideline adherence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22351873     DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2011.2215

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  7 in total

Review 1.  Pathologic assessment of gastrointestinal tract and pancreatic carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy.

Authors:  Reetesh K Pai; Rish K Pai
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  Recurrence risk model for esophageal cancer after radical surgery.

Authors:  Jincheng Lu; Hua Tao; Dan Song; Cheng Chen
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.087

3.  The revised American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system (7th edition) improves prognostic stratification after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Haris Zahoor; James D Luketich; Benny Weksler; Daniel G Winger; Neil A Christie; Ryan M Levy; Michael K Gibson; Jon M Davison; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  Association between hospital case volume and the use of bronchoscopy and esophagoscopy during head and neck cancer diagnostic evaluation.

Authors:  Gordon H Sun; Oluseyi Aliu; Nicholas M Moloci; Joshua K Mondschein; James F Burke; Rodney A Hayward
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Resection of the irradiated esophagus: the impact of lymph node yield on survival.

Authors:  V R Esposito; B A Yerokun; M S Mulvihill; M L Cox; B Y Andrew; C J Yang; A Y Choi; C Moore; T A D'Amico; B C Tong; M G Hartwig
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 3.429

6.  Better Prognosis and Survival in Esophageal Cancer Survivors After Comorbid Second Primary Malignancies: A SEER Database-Based Study.

Authors:  Jiayue Ye; Sheng Hu; Wenxiong Zhang; Deyuan Zhang; Yang Zhang; Dongliang Yu; Jinhua Peng; Jianjun Xu; Yiping Wei
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-05-06

7.  Adequate Lymphadenectomy as a Quality Measure in Esophageal Cancer: Is there an Association with Treatment Approach?

Authors:  Cary Jo R Schlick; Rhami Khorfan; David D Odell; Ryan P Merkow; David J Bentrem
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 4.339

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.