INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of neoadjuvant therapy on lymph node harvest (LNH), lymph node ratio (LNR), and overall survival rates after esophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 111 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma from 2001 to 2010 was performed. Patients were divided into two groups: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery (NEOSURG) versus surgery alone (SURG). RESULTS: There were 83 patients (75%) in the NEOSURG group and 28 (25%) in the SURG group with a mean age of 66 and 67 years, respectively. The median LNH in the NEOSURG group and SURG group was 16.0 and 15.5, respectively (p = 0.57). Within the NEOSURG group, the median LNH was 16 for complete responders, 14 for partial responders, 16 for nonresponders, and 18 in those who were pathologically upstaged (p = 0.434). The median LNR was 0, 0, 0.1, and 0.2, respectively (p < 0.001). Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy demonstrated a trend toward improved survival (p = 0.056). CONCLUSION: The LNH was not significantly influenced by neoadjuvant treatment or pathologic response. The LNR was inversely related to pathologic response after neoadjuvant therapy. Complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy trends to improve survival rates.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of neoadjuvant therapy on lymph node harvest (LNH), lymph node ratio (LNR), and overall survival rates after esophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 111 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma from 2001 to 2010 was performed. Patients were divided into two groups: neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery (NEOSURG) versus surgery alone (SURG). RESULTS: There were 83 patients (75%) in the NEOSURG group and 28 (25%) in the SURG group with a mean age of 66 and 67 years, respectively. The median LNH in the NEOSURG group and SURG group was 16.0 and 15.5, respectively (p = 0.57). Within the NEOSURG group, the median LNH was 16 for complete responders, 14 for partial responders, 16 for nonresponders, and 18 in those who were pathologically upstaged (p = 0.434). The median LNR was 0, 0, 0.1, and 0.2, respectively (p < 0.001). Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy demonstrated a trend toward improved survival (p = 0.056). CONCLUSION: The LNH was not significantly influenced by neoadjuvant treatment or pathologic response. The LNR was inversely related to pathologic response after neoadjuvant therapy. Complete pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy trends to improve survival rates.
Authors: Thomas W Rice; David P Mason; Sudish C Murthy; Gregory Zuccaro; David J Adelstein; Lisa A Rybicki; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2007-01-09 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Christopher P Twine; Wyn G Lewis; Matthew A Morgan; David Chan; Geoffrey W B Clark; Tim Havard; Tom D Crosby; S Ashley Roberts; Geriant T Williams Journal: Histopathology Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 5.087
Authors: Brendon M Stiles; Farooq Mirza; Anthony Coppolino; Jeffrey L Port; Paul C Lee; Subroto Paul; Nasser K Altorki Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-06-24 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: M Orditura; G Galizia; F Morgillo; E Martinelli; E Lieto; F Vitiello; N Di Martino; R Pacelli; A Renda; F Ciardiello; F De Vita Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Brendon M Stiles; Paul Christos; Jeffrey L Port; Paul C Lee; Subroto Paul; James Saunders; Nasser K Altorki Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-12-16 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Nasser K Altorki; Xi Kathy Zhou; Brendon Stiles; Jeffrey L Port; Subroto Paul; Paul C Lee; Madhu Mazumdar Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: E Le Prise; P L Etienne; B Meunier; G Maddern; M Ben Hassel; D Gedouin; D Boutin; J P Campion; B Launois Journal: Cancer Date: 1994-04-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Arin Kumar Saha; Christopher Sutton; Olorunda Rotimi; Simon Dexter; Henry Sue-Ling; Abeezar I Sarela Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2009-02-28 Impact factor: 5.344