AIM: To systematically review the survival outcomes relating to extramural venous invasion in rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. An electronic search was carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane library databases, Google scholar and PubMed until October 2014. Search terms were used in combination to yield articles on extramural venous invasion in rectal cancer. Outcome measures included prevalence and 5-year survival rates. These were graphically displayed using Forest plots. Statistical analysis of the data was carried out. RESULTS: Fourteen studies reported the prevalence of extramural venous invasion (EMVI) positive patients. Prevalence ranged from 9%-61%. The pooled prevalence of EMVI positivity was 26% [Random effects: Event rate 0.26 (0.18, 0.36)]. Most studies showed that EMVI related to worse oncological outcomes. The pooled overall survival was 39.5% [Random effects: Event rate 0.395 (0.29, 0.51)]. CONCLUSION: Historically, there has been huge variation in the prevalence of EMVI through inconsistent reporting. However the presence of EMVI clearly leads to worse survival outcomes. As detection rates become more consistent, EMVI may be considered as part of risk-stratification in rectal cancer. Standardised histopathological definitions and the use of magnetic resonance imaging to identify EMVI will improve detection rates in the future.
AIM: To systematically review the survival outcomes relating to extramural venous invasion in rectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. An electronic search was carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane library databases, Google scholar and PubMed until October 2014. Search terms were used in combination to yield articles on extramural venous invasion in rectal cancer. Outcome measures included prevalence and 5-year survival rates. These were graphically displayed using Forest plots. Statistical analysis of the data was carried out. RESULTS: Fourteen studies reported the prevalence of extramural venous invasion (EMVI) positive patients. Prevalence ranged from 9%-61%. The pooled prevalence of EMVI positivity was 26% [Random effects: Event rate 0.26 (0.18, 0.36)]. Most studies showed that EMVI related to worse oncological outcomes. The pooled overall survival was 39.5% [Random effects: Event rate 0.395 (0.29, 0.51)]. CONCLUSION: Historically, there has been huge variation in the prevalence of EMVI through inconsistent reporting. However the presence of EMVI clearly leads to worse survival outcomes. As detection rates become more consistent, EMVI may be considered as part of risk-stratification in rectal cancer. Standardised histopathological definitions and the use of magnetic resonance imaging to identify EMVI will improve detection rates in the future.
Authors: David E Messenger; David K Driman; Robin S McLeod; Robert H Riddell; Richard Kirsch Journal: J Clin Pathol Date: 2011-06-22 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Uday B Patel; Fiona Taylor; Lennart Blomqvist; Christopher George; Hywel Evans; Paris Tekkis; Philip Quirke; David Sebag-Montefiore; Brendan Moran; Richard Heald; Ashley Guthrie; Nicola Bees; Ian Swift; Kjell Pennert; Gina Brown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-08-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Oliver C Shihab; Fiona Taylor; Gisella Salerno; Richard J Heald; Philip Quirke; Brendan J Moran; Gina Brown Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-05-18 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: R Glynne-Jones; N Hava; V Goh; S Bosompem; J Bridgewater; I Chau; A Gaya; H Wasan; B Moran; L Melcher; A MacDonald; M Osborne; S Beare; M Jitlal; A Lopes; M Hall; N West; P Quirke; Wai-Lup Wong; M Harrison Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-10-23 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Amelia Barcellini; Viviana Vitolo; Lorenzo Cobianchi; Andrea Peloso; Alessandro Vanoli; Alfredo Mirandola; Angelica Facoetti; Maria Rosaria Fiore; Alberto Iannalfi; Barbara Vischioni; Francesco Cuccia; Sara Ronchi; Maria Bonora; Giulia Riva; Rachele Petrucci; Emma D'Ippolito; Francesca Dal Mas; Lorenzo Preda; Francesca Valvo Journal: In Vivo Date: 2020 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.155
Authors: Rory F Kokelaar; Huw G Jones; Jeremy Williamson; Namor Williams; A Paul Griffiths; John Beynon; Gareth J Jenkins; Dean A Harris Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 4.742