Yun-Cang Wang1, Han-Yu Deng2, Wen-Ping Wang2, Du He3, Peng-Zhi Ni2, Wei-Peng Hu2, Zhi-Qiang Wang2, Long-Qi Chen2. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;; Department of Thoracic Surgery, The First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050031, China. 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China. 3. Department of Pathology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Positive esophageal proximal resection margin (ERM+) following esophagectomy was considered as incomplete or R1 resection. The clinicopathological data and long-term prognosis of esophageal cancer (EC) patients with ERM+ after esophagectomy were still unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the clinical significance of ERM+ and its therapeutic option. METHODS: From November 2008 to December 2014, 3,594 patients with histologically confirmed EC underwent radical resection in our department. Among them there were 37 patients (1.03%) who had ERM+. ERM+ was defined as carcinoma or atypical hyperplasia (severe or moderate) at the residual esophageal margin in our study. For comparison, another 74 patients with negative esophageal proximal resection margin (ERM-) were propensity-matched at a ratio of 1:2 as control group according to sex, age, tumor location and TNM staging. The relevant prognostic factors were investigated by univariate and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: In this large cohort of patients, the rate of ERM+ was 1.03%. The median survival time was 35.000 months in patients with ERM+, significantly worse than 68.000 months in those with ERM- (Chi-square =4.064, P=0.044). Survival in patients with esophageal residual atypical hyperplasia (severe or moderate) was similar to those with esophageal residual carcinoma. Survival rate in stage I-II was higher than that in stage III-IV (Chi-square =27.598, P=0.000) in ERM-; But there was no difference between the two subgroups of patients in ERM+. Furthermore, in those patients with ERM+, survival was better in those who having adjuvant therapy, compared to those without adjuvant therapy (Chi-square =5.480, P=0.019). And the average survival time which was improved to a well situation for ERM+ patients who have adjuvant therapy was 68.556 months which is comparable to average survival time (65.815 months) of ERM- for those patients who are at earlier stages. CONCLUSIONS: ERM+ after esophagectomy nowadays is of low incidence but still an important prognostic factor for patients with EC. Survival of ERM+ patients who have adjuvant therapy was improved to a well situation which is comparable to overall survival (OS) rate of ERM- for those patients who are at earlier stages.
BACKGROUND: Positive esophageal proximal resection margin (ERM+) following esophagectomy was considered as incomplete or R1 resection. The clinicopathological data and long-term prognosis of esophageal cancer (EC) patients with ERM+ after esophagectomy were still unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the clinical significance of ERM+ and its therapeutic option. METHODS: From November 2008 to December 2014, 3,594 patients with histologically confirmed EC underwent radical resection in our department. Among them there were 37 patients (1.03%) who had ERM+. ERM+ was defined as carcinoma or atypical hyperplasia (severe or moderate) at the residual esophageal margin in our study. For comparison, another 74 patients with negative esophageal proximal resection margin (ERM-) were propensity-matched at a ratio of 1:2 as control group according to sex, age, tumor location and TNM staging. The relevant prognostic factors were investigated by univariate and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: In this large cohort of patients, the rate of ERM+ was 1.03%. The median survival time was 35.000 months in patients with ERM+, significantly worse than 68.000 months in those with ERM- (Chi-square =4.064, P=0.044). Survival in patients with esophageal residual atypical hyperplasia (severe or moderate) was similar to those with esophageal residual carcinoma. Survival rate in stage I-II was higher than that in stage III-IV (Chi-square =27.598, P=0.000) in ERM-; But there was no difference between the two subgroups of patients in ERM+. Furthermore, in those patients with ERM+, survival was better in those who having adjuvant therapy, compared to those without adjuvant therapy (Chi-square =5.480, P=0.019). And the average survival time which was improved to a well situation for ERM+ patients who have adjuvant therapy was 68.556 months which is comparable to average survival time (65.815 months) of ERM- for those patients who are at earlier stages. CONCLUSIONS: ERM+ after esophagectomy nowadays is of low incidence but still an important prognostic factor for patients with EC. Survival of ERM+ patients who have adjuvant therapy was improved to a well situation which is comparable to overall survival (OS) rate of ERM- for those patients who are at earlier stages.
Authors: I Ninomiya; H Osugi; T Fujimura; S Fushida; K Okamoto; S Maruzen; K Oyama; J Kinoshita; T Tsukada; H Kitagawa; H Takamura; H Nakagawara; H Tajima; H Hayashi; I Makino; T Ohta Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2013-04-02 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: John A Harvin; Guy Lahat; Arlene M Correa; Jared Lee; Dipen Maru; Jaffer Ajani; Edith M Marom; James Welsh; Manoop S Bhutani; Garret Walsh; Jack Roth; Reza Mehran; Ara Vaporciyan; David Rice; Stephen Swisher; Wayne Hofstetter Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: David P Kelsen; Katryn A Winter; Leonard L Gunderson; Joanne Mortimer; Norman C Estes; Daniel G Haller; Jaffer A Ajani; Walter Kocha; Bruce D Minsky; Jack A Roth; Christopher G Willett Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-08-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Toni Lerut; Johnny Moons; Willy Coosemans; Dirk Van Raemdonck; Paul De Leyn; Herbert Decaluwé; Georges Decker; Philippe Nafteux Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sanghyuk Song; Eui Kyu Chie; Hak Jae Kim; Chang-Hyun Kang; Young Tae Kim; Joo Hyun Kim; Charn Il Park Journal: Cancer Res Treat Date: 2013-09-30 Impact factor: 4.679