Zhidong Gao1,2, Chao Wang1,3, Yancheng Cui1, Zhanlong Shen2,3, Kewei Jiang1,3, Danhua Shen4, Yi Wang5, Siyan Zhan6, Peng Guo1, Xiaodong Yang1, Fangfang Liu4, Kai Shen1, Bin Liang1, Mujun Yin1, Qiwei Xie1, Youli Wang1, Shan Wang1,2, Yingjiang Ye1,3. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. 2. Key Laboratory of Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Research, Beijing, China. 3. Laboratory of Surgical Oncology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. 4. Department of Pathology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. 5. Department of Radiology, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China. 6. Department of Epidemiology, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the oncological outcomes of complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: CME is considered a standard procedure for colon cancer patients. However, previous evidence regarding the effect of CME on prognosis has fundamental limitations that prevent it from being fully accepted. METHODS: Patients who underwent radical resection for colon cancer were enrolled between November 2012 and March 2016. According to the principles of CME, patients were stratified into 2 groups based on intraoperative surgical fields and specimen photographs. The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). The clinicopathological data and follow-up information were collected and recorded. The final follow-up date was April 2016. The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01724775). RESULTS: There were 220 patients in the CME group and 110 patients in the noncomplete mesocolic excision (NCME) group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Compared with NCME, CME was associated with a greater number of total lymph nodes (24 vs 20, P = 0.002). Postoperative complications did not differ between the 2 groups. CME had a positive effect on LRFS compared with NCME (100.0% vs 90.2%, log-rank P < 0.001). Mesocolic dissection (100.0% vs 87.9%, log-rank P < 0.001) and nontumor deposits (97.2% vs 91.6%, log-rank P < 0.022) were also associated with improved LRFS. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that, compared with NCME, CME improves 3-year LRFS without increasing surgical risks.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the oncological outcomes of complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: CME is considered a standard procedure for colon cancer patients. However, previous evidence regarding the effect of CME on prognosis has fundamental limitations that prevent it from being fully accepted. METHODS: Patients who underwent radical resection for colon cancer were enrolled between November 2012 and March 2016. According to the principles of CME, patients were stratified into 2 groups based on intraoperative surgical fields and specimen photographs. The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). The clinicopathological data and follow-up information were collected and recorded. The final follow-up date was April 2016. The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01724775). RESULTS: There were 220 patients in the CME group and 110 patients in the noncomplete mesocolic excision (NCME) group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Compared with NCME, CME was associated with a greater number of total lymph nodes (24 vs 20, P = 0.002). Postoperative complications did not differ between the 2 groups. CME had a positive effect on LRFS compared with NCME (100.0% vs 90.2%, log-rank P < 0.001). Mesocolic dissection (100.0% vs 87.9%, log-rank P < 0.001) and nontumor deposits (97.2% vs 91.6%, log-rank P < 0.022) were also associated with improved LRFS. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that, compared with NCME, CME improves 3-year LRFS without increasing surgical risks.
Authors: Tamara Díaz-Vico; María Fernández-Hevia; Aida Suárez-Sánchez; Carmen García-Gutiérrez; Luka Mihic-Góngora; Daniel Fernández-Martínez; José Antonio Álvarez-Pérez; Jorge Luis Otero-Díez; José Electo Granero-Trancón; Luis Joaquín García-Flórez Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Giuseppe S Sica; Danilo Vinci; Leandro Siragusa; Bruno Sensi; Andrea M Guida; Vittoria Bellato; Álvaro García-Granero; Gianluca Pellino Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-09-12 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Ottavia De Simoni; Andrea Barina; Antonio Sommariva; Marco Tonello; Mario Gruppo; Genny Mattara; Antonio Toniato; Pierluigi Pilati; Boris Franzato Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2020-11-10 Impact factor: 2.571