A W Phillips1,2, K Hardy3, M Navidi3, S K Kamarajah3,4, A Madhavan3, A Immanuel3, S M Griffin3. 1. Northern Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Unit, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. awphillips@doctors.net.uk. 2. School of Medical Education, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. awphillips@doctors.net.uk. 3. Northern Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Unit, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. 4. Institute of Cellular Medicine, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Debate remains regarding the extent of lymphadenectomy required with esophagectomy. In patients who receive neoadjuvant treatment, this may address lymph node metastases. However, patients with early disease and those with comorbidities may not receive neoadjuvant treatment. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of lymph node yield and location on prognosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy without neoadjuvant treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from consecutive patients with potentially curable adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction were reviewed. Patients were treated with transthoracic esophagectomy and two-field lymphadenectomy. Outcomes according to lymph node yield were determined. The prognosis of carrying out less radical lymphadenectomy was calculated according to three groups: exclusion of proximal thoracic nodes (group 1), minimal abdominal lymphadenectomy (group 2), and minimal abdominal and thoracic lymphadenectomy (group 3). RESULTS: 357 patients were included. Median survival was 78 months [confidence interval (CI) 53-103 months]. Absolute lymph node retrieval was not related to survival (p = 0.920). An estimated additional 4 (2-6) cancer-related deaths was projected if group 1 nodes were omitted, 15 (11-19) additional deaths if group 2 nodes were omitted, and 4 (2-6) deaths if group 3 nodes were omitted. Minimal lymphadenectomy (groups 1, 2, and 3) was projected to lead to 19 (15-23) additional cancer-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Extensive lymphadenectomy allows accurate staging. In patients who do not receive neoadjuvant treatment, it may confer a survival benefit. The number of lymph nodes retrieved may not be a good surrogate for extent of lymphadenectomy, and correlation with location is required.
BACKGROUND: Debate remains regarding the extent of lymphadenectomy required with esophagectomy. In patients who receive neoadjuvant treatment, this may address lymph node metastases. However, patients with early disease and those with comorbidities may not receive neoadjuvant treatment. The aim of this study is to determine the impact of lymph node yield and location on prognosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy without neoadjuvant treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from consecutive patients with potentially curable adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction were reviewed. Patients were treated with transthoracic esophagectomy and two-field lymphadenectomy. Outcomes according to lymph node yield were determined. The prognosis of carrying out less radical lymphadenectomy was calculated according to three groups: exclusion of proximal thoracic nodes (group 1), minimal abdominal lymphadenectomy (group 2), and minimal abdominal and thoracic lymphadenectomy (group 3). RESULTS: 357 patients were included. Median survival was 78 months [confidence interval (CI) 53-103 months]. Absolute lymph node retrieval was not related to survival (p = 0.920). An estimated additional 4 (2-6) cancer-related deaths was projected if group 1 nodes were omitted, 15 (11-19) additional deaths if group 2 nodes were omitted, and 4 (2-6) deaths if group 3 nodes were omitted. Minimal lymphadenectomy (groups 1, 2, and 3) was projected to lead to 19 (15-23) additional cancer-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Extensive lymphadenectomy allows accurate staging. In patients who do not receive neoadjuvant treatment, it may confer a survival benefit. The number of lymph nodes retrieved may not be a good surrogate for extent of lymphadenectomy, and correlation with location is required.
Authors: S Michael Griffin; Rhys Jones; Sivesh Kathir Kamarajah; Maziar Navidi; Shajahan Wahed; Arul Immanuel; Nick Hayes; Alexander W Phillips Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-10-18 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Sivesh K Kamarajah; Anantha Madhavan; Jakub Chmelo; Maziar Navidi; Shajahan Wahed; Arul Immanuel; Nick Hayes; S Michael Griffin; Alexander W Phillips Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-03-03 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: S K Kamarajah; M Navidi; S Wahed; A Immanuel; N Hayes; S M Griffin; A W Phillips Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2020-03-21 Impact factor: 5.344