| Literature DB >> 31662826 |
Nan Chen1, Ting-Ting Sun1, Zhong-Wu Li2, Yun-Feng Yao1, Lin Wang3, Ai-Wen Wu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a prognostic factor for colorectal cancer, lymph node (LN) status, particularly the number of LN harvested, has been demonstrated to be essential in the evaluation of quality control in terms of surgical specimen. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation, however, decreases the LN harvest. Therefore, certain approaches (such as fat clearance or methylene blue) has drawn significant attention in order to raise LN yield. AIM: To compare the long-term oncologic outcome of ypN0 rectal cancer identified using fat clearance (FC) or conventional fixation (CF) following 30 Gy in 10 fractions (30 Gy/10f) of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (nRT).Entities:
Keywords: Conventional fixation; Fat clearance; Lymph node; Neoadjuvant radiotherapy; Rectal cancer; Survival
Year: 2019 PMID: 31662826 PMCID: PMC6815923 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v11.i10.877
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastrointest Oncol
Figure 1The effect of lymph nodes revealing after fat clearance. Small lymph nodes appeared as chalk white foci against a yellow and translucent adipose background. SRA: Superior rectal artery; LN: Lymph node.
Figure 2Small lymph nodes could be retrieved after fat clearance. The length of the sampling cassette is 30 mm.
Patient characteristics, pre-staging methods, and pathological stages of conventional fixation group versus fat clearance group, n (%)
| Sex | |||
| Male | 64 (63.4) | 69 (55.6) | 0.241 |
| Female | 37 (36.6) | 55 (44.4) | |
| Age (yr) | |||
| Median | 62 | 58 | 0.496 |
| Range | 28-83 | 32-84 | |
| cT stage | |||
| T0-2 | 4 (4.0) | 9 (7.3) | 0.170 |
| T3 | 93 (92.1) | 114 (91.9) | |
| T4a | 4 (4.0) | 1 (0.8) | |
| cN stage | |||
| N0 | 26 (25.7) | 30 (24.2) | 0.789 |
| N+ | 75 (74.3) | 94 (75.8) | |
| Distance from anal verge (cm) | |||
| Median | 5 | 5 | 0.299 |
| Range | 2-10 | 1-9 | |
| Pre-treatment staging | |||
| MRI + ERUS | 27 (26.7) | 22 (17.7) | 0.428 |
| MRI | 15 (14.9) | 23 (18.5) | |
| CT + ERUS | 15 (14.9) | 19 (15.3) | |
| ERUS | 30 (29.7) | 35 (28.2) | |
| CT | 14 (13.9) | 25 (20.2) | |
| Interval from RT to surgery | |||
| Median | 2 | 2 | 0.702 |
| Range | 1-8 | 1-6 | |
| Type of resection | |||
| Non-APR | 68 (67.3) | 90 (72.6) | 0.391 |
| APR | 33 (32.7) | 34 (27.4) | |
| ypT stage | |||
| ypCR | 7 (6.9) | 14 (11.3) | 0.550 |
| T1 | 8 (7.9) | 11 (8.9) | |
| T2 | 37 (36.6) | 51 (41.1) | |
| T3 | 47 (46.5) | 47 (37.9) | |
| T4a | 2 (2.0) | 1 (0.8) | |
| CRM status | |||
| Positive | 6 (5.9) | 8 (6.5) | 0.875 |
| Negative | 95 (94.1) | 116 (93.5) | |
MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; ERUS: Endorectal ultrasound; CT: Computed tomography; RT: Radiotherapy; CRM: circumferential resection margin.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier curves. A: The Kaplan–Meier curve of local recurrence-free survival (LRFS): the estimated 5-year LRFS rates were 95.7% and 94.6% in fat clearance (FC) and conventional fixation (CF) groups, respectively (P = 0.819); B: The Kaplan–Meier curve of cancer-specific survival (CSS): the estimated 5-year CSS rates were 92.0% and 87.2% in FC and CF groups, respectively (P = 0.482).
Lymph nodes retrieval, local recurrence-free survival, and cancer-specific survival of conventional fixation group versus fat clearance group
| LNs retrieved [median (range)] | |||
| All T stages | 19.5 (4-57) | 12 (0-44) | 0.000 |
| ypT0-2 | 19 (5-57) | 9 (0-30) | 0.000 |
| ypT3-4 | 21.5 (4-55) | 13 (1-44) | 0.000 |
| Lymph nodes ≥ 12 | |||
| All T stages | 82.3% | 50.5% | 0.000 |
| ypT0-2 | 81.6% | 34.6% | 0.000 |
| ypT3-4 | 83.3% | 67.3% | 0.068 |
| 5 yr-LRFS rate | 95.7% | 94.6% | 0.819 |
| 5 yr-CSS rate | 92.0% | 87.2% | 0.482 |
LN: Lymph node; LRFS: Local recurrence-free survival; CSS: Cancer-specific survival.