| Literature DB >> 32269841 |
Abstract
Gastrectomy with lymph node dissection remains the gold standard for curative treatment of gastric cancer. Dissection of splenic hilar lymph nodes has been included as a part of D2 lymph node dissection for proximal gastric cancer. Previously, pancreatico-splenectomy has been performed for dissecting splenic hilar lymph nodes, followed by pancreas-preserving splenectomy and spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy. However, the necessity of routine splenectomy or splenic hilar lymph node dissection has been under debate due to the increased morbidity caused by splenectomy and the poor prognostic feature of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis. In contrast, the relatively high incidence of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis, survival advantage, and therapeutic value of splenic hilar lymph node dissection in some patient subgroups, as well as the effective use of novel technologies, still supports the necessity and applicability of splenic hilar lymph node dissection. In this review, we aimed to evaluate the need for splenic hilar lymph node dissection and suggest the subgroup of patients with favorable outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Lymph node dissection; Prognosis; Spleen preservation; Splenectomy; Stomach neoplasms
Year: 2020 PMID: 32269841 PMCID: PMC7105411 DOI: 10.5230/jgc.2020.20.e10
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Gastric Cancer ISSN: 1598-1320 Impact factor: 3.720
The incidence of #10LN according to the cross-sectional tumor location
| Author | Year | Country | No. of patients with #10LN metastasis/No. of all patients | #10LN metastasis incidence | Cross-sectional tumor location | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GC | LC | AW | PW | Encircling | |||||
| Mönig et al. [ | 2001 | Germany | 11/112 | 9.8% | 37.5% | 1.5% | 0 | 0 | 13.3% |
| Sasada et al. [ | 2009 | Japan | 31/201 | 15.4% | 38.5% | 2.6% | 5.3% | 27.8% | 22.8% |
| Shin et al. [ | 2009 | Korea | 41/319 | 12.9% | 15.6% | 9.7% | 20.8% | 12.0% | 23.1% |
| Aoyagi et al. [ | 2010 | Japan | 20/191 | 10.5% | 38.1% | 0 | 6.3% | 8.6% | 17.4% |
| Kosuga et al. [ | 2011 | Japan | 30/280 | 10.7% | 19.4% | 7.2% | 16.2% | ||
| Chen et al. [ | 2014 | China | 18/205 | 8.8% | 18.2% | 3.8% | 0 | 13.3% | 13.3% |
| Sun et al. [ | 2015 | China | 16/150 | 10.7% | 17.8% | 4.1% | 10.7% | ||
| Watanabe et al. [ | 2016 | Japan | 39/421 | 9.3% | 15.9% | 6.2% | |||
| Son et al. [ | 2017 | Korea | 87/602 | 14.5% | 28.8% | 9.7% | 15.6% | 12.3% | 45.0% |
| Jeong et al. [ | 2019 | Korea | 63/665 | 9.5% | 19.4% | 3.5% | 8.1% | 7.4% | 25.7% |
| Yura et al. [ | 2019 | Japan | 48/593 | 8.1% | 15.1% | 4.2% | |||
#10LN = number 10 lymph nodes; GC = greater curvature; LC = lesser curvature; AW = anterior wall; PW = posterior wall.
The incidence of #10LN according to the Borrmann classification
| Author | Year | Country | No. of patients with #10LN metastasis/No. of all patients | #10LN metastasis incidence | Borrmann | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | |||||
| Mönig et al. [ | 2001 | Germany | 11/112 | 9.8% | 0 | 0 | 1.8% | 52.6% |
| Shin et al. [ | 2009 | Korea | 41/319 | 12.9% | 11.1% | 7.5% | 12.2% | 34.1% |
| Aoyagi et al. [ | 2010 | Japan | 20/191 | 10.5% | 16.7% | 4.3% | 12.7% | 14.3% |
| Kosuga et al. [ | 2011 | Japan | 30/280 | 10.7% | 5.3% | 26.4% | ||
| Zhu et al. [ | 2012 | China | 74/265 | 27.9% | 14.9% | 32.3% | ||
| Chen et al. [ | 2014 | China | 18/205 | 8.8% | 0 | 10.5% | 3.8% | 21.7% |
| Watanabe et al. [ | 2016 | Japan | 39/421 | 9.3% | 17.1% | 14.2% | ||
| Son et al. [ | 2017 | Korea | 87/602 | 14.5% | 10.5% | 6.5% | 13.1% | 24.5% |
#10LN = number 10 lymph nodes.
The incidence of #10LN according to the depth of invasion and stage
| Author | Year | Country | No. of patients with #10LN metastasis/No. of all patients | #10LN metastasis incidence | Depth of invasion | Stage | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M/SM | MP | SS | SE | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||||
| Mönig et al. [ | 2001 | Germany | 11/112 | 9.8% | 0 | 0 | 9.1% | 35.7% | ||||
| Ooki et al. [ | 2008 | Japan | 18/196 | 9.2% | 2.4% | 4.3% | 8.5% | 18.4% | ||||
| Sasada et al. [ | 2009 | Japan | 31/201 | 15.4% | 0 | 5.3% | 6.5% | 27.2% | ||||
| Shin et al. [ | 2009 | Korea | 41/319 | 12.9% | 0 | 0 | 9.7% | 22.2% | 0 | 4.5% | 9.5% | 43.8% |
| Aoyagi et al. [ | 2010 | Japan | 20/191 | 10.5% | 9.1% | 0 | 10.5% | 12.9% | 0 | 2.5% | 6.3% | 34.1% |
| Kosuga et al. [ | 2011 | Japan | 30/280 | 10.7% | 0 | 3.2% | 11.3% | 13.4% | ||||
| Zhu et al. [ | 2012 | China | 74/265 | 27.9% | 0 | 7.7% | 17.8% | 32.0% | ||||
| Chen et al. [ | 2014 | China | 18/205 | 8.8% | 8.3% | 0 | 4.5% | 10.6% | 0 | 2.9% | 8.5% | 23.5% |
| Sun et al. [ | 2015 | China | 16/150 | 10.7% | 0 | 1.3% | 14.3% | 34.8% | ||||
| Watanabe et al. [ | 2016 | Japan | 39/421 | 9.3% | 15.0% | 16.7% | ||||||
| Son et al. [ | 2017 | Korea | 87/602 | 14.5% | 0 | 3.1% | 4.7% | 19.2% | 0 | 2.1% | 25.1% | |
| Jeong et al. [ | 2019 | Korea | 63/665 | 9.5% | 0 | 0 | 5.6% | 19.7% | 0 | 0 | 13.5% | 38.3% |
#10LN = number 10 lymph nodes; M = mucosa; SM = submucosa; MP = muscularis propria; SS = subserosa; SE = serosa.