Literature DB >> 32833759

Prognostic Impact of Frozen Section Investigation and Extent of Proximal Safety Margin in Gastric Cancer Resection.

Felix Berlth1,2, Woo-Ho Kim3, Jong-Ho Choi1, Shin-Hoo Park1, Seong-Ho Kong1, Hyuk-Joon Lee1, Han-Kwang Yang1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Guidelines propose different extents of macroscopic proximal margin for gastric cancer and frozen margin investigation in selected cases, but data is lacking. This study was to evaluate the necessary extent of macroscopic proximal margin, accuracy of frozen margin investigation, and prognostic impact of tumor-free proximal margin length in pT2-pT4 gastric cancer. STUDY
DESIGN: Proximal and distal frozen margins were routinely investigated intraoperatively in all pT2-pT4 gastric cancers resected between 2011 and 2017. Macroscopic and microscopic proximal margin lengths were correlated. For R0-resections, survival analysis was performed for distal gastrectomy (DG) with microscopic proximal margin length ≤3 cm versus >3 cm.
RESULTS: Overall, 1484 patients were included. Microscopic proximal margin lengths were macroscopically more often misestimated in diffuse histology (P = 0.0004), but extent of underestimation in centimeter was similar to intestinal and mixed/undetermined type (P = 0.134). Fifteen cases (1.0%) resulted in R1-resection, 10 at distal, and 5 at proximal margin but none with macroscopic proximal margin ≥3 cm and negative frozen section. Overall agreement of frozen margin and final pathology was 2951/2968 (99.4%). Proximal margin length in DG did not correlate with survival or recurrence in R0-resected patients. DISCUSSION: Diffuse histology is at higher risk for underestimation of proximal margin length, but extent of underestimation is similar in other Laurén subtypes. If ≥3 cm macroscopic proximal margin length is applied with intraoperative frozen margin confirmation, R1-resection can be avoided.
CONCLUSION: In pT2-T4a gastric cancer, proximal margin of ≥3 cm plus frozen margin confirmation provides high oncological safety. In DG patients with R0-resection, proximal margin length does not correlate with survival or recurrence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32833759     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004266

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  5 in total

1.  Prediction Model for Screening Patients at Risk of Malnutrition After Gastric Cancer Surgery.

Authors:  Ji-Hyeon Park; Eunjung Kim; Eun-Mi Seol; Seong-Ho Kong; Do Joong Park; Han-Kwang Yang; Jong-Ho Choi; Shin-Hoo Park; Hwi-Nyeong Choe; Meera Kweon; Jiwon Park; Yunhee Choi; Hyuk-Joon Lee
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 2.  [Complete response after neoadjuvant therapy for gastric cancer: implications for surgery].

Authors:  Giovanni Capovilla; Caterina Froiio; Hauke Lang; Felix Berlth; Peter Philipp Grimminger
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-10-07       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 3.  Prevention and treatment of a positive proximal margin after gastrectomy for cardia cancer.

Authors:  Eider Talavera-Urquijo; Andrew R Davies; Bas P L Wijnhoven
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2022-07-16

Review 4.  Extent of Surgical Resection for Gastric Cancer: The Safety Distance Between the Tumor and the Proximal Resection Margin.

Authors:  Dimitrios Symeonidis; Dimitrios Zacharoulis; Eleana Petsa; Athina A Samara; Labrini Kissa; Konstantinos Tepetes
Journal:  Cancer Diagn Progn       Date:  2022-09-03

5.  Impact of Surgical Margins on Overall Survival after Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Validation of Japanese Gastric Cancer Association Guidelines on a Western Series.

Authors:  Marianna Maspero; Carlo Sposito; Antonio Benedetti; Matteo Virdis; Maria Di Bartolomeo; Massimo Milione; Vincenzo Mazzaferro
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 5.344

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.