Literature DB >> 34100187

Distal resection margins in rectal cancer specimens: differences in assessment between surgeons and pathologists and the influence of neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

T L Ghezzi1, C Tarta1, P C Contu1, A R Lazzaron1,2, B M Contin2, L M Kliemann3, D C Damin4,5.   

Abstract

To investigate the discrepancy between the distal resection margin (DRM) assessed by surgeons and pathologists, and the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) on DRM. This study included 67 rectal cancer patients undergoing elective surgery. DRMs were assessed through four different techniques: in vivo subjective estimative, made by the surgeon before the rectal resection (by palpation and visual estimative); in vivo objective, measured with a ruler before the rectal transection; ex vivo objective, measured right after resection of the specimen; post-fixation objective measurement, conducted by the pathologist. The DRMs subjectively and objectively assessed by the surgeons were not significantly different (3.40 cm vs. 3.45 cm). There was a mean reduction in the length of DRMs of 35.6%, from 3.45 cm objectively measured by the surgeon to 2.20 cm measured by the pathologist. This difference was significant among patients that did not receive nCRT (3.90 cm vs. 2.30 cm, P < 0.001), but not among those who received nCRT (2.30 vs. 2.05 cm). Surgeons are accurate in assessing rectal cancer DRMs. There are significant differences between intraoperative measurements of DRMs and the final pathologic results. However, these differences are not seen when nCRT is used, a finding that may be useful when sphincter preservation is being considered.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Distal margin; Neoadjuvant chemoradiation; Rectal cancer; Rectal resection

Year:  2021        PMID: 34100187     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-01102-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  10 in total

1.  Disparate surgical margin lengths of colorectal resection specimens between in vivo and in vitro measurements. The effects of surgical resection and formalin fixation on organ shrinkage.

Authors:  N S Goldstein; A Soman; J Sacksner
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 2.493

Review 2.  Effect of formalin tissue fixation and processing on immunohistochemistry.

Authors:  M Werner; A Chott; A Fabiano; H Battifora
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 6.394

3.  Formalin fixation could interfere with the clinical assessment of the tumor-free margin in tumor surgery: magnetic resonance imaging-based study.

Authors:  Pierre-Louis Docquier; Laurent Paul; Olivier Cartiaux; Frédéric Lecouvet; Denis Dufrane; Christian Delloye; Christine Galant
Journal:  Oncology       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 2.935

4.  A prospective study of the length of the distal margin after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  K Søndenaa; K H Kjellevold
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Practice parameters for the management of rectal cancer (revised).

Authors:  J R T Monson; M R Weiser; W D Buie; G J Chang; J F Rafferty; W Donald Buie; Janice Rafferty
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  The reaction of formaldehyde with unsaturated fatty acids during histological fixation.

Authors:  D Jones
Journal:  Histochem J       Date:  1969-08

7.  A prospective pathologic analysis using whole-mount sections of rectal cancer following preoperative combined modality therapy: implications for sphincter preservation.

Authors:  Jose G Guillem; David B Chessin; Jinru Shia; Arief Suriawinata; Elyn Riedel; Harvey G Moore; Bruce D Minsky; W Douglas Wong
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Objective measurement of the distal resection margin by MRI of the fresh and fixed specimen after partial mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: 5 cm is not just 5 cm and depends on when measured.

Authors:  Peter Bondeven; Rikke H Hagemann-Madsen; Lise Bro; Brendan J Moran; Søren Laurberg; Bodil Ginnerup Pedersen
Journal:  Acta Radiol       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 1.990

9.  Oncologic outcomes in rectal cancer patients with a ≤1-cm distal resection margin.

Authors:  Dong Woo Kang; Han Deok Kwak; Nak Song Sung; In Soo Yang; Se Jin Baek; Jung Myun Kwak; Jin Kim; Seon Hahn Kim
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-11-29       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection vs Open Resection of Stage II or III Rectal Cancer on Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  James Fleshman; Megan Branda; Daniel J Sargent; Anne Marie Boller; Virgilio George; Maher Abbas; Walter R Peters; Dipen Maun; George Chang; Alan Herline; Alessandro Fichera; Matthew Mutch; Steven Wexner; Mark Whiteford; John Marks; Elisa Birnbaum; David Margolin; David Larson; Peter Marcello; Mitchell Posner; Thomas Read; John Monson; Sherry M Wren; Peter W T Pisters; Heidi Nelson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 56.272

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.