切缘问题:分析环切缘受累对直肠癌不完全全肠系膜切除术后生存和复发的影响。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Techniques in Coloproctology Pub Date : 2025-01-23 DOI:10.1007/s10151-024-03098-9
A Alipouriani, F Almadi, D R Rosen, D Liska, A E Kanters, K Ban, E Gorgun, S R Steele
{"title":"切缘问题:分析环切缘受累对直肠癌不完全全肠系膜切除术后生存和复发的影响。","authors":"A Alipouriani, F Almadi, D R Rosen, D Liska, A E Kanters, K Ban, E Gorgun, S R Steele","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-03098-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Incomplete mesorectal excision during rectal cancer surgery often leads to positive circumferential margins, with uncertain prognostic impacts. This study examines whether negative margins can mitigate the poorer prognosis typically associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer surgery, thus potentially challenging the prevailing emphasis on complete mesorectal excision.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma with incomplete TME at a single center from 2010 to 2022. Patients were stratified by margin status as determined by pathologic analysis into three groups: involved, not involved with closest margin distance ≤ 2 mm, and not involved with closest margin distance > 2 mm. Outcomes included recurrence and survival. Effects of neoadjuvant therapy protocols on margin status were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2010 to 2022, 7941 patients underwent proctectomy for rectal cancer, with 236 (3%) having incomplete TME. The median age of these patients was 64 years, and 63% were male. Overall, margin involvement was observed in 54 (23%) patients. The median tumor size was 3.05 cm (interquartile range (IQR): 2-6) for the whole group. Involved margins (23.2%) had reduced overall survival (60.5 months versus 87.3 months, p < 0.001), increased local recurrence (20.4% versus 9.4%, p = 0.024), and lower disease-free survival (45.2 versus 58.9 months, p = 0.006) versus uninvolved margins. Margin involvement was prognostic for decreased survival even after adjusting for confounders (p < 0.05). Among uninvolved margins, distance (> 2 mm versus ≤ 2 mm) did not affect outcomes. Total neoadjuvant therapy (versus standard chemoradiation) was associated with lower involved margins (p = 0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Positive margins retain negative prognostic impact with incomplete TME. Optimization of surgical resection remains vital. Total neoadjuvant therapy was associated with a lower rate of margin involvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"50"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11757853/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Margin matters: analyzing the impact of circumferential margin involvement on survival and recurrence after incomplete total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.\",\"authors\":\"A Alipouriani, F Almadi, D R Rosen, D Liska, A E Kanters, K Ban, E Gorgun, S R Steele\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10151-024-03098-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Incomplete mesorectal excision during rectal cancer surgery often leads to positive circumferential margins, with uncertain prognostic impacts. This study examines whether negative margins can mitigate the poorer prognosis typically associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer surgery, thus potentially challenging the prevailing emphasis on complete mesorectal excision.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma with incomplete TME at a single center from 2010 to 2022. Patients were stratified by margin status as determined by pathologic analysis into three groups: involved, not involved with closest margin distance ≤ 2 mm, and not involved with closest margin distance > 2 mm. Outcomes included recurrence and survival. Effects of neoadjuvant therapy protocols on margin status were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2010 to 2022, 7941 patients underwent proctectomy for rectal cancer, with 236 (3%) having incomplete TME. The median age of these patients was 64 years, and 63% were male. Overall, margin involvement was observed in 54 (23%) patients. The median tumor size was 3.05 cm (interquartile range (IQR): 2-6) for the whole group. Involved margins (23.2%) had reduced overall survival (60.5 months versus 87.3 months, p < 0.001), increased local recurrence (20.4% versus 9.4%, p = 0.024), and lower disease-free survival (45.2 versus 58.9 months, p = 0.006) versus uninvolved margins. Margin involvement was prognostic for decreased survival even after adjusting for confounders (p < 0.05). Among uninvolved margins, distance (> 2 mm versus ≤ 2 mm) did not affect outcomes. Total neoadjuvant therapy (versus standard chemoradiation) was associated with lower involved margins (p = 0.007).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Positive margins retain negative prognostic impact with incomplete TME. Optimization of surgical resection remains vital. Total neoadjuvant therapy was associated with a lower rate of margin involvement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51192,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11757853/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Techniques in Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-03098-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-03098-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:直肠癌手术中不完全的肠系膜切除常导致环缘阳性,预后影响不确定。本研究探讨了阴性切缘是否可以减轻直肠癌手术中不完全全肠系膜切除术(TME)相关的不良预后,从而潜在地挑战了普遍强调完全肠系膜切除术的观点。患者与方法:回顾性分析2010 - 2022年单中心行直肠直肠腺癌不完全性TME手术的患者。根据病理分析确定的切缘状况将患者分为三组:受累组、未受累组,切缘最近距离≤2mm组和未受累组,切缘最近距离> 2mm组。结果包括复发和生存。新辅助治疗方案对切缘状态的影响也进行了评估。结果:2010年至2022年,7941例直肠癌患者行直肠切除术,其中236例(3%)为不完全TME。这些患者的中位年龄为64岁,63%为男性。总的来说,54例(23%)患者观察到切缘受累。全组中位肿瘤大小为3.05 cm(四分位间距:2 ~ 6)。受累切缘(23.2%)降低了总生存期(60.5个月vs 87.3个月,2mm vs≤2mm),但对预后没有影响。总的新辅助治疗(与标准放化疗相比)与较低的受累边缘相关(p = 0.007)。结论:阳性切缘对不完全性TME的预后仍有负面影响。优化手术切除仍然至关重要。总的新辅助治疗与较低的切缘受累率相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Margin matters: analyzing the impact of circumferential margin involvement on survival and recurrence after incomplete total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.

Background: Incomplete mesorectal excision during rectal cancer surgery often leads to positive circumferential margins, with uncertain prognostic impacts. This study examines whether negative margins can mitigate the poorer prognosis typically associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer surgery, thus potentially challenging the prevailing emphasis on complete mesorectal excision.

Patients and methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma with incomplete TME at a single center from 2010 to 2022. Patients were stratified by margin status as determined by pathologic analysis into three groups: involved, not involved with closest margin distance ≤ 2 mm, and not involved with closest margin distance > 2 mm. Outcomes included recurrence and survival. Effects of neoadjuvant therapy protocols on margin status were also assessed.

Results: From 2010 to 2022, 7941 patients underwent proctectomy for rectal cancer, with 236 (3%) having incomplete TME. The median age of these patients was 64 years, and 63% were male. Overall, margin involvement was observed in 54 (23%) patients. The median tumor size was 3.05 cm (interquartile range (IQR): 2-6) for the whole group. Involved margins (23.2%) had reduced overall survival (60.5 months versus 87.3 months, p < 0.001), increased local recurrence (20.4% versus 9.4%, p = 0.024), and lower disease-free survival (45.2 versus 58.9 months, p = 0.006) versus uninvolved margins. Margin involvement was prognostic for decreased survival even after adjusting for confounders (p < 0.05). Among uninvolved margins, distance (> 2 mm versus ≤ 2 mm) did not affect outcomes. Total neoadjuvant therapy (versus standard chemoradiation) was associated with lower involved margins (p = 0.007).

Conclusions: Positive margins retain negative prognostic impact with incomplete TME. Optimization of surgical resection remains vital. Total neoadjuvant therapy was associated with a lower rate of margin involvement.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
期刊最新文献
Cross-cultural validation and reliability of the Turkish version of the anal fistula quality of life scale for cryptoglandular anal fistula. Pedicled omental flap construction: A useful adjunct to completion proctectomy or pouch excision for inflammatory bowel disease. Impact of sentinel pile on botulinum toxin treatment of chronic anal fissure: A comparative study. Docking optimization for right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolon excision (CME) with HUGO™ robotic system: the "Gemelli configuration". Short- and mid-term outcomes of transanal/transperineal minimally invasive surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1