| Guangcai Niu,Xiangdong Ma. The optional extent of lymph node dissection for pancreatic head cancer. Oncol Transl Med, 2021, 7: 20-24. |
| 胰头癌淋巴结清扫范围的选择 |
| The optional extent of lymph node dissection for pancreatic head cancer |
| Received:May 10, 2020 Revised:January 20, 2021 |
| DOI：10.1007/s10330-020-0427-7 |
| 中文关键词: 胰头癌，标准区域的淋巴结清扫术，扩大区域的淋巴结清扫术；生存时间；并发症 |
| 英文关键词: pancreatic head cancer (PHC); standard regional lymphadenectomy (SRLN); extended regional lymphadenectomy (ERLN); survival; complication |
| 基金项目: |
| Author Name | Affiliation | E-mail | | Guangcai Niu | Department of Oncological Surgery, Xuzhou Central Hospital | n10046@163.com | | Xiangdong Ma* | Department of Oncological Surgery, Xuzhou Central Hospital | m10046@sina.com |
|
| Hits: 11136 |
| Download times: 13814 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的：目前胰头癌淋巴结清扫范围不确定并且有争议。本研究目的在于探讨胰头癌患者不同范围的淋巴结清扫病人是否可以获益。
病人和方法:2015年9月至2019年9月，106例胰头癌患者入组研究，其中没有一个出现远处转移。其中56名患者接受标准的区域淋巴切除术（SRLN）,而50例病人接受扩大的区域淋巴切除术（ERLN）。我们对两组患者的平均存存时间和并发症进行比较。
结果:SRLN组平均生存时间是27.01个月,，而在ERLN组是21.17个月，两组生存没有显著差异(p = 0.30)。SRLN组术后主要的并发生发生率和死亡率分别为37.50%和1.79%,而在ERLN组分别为46.00%和2.00%。此外,肿瘤分化程度、直径、淋巴结转移、神经的侵犯、血管侵犯和切缘状态与生存密切相关(p < 0.05)。
结论:对胰头癌淋巴结转移患者，与标准的淋巴结清扫相比扩大的淋巴结清扫不能获得更好的生存受益，并且还增加术后并发症发生率及死亡率，尽管没有统计学差异。所以对于此类患者不应盲目的行扩大淋巴结清扫术。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective The extent of lymph node dissection for pancreatic head cancer (PHC) is uncertain and
controversial; therefore, this study evaluated whether PHC patients can benefit from different extents of
lymph node dissection.
Methods A total of 106 PHC patients underwent standard regional lymphadenectomy (SRLN; n = 56,
52.8%) and extended regional lymphadenectomy (ERLN; n = 50, 47.2%) between September 2015 and
September 2019. None of the study participants had distant metastases. The median survival time and
complications were compared between the two groups.
Results The median survival time in the SRLN and ERLN groups was 27.01 months and 21.17 months,
respectively (P = 0.30). The postoperative major morbidity and mortality rates were 37.50% and 1.79% in the
SRLN group, and 46.00% and 2.00% in the ERLN group, respectively. Moreover, the tumor differentiation,
tumor diameter, lymph node involvement, perineural invasion, vascular invasion, and margin status all
correlated with survival (P < 0.05).
Conclusion For PHC patients, ERLN cannot provide a significant survival benefit over SRLN. Moreover,
ERLN increased morbidity and mortality, although without statistical significance. This indicates that ERLN
should not be considered in PHC patients. |
|
View Full Text
Download reader HTML全文 |
| Close |
|
|
|