Cargando…

A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma

BACKGROUND: In esophageal cancer, circumferential resection margins (CRMs) are considered to be of relevant prognostic value, but a reliable definition of tumor-free CRM is still unclear. The aim of this study was to appraise the clinical prognostic value of microscopic CRM involvement and to determ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pultrum, Bareld B., Honing, Judith, Smit, Justin K., van Dullemen, Hendrik M., van Dam, Gooitzen M., Groen, Henk, Hollema, Harry, Plukker, John Th. M.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2820690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19924487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0827-4
_version_ 1782177405292511232
author Pultrum, Bareld B.
Honing, Judith
Smit, Justin K.
van Dullemen, Hendrik M.
van Dam, Gooitzen M.
Groen, Henk
Hollema, Harry
Plukker, John Th. M.
author_facet Pultrum, Bareld B.
Honing, Judith
Smit, Justin K.
van Dullemen, Hendrik M.
van Dam, Gooitzen M.
Groen, Henk
Hollema, Harry
Plukker, John Th. M.
author_sort Pultrum, Bareld B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In esophageal cancer, circumferential resection margins (CRMs) are considered to be of relevant prognostic value, but a reliable definition of tumor-free CRM is still unclear. The aim of this study was to appraise the clinical prognostic value of microscopic CRM involvement and to determine the optimal limit of CRM. METHODS: To define the optimal tumor-free CRM we included 98 consecutive patients who underwent extended esophagectomy with microscopic tumor-free resection margins (R0) between 1997 and 2006. CRMs were measured in tenths of millimeters with inked lateral margins. Outcome of patients with CRM involvement was compared with a statistically comparable control group of 21 patients with microscopic positive resection margins (R1). RESULTS: A cutoff point of CRM at ≤1.0 mm and >1.0 mm appeared to be an adequate marker for survival and prognosis (both P < 0.001). The outcome in patients with CRMs ≤1.0 and >0 mm was equal to that in patients with CRM of 0 mm (P = 0.43). CRM involvement was an independent prognostic factor for both recurrent disease (P = 0.001) and survival (P < 0.001). Survival of patients with positive CRMs (≤1 mm) did not significantly differ from patients with an R1 resection (P = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Involvement of the circumferential resection margins is an independent prognostic factor for recurrent disease and survival in esophageal cancer. The optimal limit for a positive CRM is ≤1 mm and for a free CRM is >1.0 mm. Patients with unfavorable CRM should be approached as patients with R1 resection with corresponding outcome.
format Text
id pubmed-2820690
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28206902010-02-19 A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma Pultrum, Bareld B. Honing, Judith Smit, Justin K. van Dullemen, Hendrik M. van Dam, Gooitzen M. Groen, Henk Hollema, Harry Plukker, John Th. M. Ann Surg Oncol Gastrointestinal Oncology BACKGROUND: In esophageal cancer, circumferential resection margins (CRMs) are considered to be of relevant prognostic value, but a reliable definition of tumor-free CRM is still unclear. The aim of this study was to appraise the clinical prognostic value of microscopic CRM involvement and to determine the optimal limit of CRM. METHODS: To define the optimal tumor-free CRM we included 98 consecutive patients who underwent extended esophagectomy with microscopic tumor-free resection margins (R0) between 1997 and 2006. CRMs were measured in tenths of millimeters with inked lateral margins. Outcome of patients with CRM involvement was compared with a statistically comparable control group of 21 patients with microscopic positive resection margins (R1). RESULTS: A cutoff point of CRM at ≤1.0 mm and >1.0 mm appeared to be an adequate marker for survival and prognosis (both P < 0.001). The outcome in patients with CRMs ≤1.0 and >0 mm was equal to that in patients with CRM of 0 mm (P = 0.43). CRM involvement was an independent prognostic factor for both recurrent disease (P = 0.001) and survival (P < 0.001). Survival of patients with positive CRMs (≤1 mm) did not significantly differ from patients with an R1 resection (P = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Involvement of the circumferential resection margins is an independent prognostic factor for recurrent disease and survival in esophageal cancer. The optimal limit for a positive CRM is ≤1 mm and for a free CRM is >1.0 mm. Patients with unfavorable CRM should be approached as patients with R1 resection with corresponding outcome. Springer-Verlag 2009-11-19 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2820690/ /pubmed/19924487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0827-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2009 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Gastrointestinal Oncology
Pultrum, Bareld B.
Honing, Judith
Smit, Justin K.
van Dullemen, Hendrik M.
van Dam, Gooitzen M.
Groen, Henk
Hollema, Harry
Plukker, John Th. M.
A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma
title A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma
title_full A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma
title_fullStr A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma
title_short A Critical Appraisal of Circumferential Resection Margins in Esophageal Carcinoma
title_sort critical appraisal of circumferential resection margins in esophageal carcinoma
topic Gastrointestinal Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2820690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19924487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0827-4
work_keys_str_mv AT pultrumbareldb acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT honingjudith acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT smitjustink acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT vandullemenhendrikm acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT vandamgooitzenm acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT groenhenk acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT hollemaharry acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT plukkerjohnthm acriticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT pultrumbareldb criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT honingjudith criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT smitjustink criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT vandullemenhendrikm criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT vandamgooitzenm criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT groenhenk criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT hollemaharry criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma
AT plukkerjohnthm criticalappraisalofcircumferentialresectionmarginsinesophagealcarcinoma