Cargando…
The impact of resection margin distance on survival and recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a retrospective cohort analysis
BACKGROUND: The prognostic effect of resection margin status following pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial, even with the implementation of standardized pathological assessment. We therefore investigated the impact of resection margin (RM) status a...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9937496/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36800357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281921 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The prognostic effect of resection margin status following pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial, even with the implementation of standardized pathological assessment. We therefore investigated the impact of resection margin (RM) status and RM distance in curative resected PDAC on overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence. METHOD: 108 patients were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database of a certified pancreatic cancer center. Distribution and relationships between circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement (CRM≤1mm; CRM>1mm; CRM≥2mm) and their prognostic impact on OS and DFS were assessed using Kaplan-Meier statistics and the Log-Rank test. Multivariate logistic regression was used explain the development of a recurrence 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: 63 out of 108 patients had medial RM and 32 posterior RM involvement. There was no significant difference in OS and DFS between CRM≤1mm and CRM>1mm resections. Clearance at the medial margin of ≥2mm had an impact on OS and DFS, (RM≥2mm vs. RM<2mm: median OS 29.8 vs 16.8 months, median DFS 19.6 vs. 10.3 months). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age, medial RM ≥2mm, lymph node status and chemotherapy were prognostic factors for OS and DFS. Posterior RM had no influence on OS or DFS. CONCLUSION: Not all RM seem to have the same impact on OS and DFS, and a clearance of 1mm for definition of a negative RM (i.e. CRM>1mm) seems not sufficient. Future studies should include more patients to stratify for potential confounders we could not account for. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the German Clinical Trials Registry (reference number DRKS0017425). |
---|