Oncologic safety of pylorus-preserving gastrectomy in the aspect of micrometastasis in lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6

Baek Hui Kim, Soon Won Hong, Jong Won Kim, Seung Ho Choi, Sun Och Yoon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) is a function-preserving gastrectomy for early gastric cancers (EGCs) that are preoperatively assessed as pN0 tumors and located in the middle portion of the stomach. In PPG, dissection of the lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6 is frequently incomplete, and this may be worrisome in terms of oncologic safety. Methods: We examined lymph nodes collected from stations 5 and 6 from 196 patients who had undergone conventional distal gastrectomy (CDG) for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach and from 24 patients who had undergone PPG. Results: The average number of lymph nodes collected at station 5 was significantly lower with PPG than with CDG (0.08 vs. 1.32, respectively; P = 0.008). However, such a difference was not noted for station 6 nodes. The rate of macrometastasis was very low in all station 5 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 %) and station 6 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 %). Immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin in 109 cases of the CDG group and 21 cases of the PPG group showed that micrometastasis of single isolated tumor cell type was observed in only one station 6 lymph node of a patient who was initially diagnosed with pN0 EGC. There were no cases of micrometastasis in station 5 nodes. Conclusions: The possibility of micrometastasis to station 5 and/or 6 lymph nodes may be negligible for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach, and PPG thus might be the oncologically safe procedure when considering micrometastasis in remaining nodes in vivo at stations 5 and 6.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)533-538
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of surgical oncology
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Feb 1

Fingerprint

Neoplasm Micrometastasis
Pylorus
Gastrectomy
Lymph Nodes
Safety
Stomach Neoplasms
Stomach
Keratins
Lymph Node Excision
Neoplasms

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Kim, Baek Hui ; Hong, Soon Won ; Kim, Jong Won ; Choi, Seung Ho ; Yoon, Sun Och. / Oncologic safety of pylorus-preserving gastrectomy in the aspect of micrometastasis in lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6. In: Annals of surgical oncology. 2014 ; Vol. 21, No. 2. pp. 533-538.
@article{deec699be5d94f19b2576851df9578b4,
title = "Oncologic safety of pylorus-preserving gastrectomy in the aspect of micrometastasis in lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6",
abstract = "Background: Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) is a function-preserving gastrectomy for early gastric cancers (EGCs) that are preoperatively assessed as pN0 tumors and located in the middle portion of the stomach. In PPG, dissection of the lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6 is frequently incomplete, and this may be worrisome in terms of oncologic safety. Methods: We examined lymph nodes collected from stations 5 and 6 from 196 patients who had undergone conventional distal gastrectomy (CDG) for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach and from 24 patients who had undergone PPG. Results: The average number of lymph nodes collected at station 5 was significantly lower with PPG than with CDG (0.08 vs. 1.32, respectively; P = 0.008). However, such a difference was not noted for station 6 nodes. The rate of macrometastasis was very low in all station 5 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 {\%}) and station 6 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 {\%}). Immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin in 109 cases of the CDG group and 21 cases of the PPG group showed that micrometastasis of single isolated tumor cell type was observed in only one station 6 lymph node of a patient who was initially diagnosed with pN0 EGC. There were no cases of micrometastasis in station 5 nodes. Conclusions: The possibility of micrometastasis to station 5 and/or 6 lymph nodes may be negligible for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach, and PPG thus might be the oncologically safe procedure when considering micrometastasis in remaining nodes in vivo at stations 5 and 6.",
author = "Kim, {Baek Hui} and Hong, {Soon Won} and Kim, {Jong Won} and Choi, {Seung Ho} and Yoon, {Sun Och}",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-013-3252-7",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "533--538",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "2",

}

Oncologic safety of pylorus-preserving gastrectomy in the aspect of micrometastasis in lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6. / Kim, Baek Hui; Hong, Soon Won; Kim, Jong Won; Choi, Seung Ho; Yoon, Sun Och.

In: Annals of surgical oncology, Vol. 21, No. 2, 01.02.2014, p. 533-538.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Oncologic safety of pylorus-preserving gastrectomy in the aspect of micrometastasis in lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6

AU - Kim, Baek Hui

AU - Hong, Soon Won

AU - Kim, Jong Won

AU - Choi, Seung Ho

AU - Yoon, Sun Och

PY - 2014/2/1

Y1 - 2014/2/1

N2 - Background: Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) is a function-preserving gastrectomy for early gastric cancers (EGCs) that are preoperatively assessed as pN0 tumors and located in the middle portion of the stomach. In PPG, dissection of the lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6 is frequently incomplete, and this may be worrisome in terms of oncologic safety. Methods: We examined lymph nodes collected from stations 5 and 6 from 196 patients who had undergone conventional distal gastrectomy (CDG) for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach and from 24 patients who had undergone PPG. Results: The average number of lymph nodes collected at station 5 was significantly lower with PPG than with CDG (0.08 vs. 1.32, respectively; P = 0.008). However, such a difference was not noted for station 6 nodes. The rate of macrometastasis was very low in all station 5 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 %) and station 6 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 %). Immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin in 109 cases of the CDG group and 21 cases of the PPG group showed that micrometastasis of single isolated tumor cell type was observed in only one station 6 lymph node of a patient who was initially diagnosed with pN0 EGC. There were no cases of micrometastasis in station 5 nodes. Conclusions: The possibility of micrometastasis to station 5 and/or 6 lymph nodes may be negligible for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach, and PPG thus might be the oncologically safe procedure when considering micrometastasis in remaining nodes in vivo at stations 5 and 6.

AB - Background: Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) is a function-preserving gastrectomy for early gastric cancers (EGCs) that are preoperatively assessed as pN0 tumors and located in the middle portion of the stomach. In PPG, dissection of the lymph nodes at stations 5 and 6 is frequently incomplete, and this may be worrisome in terms of oncologic safety. Methods: We examined lymph nodes collected from stations 5 and 6 from 196 patients who had undergone conventional distal gastrectomy (CDG) for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach and from 24 patients who had undergone PPG. Results: The average number of lymph nodes collected at station 5 was significantly lower with PPG than with CDG (0.08 vs. 1.32, respectively; P = 0.008). However, such a difference was not noted for station 6 nodes. The rate of macrometastasis was very low in all station 5 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 %) and station 6 nodes (1 of 220, 0.45 %). Immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin in 109 cases of the CDG group and 21 cases of the PPG group showed that micrometastasis of single isolated tumor cell type was observed in only one station 6 lymph node of a patient who was initially diagnosed with pN0 EGC. There were no cases of micrometastasis in station 5 nodes. Conclusions: The possibility of micrometastasis to station 5 and/or 6 lymph nodes may be negligible for EGC located in the middle portion of the stomach, and PPG thus might be the oncologically safe procedure when considering micrometastasis in remaining nodes in vivo at stations 5 and 6.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84896725306&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84896725306&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-013-3252-7

DO - 10.1245/s10434-013-3252-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 24008556

AN - SCOPUS:84896725306

VL - 21

SP - 533

EP - 538

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

IS - 2

ER -