European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2026
Lymph node metastasis, dissection efficacy, and prognostic differences between direct and incidental gallbladder carcinoma: A retrospective study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xu Ke, Zhang Ruoyu, Yuan Yimeng, Liu Mei, Cao Dayong, Wang Liming
Аннотация
AIMS: Gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) has a poor prognosis, with lymph node metastasis (LNM) being a key prognostic factor. Controversies remain regarding lymph node dissection (LND) utility and prognostic differences of direct (DGBC) vs. incidental (IGBC) GBC.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 193 GBC patients who underwent radical resection (2012.2-2024.9). Patients were categorized in two ways: first by LNM status (LNM group vs. LN0 group) and second by GBC type (DGBC group vs. IGBC group). Clinical, pathological, and follow-up data were collected; survival analyses used Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves with log-rank tests, and prognostic/predictive factors were analyzed via Cox regression and Logistics regression.
RESULTS: Of 193 patients, 37% (72/193) had LNM (most common in LN12: 81.9%), which significantly reduced Overall Survival (OS: median 22.95 vs. 46.30 months, P < 0.0001) and Recurrence-Free Survival (RFS: median 13.25 vs. 41.70 months, P < 0.0001) vs. LN0 group. The most common LNM sites in GBC occur at No.12 (30.57%), No. 13 (13.47%), and No.8 (11.40%) LNs. LND did not improve OS (P = 0.14) or RFS (P = 0.96) in GBC patients. IGBC (45/193) had better OS (88.89% vs. 60.14%, P = 0.0007) and RFS (median 39.60 vs. 20.70 months, P = 0.0473) than DGBC, with lower LNM rates (especially No.12: P = 0.0006) and milder pathological features (lower T stage, less hepatic or nerve invasion). However, LND still failed to improve survival of IGBC patients.
CONCLUSION: LNM is a critical negative prognostic factor for GBC. LND serves staging and treatment planning, not survival improvement. Routine LND is unnecessary for IGBC, providing evidence for personalized GBC management.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 193 GBC patients who underwent radical resection (2012.2-2024.9). Patients were categorized in two ways: first by LNM status (LNM group vs. LN0 group) and second by GBC type (DGBC group vs. IGBC group). Clinical, pathological, and follow-up data were collected; survival analyses used Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves with log-rank tests, and prognostic/predictive factors were analyzed via Cox regression and Logistics regression.
RESULTS: Of 193 patients, 37% (72/193) had LNM (most common in LN12: 81.9%), which significantly reduced Overall Survival (OS: median 22.95 vs. 46.30 months, P < 0.0001) and Recurrence-Free Survival (RFS: median 13.25 vs. 41.70 months, P < 0.0001) vs. LN0 group. The most common LNM sites in GBC occur at No.12 (30.57%), No. 13 (13.47%), and No.8 (11.40%) LNs. LND did not improve OS (P = 0.14) or RFS (P = 0.96) in GBC patients. IGBC (45/193) had better OS (88.89% vs. 60.14%, P = 0.0007) and RFS (median 39.60 vs. 20.70 months, P = 0.0473) than DGBC, with lower LNM rates (especially No.12: P = 0.0006) and milder pathological features (lower T stage, less hepatic or nerve invasion). However, LND still failed to improve survival of IGBC patients.
CONCLUSION: LNM is a critical negative prognostic factor for GBC. LND serves staging and treatment planning, not survival improvement. Routine LND is unnecessary for IGBC, providing evidence for personalized GBC management.