Diseases of the colon and rectum · 2009
Lymph node size in rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation--can we rely on radiologic nodal staging after chemoradiation?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Perez Rodrigo O, Pereira Diego D, Proscurshim Igor, Gama-Rodrigues Joaquim, Rawet Viviane, São Julião Guilherme P, Kiss Desiderio, Cecconello Ivan, Habr-Gama Angelita
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Local excision is currently being considered as an alternative strategy for ypT0-2 rectal cancer. However, patient selection is crucial to rule out nodal disease and is performed by radiologic studies that consider size as a surrogate marker for positive nodes. The purpose of this study was to determine the difference in size between metastatic and nonmetastatic nodes and the critical lymph node size after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy.
METHODS: The 201 lymph nodes available from 31 patients with ypT0-2 rectal cancer were reviewed and measured. Lymph nodes were compared according to the presence of metastases and size.
RESULTS: There was a mean of 6.5 lymph nodes per patient and 12 positive nodes of the 201 recovered (6%). Ninety-five percent of all lymph nodes were <5 mm, whereas 50% of positive lymph nodes were <3 mm. Metastatic lymph nodes were significantly greater in size (5.0 vs. 2.5mm; P = 0.02). Lymph nodes >4.5 mm had a greater risk of harboring metastases (P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ypT0-2 rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation have very small perirectal nodes. Individual metastatic lymph nodes are significantly larger. However, a significant number of lymph nodes after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (negative and positive) are <3 mm. Individual lymph node size is not a good predictor of nodal metastases and may lead to inaccurate radiologic staging.
METHODS: The 201 lymph nodes available from 31 patients with ypT0-2 rectal cancer were reviewed and measured. Lymph nodes were compared according to the presence of metastases and size.
RESULTS: There was a mean of 6.5 lymph nodes per patient and 12 positive nodes of the 201 recovered (6%). Ninety-five percent of all lymph nodes were <5 mm, whereas 50% of positive lymph nodes were <3 mm. Metastatic lymph nodes were significantly greater in size (5.0 vs. 2.5mm; P = 0.02). Lymph nodes >4.5 mm had a greater risk of harboring metastases (P = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ypT0-2 rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation have very small perirectal nodes. Individual metastatic lymph nodes are significantly larger. However, a significant number of lymph nodes after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (negative and positive) are <3 mm. Individual lymph node size is not a good predictor of nodal metastases and may lead to inaccurate radiologic staging.