Comparison of Clinicopathological Characteristics in the Patients with Cardiac Cancer with or without Esophagogastric Junctional Invasion: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

Background. This study addresses clinicopathological differences between patients with gastric cardia and subcardial cancer with and without esophagogastric junctional invasion. Methods. We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort study. We studied patients who underwent curative surgery for...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International Journal of Surgical Oncology 2013-01, Vol.2013 (2013), p.6-12
Hauptverfasser: Omoto, Tomokatsu, Kudo, Shin-ei, Ito, Hiroaki, Takehara, Yusuke, Mukai, Shumpei, Suzuki, Michitaka, Inoue, Haruhiro, Odaka, Noriko, Satodate, Hitoshi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background. This study addresses clinicopathological differences between patients with gastric cardia and subcardial cancer with and without esophagogastric junctional invasion. Methods. We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort study. We studied patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric cardia and subcardial cancers. Tumors centered in the proximal 5 cm of the stomach were classed into two types, according to whether they did (Ge) or did not (G) invade the esophagogastric junction. Results. A total of 80 patients were studied; 19 (73.1%) of 26 Ge tumors and 16 (29.6%) of 54 G tumors had lymph nodes metastases. Incidence of nodal metastasis in pT1 tumors was significantly higher in the Ge tumor group. No nodal metastasis in cervical lymph nodes was recognized. Only two patients with Ge tumors had mediastinal lymph node metastases. Incidence of perigastric lymph node metastasis was significantly higher in those with Ge tumors. Ge tumors tended to be staged as progressive disease using the esophageal cancer staging manual rather than the gastric cancer staging manual. Conclusion. Because there are some differences in clinicopathological characteristics, it is thought to be adequate to distinguish type Ge from type G tumor.
ISSN:2090-1402
2090-1410
DOI:10.1155/2013/189459