Prognostic factors analysis of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction after radical resection with different surgical approaches
10.3760/cma.j.cn115610-20200427-00291
- VernacularTitle:Siewert Ⅱ型和Ⅲ型食管胃结合部腺癌不同手术径路根治术预后影响因素分析
- Author:
Yingxin DU
1
;
Jingyu DENG
;
Han LIANG
;
Huifang LIU
;
Weilin SUN
;
Zizhen WU
;
Jinyuan LIU
;
Nannan ZHANG
;
Zhenzhen ZHAO
;
Liqiao CHEN
Author Information
1. 天津医科大学肿瘤医院胃部肿瘤科 国家肿瘤临床医学研究中心 天津市肿瘤防治重点实验室 天津市恶性肿瘤临床医学研究中心 300060
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Surgery
2020;19(6):630-636
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the prognostic factors of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG) after radical resection with different surgical approaches.Methods:The retrospective case-control study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 442 patients who were admitted to Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from February 2003 to July 2011 were collected. There were 362 males and 80 females, aged from 21 to 85 years, with a median age of 64 years. Patients underwent radical resection of AEG. Observation indicators: (1) surgical situations; (2) follow-up; (3) progrostic factors analysis of AEG after radical resection; (4) survival of patients after radical resection of AEG via abdominal approach; (5) survival of patients after radical resection of AEG via thoracoabdominal approach; (6) survival of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅱ type AEG; (7) survival of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅲ AEG. Follow-up using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect postoperative survival of patients up to June 2018. Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range). Count data were expressed as absolute numbers or percentages. Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rates and draw survival curves, and Log-rank test was used for survival analysis. Univariate analysis was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariate analysis was conducted using the COX proportional hazard model. Results:(1) Surgical situations: 442 patients underwent radical resection of AEG, including 204 via abdominal approach and 238 via thoracoabdominal approach. There were 391 patients with D 2 lymphadenectomy and 51 with D 2+ lymphadenectomy. (2) Follow-up: 442 patients were followed up for 8-162 months, with a median follow-up time of 37 months. All the 442 patients survived for 2-156 months, with a median survival time of 31 months. The 1-, 3-, 5-year overall survival rates were 79.2%, 42.0%, 30.0%, respectively. (3) Prognostic factors analysis of AEG after radical resection: results of univariate analysis showed that tumor diameter, Lauren type, pathological T staging, pathological N staging, pathological TNM staging, lymphatic vessel invasion, and soft tissue infiltration were related factors for prognosis of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG ( χ2=4.028, 4.885, 19.435, 17.014, 34.449, 9.707, 11.866, P<0.05). Results of multivariate analysis showed that pathological TNM staging, lymphatic vessel invasion, and soft tissue infiltration were independent influencing fators for prognosis of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG ( hazard ratio=1.255, 0.486, 1.454, 95% confidence interval: 1.024-1.539, 0.325-0.728, 1.096-1.928, P<0.05). (4) Survival of patients after radical resection of AEG via abdominal approach: of the 204 patients undergoing radical resection of AEG via abdominal approach, the 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates were 83.6%, 50.4%, 37.8% for 121 patients with Siewert type Ⅱ AEG, respectively, versus 72.0%, 39.3%, 31.8% for 83 patients with Siewert type Ⅲ AEG, showing no significant difference in the survival between the two groups ( χ2=1.854, P>0.05). (5) Survival of patients after radical resection of AEG via thoracoabdominal approach: of the 238 patients undergoing radical resection of AEG via thoracoabdominal approach, the 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates were 79.6%, 38.8%, 23.8% for 183 patients with Siewert type Ⅱ AEG, respectively, versus 79.1%, 37.6%, 29.3% for 55 patients with Siewert type Ⅲ AEG, showing no significant difference in the survival between the two groups ( χ2=0.215, P>0.05). (6) Survival of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅱ AEG: of the 304 patients with Siewert typeⅡAEG, the postoperative 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates were 83.6%, 50.4%, 37.8% for 121 patients undergoing radical resection of AEG via abdominal approach, respectively, versus 79.6%, 38.8%, 23.8% for 183 patients undergoing radical resection of AEG via thoracoabdominal approach, showing no significant difference in the survival between the two groups ( χ2=2.406, P>0.05). (7) Survival of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅲ AEG: of the 138 patients with Siewert type Ⅲ AEG, the postoperative 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates were 72.0%, 39.3%, 31.8% for 83 patients undergoing radical resection of AEG via abdominal approach, respectively, versus 79.1%, 37.6%, 29.3% for 55 patients undergoing radical resection of AEG via thoracoabdominal approach, showing no significant difference in the survival between the two groups ( χ2=0.640, P>0.05). Conclusions:Pathological TNM staging, lymphatic vessel invasion, and soft tissue infiltration are independent fators for prognosis of patients after radical resection of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG. Siewert types and surgical approach are not related factors for prognosis of patients after radical resection of AEG. There is no significant difference in the survival between patients with different Siewert types of AEG undergoing radical resection via different surgical approaches.
