Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 9, Issue 9, pp 894–900

Survival benefit of extended D2 lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer with involvement of second level lymph nodes: A longitudinal multicenter study

  • Franco Roviello
  • Daniele Marrelli
  • Paolo Morgagni
  • Giovanni de Manzoni
  • Alberto di Leo
  • Carla Vindigni
  • Luca Saragoni
  • Anna Tomezzoli
  • Hayato Kurihara
  • Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer
Original Articles

Abstract

Background

The survival benefit of extended lymphadenectomy in the surgical treatment of gastric cancer is still being debated. The aim of this longitudinal multicenter study was to evaluate long-term survival in a group of patients with involvement of second level lymph nodes, which would not have been removed in the case of a limited lymphadenectomy. Results were compared with those in patients with involvement of first level lymph nodes.

Methods

Between 1991 and 1997, 451 patients with primary gastric cancer underwent curative resection with extended lymphadenectomy at three surgical departments in Italy according to the rules of the Japanese Research Society for Gastric Cancer.

Results

In 451 cases treated by extended lymphadenectomy, morbidity and mortality rates were 17.1% and 2%, respectively. In 126 patients (27.9%) (group A), metastases were found in lymph node stations 7 to 12; 109 patients (24.2%) had metastases confined to the first level (group B). Lymph node stations 7 and 8 showed the highest incidence of metastases in the second level (17.1% and 12.4%, respectively). A significant difference in 5-year survival was observed between group A and group B (32% vs. 54%;P=.0005). This difference disappeared when cases were stratified according to the number of positive lymph nodes. By multivariate analysis, only the number of positive lymph nodes (relative risk, 1.8;P<.0001) and the depth of invasion (relative risk. 2.1;P<.0001), but not the level of involved nodes, showed to be independent predictors of poor prognosis.

Conclusions

Japanese-type extended lymphadenectomy yields low morbidity and mortality rates if performed in specialized centers. This procedure could provide a good probability of long-term survival, even for patients with involvement of regional lymph nodes.

Key words

Gastric cancer Surgery Lymphadenectomy Lymph node metastasis Prognostic factors Follow-up 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Wanebo HJ, Kennedy BJ, Chmiel J. Cancer of the stomach: a patient care study by the American College of Surgeons.Ann Surg 1993;218:583–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roder JD, Bottcher K, Siewert JR, Busch R, Hermanek P, Meyer HJ. Prognostic factors in gastric carcinoma. Results of the German Gastric Carcinoma Study 1992.Cancer 1993;72:2089–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Maruyama K, Sasako M, Kinoshita T, et al. Should systematic lymph node dissection be recommended for gastric cancer?Eur J Cancer 1998;34:1480–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Maruyama K, Okabayashi K, Kinoshita T. Progress in gastric cancer surgery in Japan and its limits of radicality.World J Surg 1987;11:418–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roukos DH, Lorenz M, Encke A. Evidence of survival benefit of extended (D2) lymphadenectomy in western patients with gastric cancer based on a new concept: a prospective long-term follow-up study.Surgery 1998;123:573–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Siewert JR, Bottcher K, Stein HJ, Roder JD. Relevant prognostic factors in gastric cancer: ten-year results of the German Gastric Cancer Study.Ann Surg 1998;228:449–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pacelli F, Doglietto GB, Bellantone R, Alfieri S, Sgadari A, Crucitti F. Extensive versus limited lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: a comparative study of 320 patients.Br J Surg 1993;80:1153–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bonenkamp JJ, Hermans J, Sasako M, van de Velde CJ. Extended lymph-node dissection for gastric cancer. Dutch Gastric Cancer Group.N Engl J Med 1999;340:908–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cuschieri A, Weeden S, Fielding J, et al. Patient survival after D1 and D2 resections for gastric cancer: long-term results of the MRC randomized surgical trial. Surgical Co-operative Group.Br J Cancer 1999;79:1522–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Japanese Research Society for Gastric Cancer.Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma. Tokyo: Kaneara & Co., Ltd., 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lauren P. The two histological main types of gastric carcinoma: diffuse and so-called intestinal-type carcinoma.Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand 1965;64:31–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sobin LH, Wittekind C.TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors. 5th ed. New York; John Wiley, 1997:59–62.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jatzko GR, Lisborg PH, Denk H, Klimpfinger M, Stettner HM. A 10-year experience with Japanese-type radical lymph node dissection for gastric cancer outside of Japan.Cancer 1995;76:1302–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Manzoni G, Verlato G, Guglielmi A, Laterza E, Genna M, Cordiano C. Prognostic significance of lymph node dissection in gastric cancer.Br J Surg 1996;83:1604–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kasakura Y, Fujii M, Mochizuki F, Kochi M, Kaiga T. Is there a benefit of pancreaticosplenectomy with gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer?Am J Surg 2000;179:237–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schmid A, Thybusch A, Kremer B, Henne-Bruns D. Differential effects of radical D2-lymphadenectomy and splenectomy in surgically treated gastric cancer patients.Hepatogastroenterology 2000; 47:579–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maruyama K, Gunven P, Okabayashi K, Sasako M, Kinoshita T. Lymph node metastases of gastric cancer. General pattern in 1931 patients.Ann Surg 1989;210:596–602.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sasako M, McCulloch P, Kinoshita T, Maruyama K. New method to evaluate the therapeutic value of lymph node dissection for gastric cancer.Br J Surg 1995;82:346–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hermanek P. PTNM and residual tumor classifications: problems of assessment and prognostic significance.World J Surg 1995;19: 184–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Siewert JR, Kestlmeier R, Busch R, et al. Benefits of D2 lymph node dissection for patients with gastric cancer and pN0 and pN1 lymph node metastases.Br J Surg 1996;83:1144–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    De Manzoni G, Verlato G, Guglielmi A, et al. Classification of lymph node metastases from carcinoma of the stomach: comparison of the old (1987) and new (1997) TNM systems.World J Surg 1999;23:664–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hayashi H, Ochiai T, Suzuki T, Shimada H, Hori S, Takeda A, Miyazawa Y. Superiority of a new UICC-TNM staging system for gastric carcinoma.Surgery 2000;127:129–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yu W, Whang I, Suh I, Averbach A, Chang D, Sugarbaker PH. Prospective randomized trial of early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy as an adjuvant to resectable gastric cancer.Ann Surg 1998;228:347–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fujimura T, Yonemura Y, Muraoka K, et al. Continuous hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion for the prevention of peritoneal recurrence of gastric cancer: randomized controlled study.World J Surg 1994;18:150–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fujimoto S, Takahashi M, Mutou T, Kobayashi K, Toyosawa T. Successful intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemoperfusion for the prevention of postoperative peritoneal recurrence in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma.Cancer 1999;85:529–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Franco Roviello
    • 1
  • Daniele Marrelli
    • 1
  • Paolo Morgagni
    • 3
  • Giovanni de Manzoni
    • 4
  • Alberto di Leo
    • 4
  • Carla Vindigni
    • 2
  • Luca Saragoni
    • 5
  • Anna Tomezzoli
    • 2
  • Hayato Kurihara
    • 6
  • Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer
  1. 1.Unit of Surgical OncologyUniversity of SienaSienaItaly
  2. 2.Institute of PathologyUniversity of SienaSienaItaly
  3. 3.First Department of Surgery“Morgagni” Hospital of ForlìItaly
  4. 4.First Division of General SurgeryUniversity of VeronaItaly
  5. 5.Unit of Pathology“Pierantoni” Hospital of ForlìItaly
  6. 6.Department of Surgery, “Sacco” HospitalUniversity of MilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations