Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery

, Volume 397, Issue 7, pp 1053–1057 | Cite as

Prognostic significance of lymph node ratio in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection of rectum

  • M. Tayyab
  • A. SharmaEmail author
  • A. W. MacDonald
  • J. Gunn
  • J. E. Hartley
  • J. R. T. Monson
Original Article



Lymph node ratio (LNR) has been shown to be an independent prognostic factor in stage III colorectal cancer. Abdominoperineal resection (APR) of rectum is historically associated with poorer oncological outcomes compared to other colorectal resections, and significance of LNR in this group of patients has not been studied.


Our aim was to determine impact of LNR on oncological outcomes in a series of patients with rectal cancers undergoing APR.

Patients and methods

A series of patients who had undergone APR and had lymph node metastasis were identified from a prospectively maintained clinical, histopathological and radiological database. LNR was calculated, and Cox regression was used to determine the impact of factors affecting local recurrence, distal metastases and overall survival.


Fifty-eight (42 males) patients were identified to have rectal cancer with lymph node involvement. LNR was an independent predictor of distal metastasis and overall survival at cutoff levels of 0.17, 0.41 and 0.69.


Lymph node ratio is an independent predictor of survival outcomes in patients with stage III tumours undergoing APR. LNR may help improve stratification of this group of patients.


Lymph node ratio Rectal cancer APR Prognosis 


Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    UK bowel cancer incidence statistics. Cancer Research UK, 2009Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    UK, C.R., UK bowel cancer mortality statistics, 2009Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Newland RC et al (1981) The relationship of survival to staging and grading of colorectal carcinoma: a prospective study of 503 cases. Cancer 47(6):1424–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baxter NN et al (2005) Lymph node evaluation in colorectal cancer patients: a population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(3):219–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vather R et al (2009) Lymph node evaluation and long-term survival in stage II and stage III colon cancer: a national study. Ann Surg Oncol 16(3):585–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sobin LH, Fleming ID (1997) TNM classification of malignant tumors, fifth edition (1997). Union Internationale Contre le Cancer and the American Joint Committee on Cancer. Cancer 80(9):1803–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Park IJ, Choi GS, Jun SH (2009) Nodal stage of stage III colon cancer: the impact of metastatic lymph node ratio. J Surg Oncol 100(3):240–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rosenberg R et al (2008) Prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer is associated with lymph node ratio: a single-center analysis of 3,026 patients over a 25-year time period. Ann Surg 248(6):968–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim YS et al (2009) Lymph node ratio as a prognostic factor in patients with stage III rectal cancer treated with total mesorectal excision followed by chemoradiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 74(3):796–802PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moug SJ et al (2009) Positive lymph node retrieval ratio optimises patient staging in colorectal cancer. Br J Cancer 100(10):1530–3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Van Belle V et al (2009) Lymph node ratio better predicts disease-free survival in node-positive breast cancer than the number of positive lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 27(7):1062–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yu JX, Li Y (2007) The staging system of metastatic lymph node ratio in gastric cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 19(4):269–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim JS et al (2009) Oncologic outcomes after radical surgery following preoperative chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced lower rectal cancer: abdominoperineal resection versus sphincter-preserving procedure. Ann Surg Oncol 16(5):1266–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ha YH, Jeong SY, Lim SB, Choi HS, Hong YS, Chang HJ, Kim DY, Jung KH, Park JG (2010) Influence of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on the number of lymph nodes retrieved in rectal cancer. Ann Surg 252(2):336–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Inoue K et al (2002) The superiority of ratio-based lymph node staging in gastric carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 9(1):27–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Johnson PM et al (2006) Increasing negative lymph node count is independently associated with improved long-term survival in stage IIIB and IIIC colon cancer. J Clin Oncol 24(22):3570–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chang GJ et al (2007) Lymph node evaluation and survival after curative resection of colon cancer: systematic review. J Natl Cancer Inst 99(6):433–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ceelen W, Van Nieuwenhove Y, Pattyn P (2010) Prognostic value of the lymph node ratio in stage III colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol 17(11):2847–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chen SL, Steele SR, Eberhardt J, Zhu K, Bilchik A, Stojadinovic A (2011) Lymph node ratio as a quality and prognostic indicator in stage III colon cancer. Ann Surg 253(1):82–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moran MR et al (1992) Prognostic value of positive lymph nodes in rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 35(6):579–81PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Faus C et al (2010) The role of the pathologist in rectal cancer diagnosis and staging and surgical quality assessment. Clin Transl Oncol 12(5):339–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Tayyab
    • 1
  • A. Sharma
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • A. W. MacDonald
    • 2
  • J. Gunn
    • 1
  • J. E. Hartley
    • 1
  • J. R. T. Monson
    • 3
  1. 1.Academic Surgical UnitUniversity of HullCottinghamUK
  2. 2.Department of PathologyHull Royal InfirmaryHullUK
  3. 3.Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Rochester Medical CenterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations