Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of Solitary Involved Lymph Node on Outcome in Localized Cancer of the Esophagus and Esophagogastric Junction

  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

Abstract

Node-positive esophageal cancer is associated with a dismal prognosis. The impact of a solitary involved node, however, is unclear, and this study examined the implications of a solitary node compared with greater nodal involvement and node-negative disease. The clinical and pathologic details of 604 patients were entered prospectively into a database from1993 and 2005. Four pathologic groups were analyzed: node-negative, one lymph node positive, two or three lymph nodes positive, and greater than three lymph nodes positive. Three hundred and fifteen patients (52%) were node-positive and 289 were node-negative. The median survival was 26 months in the node-negative group. Patients (n = 84) who had one node positive had a median survival of 16 months (p = 0.03 vs node-negative). Eighty-four patients who had two or three nodes positive had a median survival of 11 months compared with a median survival of 8 months in the 146 patients who had greater than three nodes positive (p = 0.01). The survival of patients with one node positive [number of nodes (N) = 1] was also significantly greater than the survival of patients with 2–3 nodes positive (N = 2–3) (p = 0.049) and greater than three nodes positive (p < 0001). The presence of a solitary involved lymph node has a negative impact on survival compared with node-negative disease, but it is associated with significantly improved overall survival compared with all other nodal groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Roder JD, Busch R, Stein HJ, et al. Ratio of invaded to removed lymph nodes as a predictor of survival in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Br J Surg. 1994;81:410–413.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. HulscherJB, Van Sandick JW, De Boer AG, et al. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1662–1669.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ito H, Clancy TE, Osteen RT, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the gastric cardia: what is the optimal surgical approach? J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199: 880–886.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Altorki N, Skinner D. Should en bloc esophagectomy be the standard of care for esophageal carcinoma? Ann Surg. 2001;234:581–587.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, Peters JH, et al. Curative resection for esophageal adenocarcinoma: Analysis of 100 en bloc esophagectomies. Ann Surg. 2001;234:520–531.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JM, et al. Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg. 1998;227:645–651.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lamb PJ, Griffin SM, Burt AD, et al. Sentinel node biopsy to evaluate the metastatic dissemination of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg. 2005;92:60–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Burian M, Stein HJ, Sendler A, et al. Sentinel node detection in Barrett’s and cardia cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:255S–258S.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Luketich JD, Alvero-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: Outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg. 2003;238:486–494.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Walsh TN, Noonan N, Hollywood D, Kelly A, et al. A comparison of multimodal therapy and surgery for esophageal adenocarcinoma. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:462–467.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Digestive system: The esophagus. In: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, 1997, pp. 65–67.

  12. Cox D. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Soc. 1972;34:197–219.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Siewert JR, Feith M, Werner M, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: Results of surgical therapy based on anatomical/topographical classification in 1,002 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2000;232:353–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hundahl SA, Phillips JL, Menck HR. The National Cancer Data Base Report on poor survival of U.S. gastric carcinoma patients treated with gastrectomy: Fifth Edition American Joint Committee on Cancer staging, proximal disease, and the “different disease” hypothesis. Cancer. 2000;88:921–932.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Dresner SM, Wayman J, Shenfine J, et al. Pattern of recurrence following subtotal oesophagectomy with two field lymphadenectomy. Br J Surg. 2000;87:362–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Akiyama H, Tsurumara M, Udagawa H, Kajiyama Y. Radical lymph node dissection for cancer of the thoracic esophagus. Ann Surg. 1994;220:364–372.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Eloubeidi MA, Desmond R. Prognostic factors for the survival of patients with esophageal cancer in the US. Cancer. 2002;95:1434–1443.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hsu CP, Chen CY, Hsia JY, Shai SE. Prediction of prognosis by the extent of lymph node involvement in squamus cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus. Eur J Cardio-thorac Surg. 2001;19:10–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gu Y, Swisher SG, Ajani JA, Correa AM. et al. The number of lymph nodes with metastasis predicts survival in patients with esophageal or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma who receive preoperative chemoradiation. Cancer. 2006;106:1017–1025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University Department of Surgery, Trinity College Centre for Health Sciences, St James’ Hospital and Trinity College, Dublin, 8, Ireland

    James M. O’Riordan, Suzanne Rowley, James O. Murphy, Narayasami Ravi, Patrick J. Byrne & John V. Reynolds

Authors
  1. James M. O’Riordan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Suzanne Rowley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James O. Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Narayasami Ravi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Patrick J. Byrne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. John V. Reynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John V. Reynolds.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

O’Riordan, J.M., Rowley, S., Murphy, J.O. et al. Impact of Solitary Involved Lymph Node on Outcome in Localized Cancer of the Esophagus and Esophagogastric Junction. J Gastrointest Surg 11, 493–499 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-006-0027-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-006-0027-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation