Skip to main content
Log in

Assessing the effectiveness of mesorectal excision in rectal cancer

Prognostic value of the number of lymph nodes found in resected specimens

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the number of involved or uninvolved lymph nodes in resected specimens can be used to predict the effectiveness of surgical resection for rectal cancer. METHODS: Local recurrence and survival rates for 118 patients undergoing curative resection for rectal carcinoma, without adjuvant therapy, were retrospectively studied. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 62±37 months. Mean number of involved or uninvolved lymph nodes per resected specimen was 12±7. Overall local recurrence rate was 15.2 percent. In patients without involved lymph nodes (N0 patients) and with T1 or T2 tumors, the local recurrence rate ranged from 0 to 8 percent (not significant), depending on the number of lymph nodes on the specimen. In patients without involved lymph nodes and those with T3 tumors, the actuarial survival rate at ten years was significantly lower (P<0.05), and the local recurrence rate was higher (P<0.02) in patients with fewer than ten lymph nodes than in those with more than ten nodes. In patients with involved lymph nodes, the mean number of nodes on the resected specimen correlated closely with the mean number involved by the tumor. CONCLUSION: The assessment of the effectiveness of rectal excision for cancer is in part helped by the number of involved or uninvolved lymph nodes found on the resected specimen. This is of particular interest in patients without involved lymph nodes and those having infiltrating T3 tumors, for whom the long-term survival and local recurrence rates were significantly better when more than ten lymph nodes were present. On the other hand, when fewer than ten nodes were found, whatever the cause, adjuvant radiotherapy had to be considered, because of the high risk of local failure rate.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Krook JE, Moertel CG, Gunderson LL,et al. Effective surgical adjuvant therapy for high-risk rectal carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1991;324:709–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG,et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet 1994;344:707–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hautefeuille P, Valleur P, Perniceni T,et al. Functional and oncologic results after coloanal anastomosis for low rectal carcinoma. Ann Surg 1988;207:61–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Abulafi AM, Williams NS. Local recurrence of colorectal cancer: the problem, mechanisms, management and adjuvant therapy. Br J Surg 1994;81:7–19.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Heald RJ, Ryall RD. Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet 1986;1:1479–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Enker WE, Thaler HT, Cranor ML, Polyak T. Total mesorectal excision in the operative treatment of carcinoma of the rectum. J Am Coll Surg 1995;181:335–46.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Reid JD, Robins RE, Atkinson KG. Pelvic recurrence after anterior resection and EEA stapling anastomosis for potentially curable carcinoma of the rectum. Am J Surg 1984;147:629–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Malassagne B, Valleur P, Serra J,et al. Relationship of apical lymph node involvement to survival in resected colon carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:645–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jass JR. Lymphocytic infiltration and survival in rectal cancer. J Clin Pathol 1986;39:585–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pihl E, Malahy MA, Khankhanian N, Hersh EM, Mavligit GM. Immunomorphological features of prognostic significance in Dukes' Stage B colorectal carcinoma. Cancer Res 1977;37:4145–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Halvorsen TB, Seim E. Association between invasiveness, inflammatory reaction, desmoplasia and survival in colorectal cancer. J Clin Pathol 1989;42:162–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fischer ER, Sass R, Palekar A, Fischer B, Wolmark N. Dukes' classification revisited: findings from the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel projects (protocol R-01). Cancer 1989;64:2354–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tang R, Wang J-Y, Chen J-S,et al. Survival impact of lymph node metastasis in TNM stage III carcinoma of the colon and rectum. J Am Coll Surg 1995;180:705–12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hermanek P, Sobin LH, eds. UICC TNM classification of malignant tumors. 4th ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1987:47–9.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Pocard, M., Panis, Y., Malassagne, B. et al. Assessing the effectiveness of mesorectal excision in rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 41, 839–845 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02235362

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02235362

Key words

Navigation