Does immunohistochemical staining have a clinical impact in early gastric cancer conducted endoscopic submucosal dissection?

doi:10.3748/wjg.v18.i33.4578

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 18, Issue 33

This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (3259)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, HTML series, Figures (1-1) series, Tables (1-5) series.

Item

Count

PDF

369

HTML

2409

Figures (1-1)

251

Tables (1-5)

230

Sum=3259

Sep 7, 2012 (publication date) through Dec 26, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (6)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastroenterology

ISSN

1007-9327

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Brief Article

World J Gastroenterol. Sep 7, 2012; 18(33): 4578-4584
Published online Sep 7, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i33.4578

Table 2 Subgroup analysis in the expanded indication groups

	Group 1 (n = 71)	Group 2 (n = 140)	Group 3 (n = 27)	Group 4 (n = 10)	P value
Age > 60 (yr, %)	44 (62)	82 (58.6)	21 (77.8)	6 (60)	0.502
Male (%)	56 (78.9)	104 (74.3)	24 (88.9)	5 (50)	0.455
Location (%)					0.730
Upper + corpus	19 (26.8)	15 (10.7)	11 (40.7)	1 (10)
Lower + angle	52 (73.2)	125 (89.3)	16 (59.3)	9 (90)
Macroscopic type (%)					< 0.001
Elevated	45 (63.4)	4 (2.9)	4 (14.8)	3 (30)
Flat/depressed	26 (36.6)	136 (97.1)	23 (85.2)	7 (70)
Endoscopic ulcer (%)					< 0.001
Present	0 (0)	140 (100)	20 (74.1)	1 (10)
Absent	71 (100)	0 (0)	7 (25.9)	9 (90)
Resection, piece (%)					0.177
≤ 2	68 (95.8)	137 (97.9)	27 (100)	10 (100)
≥ 3	3 (4.2)	3 (2.1)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Depth (%)					0.003
M2	33 (46.5)	52 (37.1)	0 (0)	4 (40)
M3 + SM1	38 (53.5)	88 (62.9)	27 (100)	6 (60)
Tumor size, mm (%)					< 0.001
≤ 20	0 (0)	105 (75)	16 (59.3)	10 (100)
> 20	71(100)	35 (25)	11 (40.7)	0 (0)
Lateral margin (%)					0.091
Positive	10 (14.1)	11 (7.9)	1 (3.7)	2 (20)
Negative	61 (85.9)	129 (92.1)	26 (96.3)	8 (80)
Vertical margin (%)					0.170
Positive	2 (2.8)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Negative	69 (97.2)	140 (100)	27 (100)	10 (100)
Phenotype (%)					0.107
Intestinal	31 (43.7)	50 (35.7)	9 (33.3)	2 (20)
Non-intestinal	40 (56.3)	90 (64.3)	18 (66.7)	8 (80)
VEGF (%)					0.003
Positive	17 (23.9)	34 (24.3)	16 (59.3)	5 (50)
Negative	54 (76.1)	106 (75.7)	11 (40.7)	5 (50)
High LVD/MVD (%)					< 0.001
Positive	11 (15.5)	26 (18.6)	16 (59.3)	6 (60)
Negative	60 (84.5)	114 (81.4)	11 (40.7)	4 (40)
LVI HES					0.005
Positive	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	1 (10)
Negative	71 (100)	140 (100)	27 (100)	9 (90)
LVI IHCS					< 0.001
Positive	1 (1.4)	1 (0.7)	7 (25.9)	2 (20)
Negative	70 (98.6)	139 (99.3)	20 (74.1)	8 (80)

M: Mucosa; SM: Submucosa; VEGF: Vascular endothelial growth factor; MVD: Microvessel density; LVD: Lymphatic vessel density; LVI: Lymphovascular invasion; HES: Hematoxylin-eosin staining; IHCS: Immunohistochemical staining.

Citation: Jeon SR, Cho JY, Bok GH, Lee TH, Kim HG, Cho WY, Jin SY, Kim YS. Does immunohistochemical staining have a clinical impact in early gastric cancer conducted endoscopic submucosal dissection? World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18(33): 4578-4584
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v18/i33/4578.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i33.4578