Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Jan 15, 2013; 5(1): 4-11
Published online Jan 15, 2013. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v5.i1.4
Published online Jan 15, 2013. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v5.i1.4
Table 2 Studies on an adequate length of proximal resection margin in gastric cancer
Ref. | Characteristics | RLPRM | Brief results of the study |
Bozzetti et al[4] | without SI | ≥ 3 cm | No positive margin if gross PRM ≥ 3 cm |
with SI | ≥ 6 cm | No positive margin if gross PRM ≥ 6 cm | |
(0% if PRM ≥ 6 cm vs 7% if PRM < 6 cm) | |||
Ito et al[7] | Cardia | ||
T1, T2 | ≥ 4 cm | No positive margin if gross PRM ≥ 4 cm | |
T3, T4 | ≥ 6 cm | No positive margin if gross PRM ≥ 6 cm | |
Papachristou et al[3] | Gastric cancer | ≥ 6.5 cm | Median length of gross PRM in patients with or without recurrences: 6.5 cm vs 3.5 cm, respectively |
Kim et al[36] | Upper third | ≥ 2 cm | Recurrences: 8.2% (PRM > 2 cm) vs 14.5% (1-2 cm) and 30% (< 1 cm), P = 0.024 |
Ha et al[6] | EGC | - | PRM did not affect survival if margins were negative |
AGC | ≥ 3 cm | Recurrences: 32.9% (PRM ≥ 3 cm) vs 37.6% (< 3 cm), NS; 5-yr survival: 57%(PRM ≥ 3 cm) vs 46% (< 3 cm), P = 0.02 |
- Citation: Shin D, Park SS. Clinical importance and surgical decision-making regarding proximal resection margin for gastric cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2013; 5(1): 4-11
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v5/i1/4.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v5.i1.4