Should lymphadenectomy be recommended in radical surgery of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients? A retrospective study.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Ruoyu Zhang, Dayong Cao, Min Yang, Jiajun Zhang, Feng Ye, Ning Huang, Mei Liu, Bo Chen, Liming Wang
{"title":"Should lymphadenectomy be recommended in radical surgery of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients? A retrospective study.","authors":"Ruoyu Zhang, Dayong Cao, Min Yang, Jiajun Zhang, Feng Ye, Ning Huang, Mei Liu, Bo Chen, Liming Wang","doi":"10.1007/s00432-025-06148-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is an extremely deadly cancer with high recurrence incidence, particularly in patients with lymph node metastasis (LNM). The necessity of lymphadenectomy including lymph node biology (LNB) and dissection (LND) during ICC radical surgery remains debate.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed the patients diagnosed with ICC and underwent radical surgery at the Cancer Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from 2012 to 2023.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 308 ICC patients were involved in this study. pLNM<sup>+</sup> group had poorer OS (P < 0.0001) and poorer DFS (P < 0.0001) compared with pLNM<sup>-</sup> group. Compared to the LN<sup>-</sup> group, LN<sup>+</sup> group exhibited worse OS (P = 0.038) and worse DFS (P = 0.003). After PSM and IPTW, compared with LN<sup>-</sup> group, LNB exhibited longer operation time (IPTW: P = 0.0024) and longer hospitalization days (IPTW: P = 0.0112) with no significant differences in complications, DFS, and OS. Compared with LN<sup>-</sup> group, LND group had no better DFS and OS, only more complications (IPTW: P = 0.0191), longer operation time (all P < 0.001), higher risk of bleeding (all P < 0.05), transfusion (IPTW: P = 0.014) and longer hospitalization days (IPTW: P = 0.0044). Compared with LNB group, LND had longer operation time (P = 0.0227), higher risk of bleeding (P = 0.017) and transfusion (P = 0.0321), and more postoperative complications (P = 0.0425), with no difference in DFS and OS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Lymphadenectomy does not necessarily provide long-term survival or recurrence benefits. LND only achieves the effect of LNB while negatively affects postoperative recovery without survival benefit for ICC patients. LNB can be performed for accurate pathological staging while not all patients may require LND based on their specific circumstances.</p>","PeriodicalId":15118,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","volume":"151 3","pages":"107"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11903595/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-025-06148-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is an extremely deadly cancer with high recurrence incidence, particularly in patients with lymph node metastasis (LNM). The necessity of lymphadenectomy including lymph node biology (LNB) and dissection (LND) during ICC radical surgery remains debate.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the patients diagnosed with ICC and underwent radical surgery at the Cancer Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from 2012 to 2023.

Results: A total of 308 ICC patients were involved in this study. pLNM+ group had poorer OS (P < 0.0001) and poorer DFS (P < 0.0001) compared with pLNM- group. Compared to the LN- group, LN+ group exhibited worse OS (P = 0.038) and worse DFS (P = 0.003). After PSM and IPTW, compared with LN- group, LNB exhibited longer operation time (IPTW: P = 0.0024) and longer hospitalization days (IPTW: P = 0.0112) with no significant differences in complications, DFS, and OS. Compared with LN- group, LND group had no better DFS and OS, only more complications (IPTW: P = 0.0191), longer operation time (all P < 0.001), higher risk of bleeding (all P < 0.05), transfusion (IPTW: P = 0.014) and longer hospitalization days (IPTW: P = 0.0044). Compared with LNB group, LND had longer operation time (P = 0.0227), higher risk of bleeding (P = 0.017) and transfusion (P = 0.0321), and more postoperative complications (P = 0.0425), with no difference in DFS and OS.

Conclusion: Lymphadenectomy does not necessarily provide long-term survival or recurrence benefits. LND only achieves the effect of LNB while negatively affects postoperative recovery without survival benefit for ICC patients. LNB can be performed for accurate pathological staging while not all patients may require LND based on their specific circumstances.

肝内胆管癌根治性手术是否推荐行淋巴结切除术?回顾性研究。
目的:肝内胆管癌(ICC)是一种复发率高、致死率极高的肿瘤,多发于淋巴结转移(LNM)患者。在ICC根治性手术中,淋巴结切除术包括淋巴结生物学(LNB)和清扫(LND)的必要性仍然存在争议。方法:回顾性分析2012年至2023年在中国医学科学院肿瘤医院诊断为ICC并接受根治性手术的患者。结果:本研究共纳入308例ICC患者。pLNM+组OS较P -组差。LN+组OS较LN-组差(P = 0.038), DFS较LN-组差(P = 0.003)。与LN-组相比,经PSM和IPTW治疗后,LNB组手术时间更长(IPTW: P = 0.0024),住院天数更长(IPTW: P = 0.0112),并发症、DFS和OS无显著差异。与LN-组相比,LND组无更好的DFS和OS,只有更多的并发症(IPTW: P = 0.0191),更长的手术时间(均P)。结论:淋巴结切除术不一定能提供长期生存或复发的好处。LND仅达到LNB的效果,对ICC患者的术后恢复有负面影响,无生存获益。LNB可以用于准确的病理分期,但并非所有患者都需要根据其具体情况进行LNB。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
2.80%
发文量
577
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The "Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology" publishes significant and up-to-date articles within the fields of experimental and clinical oncology. The journal, which is chiefly devoted to Original papers, also includes Reviews as well as Editorials and Guest editorials on current, controversial topics. The section Letters to the editors provides a forum for a rapid exchange of comments and information concerning previously published papers and topics of current interest. Meeting reports provide current information on the latest results presented at important congresses. The following fields are covered: carcinogenesis - etiology, mechanisms; molecular biology; recent developments in tumor therapy; general diagnosis; laboratory diagnosis; diagnostic and experimental pathology; oncologic surgery; and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信