高危皮肤黑色素瘤的最小边缘和延迟区域淋巴结清扫的病例。

Current opinion in general surgery Pub Date : 1993-01-01
N Cascinelli, F Belli
{"title":"高危皮肤黑色素瘤的最小边缘和延迟区域淋巴结清扫的病例。","authors":"N Cascinelli,&nbsp;F Belli","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Some aspects of the surgical treatment of cutaneous melanoma are still currently debated. There is presently a general agreement in favor of a less wide excision of primary lesions. Specifically, data coming from a randomized study of the World Health Organization (WHO) Melanoma Programme indicates that the width of resection has no impact on either disease-free and overall survival of 612 stage I entered patients. Opportunity of an elective (ELND) or delayed (DLND) lymph node dissection remains much more controversial. Complications, including lymphedema, associated with this type of surgery, and no evidence of regional lymph node disease in at least 70% of clinical stage I patients submitted to node dissection, argue for avoiding ELND. Some studies show a positive value for ELND, but they are flawed by biased entry of patients into the ELND group, and conclusions are not derived from randomized studies. Two prospective trials show that ELND does not improve the prognosis of patients with stage I cutaneous melanoma. The results of the WHO study of 553 cases will be evaluable at 20 years. So far, on the basis of many biologic, clinical, and statistical findings, there is no evidence, in our opinion, of a substantial benefit related to ELND.</p>","PeriodicalId":79397,"journal":{"name":"Current opinion in general surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The case for minimal margins and delayed regional node dissection for high-risk cutaneous melanoma.\",\"authors\":\"N Cascinelli,&nbsp;F Belli\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Some aspects of the surgical treatment of cutaneous melanoma are still currently debated. There is presently a general agreement in favor of a less wide excision of primary lesions. Specifically, data coming from a randomized study of the World Health Organization (WHO) Melanoma Programme indicates that the width of resection has no impact on either disease-free and overall survival of 612 stage I entered patients. Opportunity of an elective (ELND) or delayed (DLND) lymph node dissection remains much more controversial. Complications, including lymphedema, associated with this type of surgery, and no evidence of regional lymph node disease in at least 70% of clinical stage I patients submitted to node dissection, argue for avoiding ELND. Some studies show a positive value for ELND, but they are flawed by biased entry of patients into the ELND group, and conclusions are not derived from randomized studies. Two prospective trials show that ELND does not improve the prognosis of patients with stage I cutaneous melanoma. The results of the WHO study of 553 cases will be evaluable at 20 years. So far, on the basis of many biologic, clinical, and statistical findings, there is no evidence, in our opinion, of a substantial benefit related to ELND.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current opinion in general surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1993-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current opinion in general surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current opinion in general surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

皮肤黑色素瘤手术治疗的某些方面目前仍存在争议。目前普遍同意对原发病变进行较小范围的切除。具体来说,来自世界卫生组织(WHO)黑色素瘤项目的一项随机研究数据表明,切除的宽度对612名I期患者的无病生存和总生存没有影响。选择性淋巴结清扫(ELND)或延迟性淋巴结清扫(dnd)的机会仍有争议。并发症,包括淋巴水肿,与这种类型的手术相关,并且在至少70%的临床I期患者中没有区域淋巴结疾病的证据,建议避免ELND。一些研究显示了ELND的阳性价值,但由于患者进入ELND组有偏见,这些研究存在缺陷,并且结论并非来自随机研究。两项前瞻性试验表明,ELND不能改善I期皮肤黑色素瘤患者的预后。世卫组织对553个病例的研究结果将在20年后进行评估。到目前为止,在许多生物学、临床和统计学发现的基础上,我们认为没有证据表明与ELND相关的实质性益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The case for minimal margins and delayed regional node dissection for high-risk cutaneous melanoma.

Some aspects of the surgical treatment of cutaneous melanoma are still currently debated. There is presently a general agreement in favor of a less wide excision of primary lesions. Specifically, data coming from a randomized study of the World Health Organization (WHO) Melanoma Programme indicates that the width of resection has no impact on either disease-free and overall survival of 612 stage I entered patients. Opportunity of an elective (ELND) or delayed (DLND) lymph node dissection remains much more controversial. Complications, including lymphedema, associated with this type of surgery, and no evidence of regional lymph node disease in at least 70% of clinical stage I patients submitted to node dissection, argue for avoiding ELND. Some studies show a positive value for ELND, but they are flawed by biased entry of patients into the ELND group, and conclusions are not derived from randomized studies. Two prospective trials show that ELND does not improve the prognosis of patients with stage I cutaneous melanoma. The results of the WHO study of 553 cases will be evaluable at 20 years. So far, on the basis of many biologic, clinical, and statistical findings, there is no evidence, in our opinion, of a substantial benefit related to ELND.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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