Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2010 Mar 7;16(9):1138-49.
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i9.1138.

Systematic review of D2 lymphadenectomy versus D2 with para-aortic nodal dissection for advanced gastric cancer

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Systematic review of D2 lymphadenectomy versus D2 with para-aortic nodal dissection for advanced gastric cancer

Zhen Wang et al. World J Gastroenterol. .

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the feasibility and therapeutic effects of para-aortic nodal dissection (PAND) for advanced gastric cancer.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies comparing D2 + PAND with D2 lymphadenectomy were identified using a pre-defined search strategy. Five-year overall survival rate, post-operative mortality, and wound degree of surgery between the two operations were compared by using the methods provided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

Results: Four RCTs (1120 patients) and 4 non-randomized studies (901 patients) were identified. Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference between these two groups in 5-year overall survival rate [risk ratio (RR) 1.04 (95% CI: 0.93-1.16) for RCTs and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.83-1.10) for non-randomized studies] and post-operative mortality [RR 0.99 (95% CI: 0.44-2.24) for RCTs and 2.06 (95% CI: 0.69-6.15) for non-randomized studies]. There was a significant difference between these two groups in wound degree of surgery, operation time was significantly longer [weighted mean difference (WMD) 195.32 min (95% CI: 114.59-276.05) for RCTs and 126.07 min (95% CI: 22.09-230.04) for non-randomized studies] and blood loss was significantly greater [WMD 301 mL (95% CI: 151.55-450.45) for RCTs and 302.86 mL (95% CI: 127.89-477.84) for non-randomized studies] in D2 + PAND.

Conclusion: D2 + PAND can be performed as safely as standard D2 resection without increasing post-operative mortality but fail to benefit overall survival in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
QUORUM flow chart for studies.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Meta-analysis of 5-year overall survival rate comparing D2 + PAND with D2 gastrectomy.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Meta-analysis of 5-year overall survival rate for serosa negative and positive subgroups comparing D2 + PAND with D2 gastrectomy.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Meta-analysis of post-operative morbidity comparing (A), post-operative mortality (B), operation time (C), blood loss during operation (D) D2 + PAND with D2 gastrectomy.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Crew KD, Neugut AI. Epidemiology of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12:354–362. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Parkin DM, Whelan SL, Ferlay J. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents, vol VII. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 1997. pp. 822–823.
    1. Yamamoto S. Stomach cancer incidence in the world. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2001;31:471. - PubMed
    1. Wang ZN, Lu C, Xu HM. Lymph node metastasis of upper gastric cancer and its significance in surgical treatment. Zhongguo Shiyong Waike Zazhi. 2002;22:611–612.
    1. Tsubono Y, Hisamichi S. Screening for gastric cancer in Japan. Gastric Cancer. 2000;3:9–18. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms