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
Review
. 2016 Dec 8:1:90.
doi: 10.21037/tgh.2016.11.06. eCollection 2016.

Historical assumptions of lymphadenectomy

Affiliations
Review

Historical assumptions of lymphadenectomy

Paolo Morgagni et al. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. .

Abstract

The role of lymphadenectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer is still very much open to debate. Consequently, Japanese, European and American surgeons perform different typologies of lymphadenectomy because of the absence of randomized clinical trials confirming the superiority of extended lymphadenectomy over less invasive surgery. In Japan, D2 lymphadenectomy has been considered as the gold standard for advanced gastric carcinoma for many years. Although numerous European studies have been conducted in an attempt to find differences between D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy, none has succeeded to date. The decision to wait for results attesting to the fact that D2 guarantees a better outcome than D1 resulted in a long delay in the implementation of D2 as the gold standard treatment in Europe. In the U.S., the study by Macdonald et al. established D1 lymphadenectomy followed by chemoradiotherapy as the treatment of choice for advanced cancer, whereas D2 is officially indicated as the gold standard in the most recent European guidelines [the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRGC), German, British, ESSO]. Interestingly, European guidelines for lymphadenectomy are not based on evidence-based medicine but rather on the experience of the most important centers involved in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Keywords: D1 lymphadenectomy; D2 lymphadenectomy; Gastric cancer; Maruyama index; super-extended lymphadenectomy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. Kajitani T. The general rules for the gastric cancer study in surgery and pathology. Part I. Clinical classification. Jpn J Surg 1981;11:127-39. 10.1007/BF02468883 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association Registration Committee , Maruyama K, Kaminishi M, et al. Gastric cancer treated in 1991 in Japan: data analysis of nationwide registry. Gastric Cancer 2006;9:51-66. 10.1007/s10120-006-0370-y - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sasako M, Saka M, Fukagawa T, et al. Modern surgery for gastric cancer--Japanese perspective. Scand J Surg 2006;95:232-5. - PubMed
    1. McCulloch P, Nita ME, Kazi H, et al. Extended versus limited lymph nodes dissection technique for adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(4):CD001964. - PubMed
    1. McCulloch P, Niita ME, Kazi H, et al. Gastrectomy with extended lymphadenectomy for primary treatment of gastric cancer. Br J Surg 2005;92:5-13. 10.1002/bjs.4839 - DOI - PubMed