Two- versus three-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of early and late results
- PMID: 35689575
- DOI: 10.1002/jso.26857
Two- versus three-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of early and late results
Abstract
This study aims to estimate whether prophylactic cervical lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences the short- and long-term results through a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Twenty-eight articles were selected in this systematic review, encompassing 9180 patients. Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution, as it is associated with worse short-term results compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival.
Keywords: esophageal cancer; esophagus; lymphadenectomy; meta-analysis; systematic review.
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Vendrely V, Launay V, Najah H, Smith D, Collet D, Gronnier C. Prognostic factors in esophageal cancer treated with curative intent. Dig Liver Dis. 2018;50(10):991-996.
-
- Tustumi F, Kimura CM, Takeda FR, Sallum RA, Ribeiro-Junior U, Cecconello I. Evaluation of lymphatic spread, visceral metastasis and tumoral local invasion in esophageal carcinomas. ABCD. Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2016;29:215-217.
-
- Jamieson GG, Lamb PJ, Thompson SK. The role of lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):206-209.
-
- Watanabe H, Kato H, Tachimori Y. Significance of extended systemic lymph node dissection for thoracic esophageal carcinoma in Japan. In Esophageal Carcinoma. Springer; 2000:123-133.
-
- Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010;8(5):336-341.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical