» Articles » PMID: 27231119

A Radiological and Pathological Assessment of Ileocolic Pedicle Length As a Predictor of Lymph Node Retrieval Following Right Hemicolectomy for Caecal Cancer

Overview
Date 2016 May 28
PMID 27231119
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In colon cancer, the number of harvested lymph nodes is critical for pathological staging. It has been proposed that the more central the mesenteric vascular ligation, the greater the nodal yield. The aim of the current study was to determine the association of radiological and pathological ileocolic pedicle length on nodal harvest following right hemicolectomy for caecal cancer.

Methods: A series of 50 patients undergoing right hemicolectomy for adenocarcinoma underwent specimen evaluation. Preoperative computed tomography images were reconstructed and analysed to determine the direct (vessel origin to caecum) ileocolic pedicle length.

Results: The median pathological distance from the tumour to the high vascular tie was 80 mm, and median nodal yield was 16.5 nodes. Radiological pedicle length did not correlate with the pathological distance from the tumour to the high vascular tie or nodal yield; however, the pathological pedicle length did correlate with the total nodal yield (r (2): 0.343, p = 0.015). The median pathologically determined length of colon resected (r (2): 0.153, p = 0.289), ileum resected (r (2): 0.087, p = 0.568) and total specimen length resected (r (2): 0.182, p = 0.205) did not correlate with the total nodal yield. An ileal specimen length ≤25 mm [hazard ratio (HR) 14.8, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.1-194.5, p = 0.040] and a well-differentiated tumour (HR 10.5, 95 % CI 1.1-95.9, p = 0.037) increased the likelihood of retrieving <12 lymph nodes.

Conclusions: Based on these data, pathologic pedicle length is a determining factor in lymph node retrieval. Preoperative radiological calculation of pedicle length does not help predict the number of lymph nodes retrieved.

Citing Articles

Association between the number of retrieved lymph nodes and demographic/tumour-related characteristics in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Liu Q, Huang M, Yang J, Jiang M, Zhao Z, Zhao H BMJ Open. 2023; 13(12):e072244.

PMID: 38135324 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-072244.


Post-operative computed tomography scan - reliable tool for quality assessment of complete mesocolic excision.

Livadaru C, Morarasu S, Frunza T, Ghitun F, Paiu-Spiridon E, Sava F World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2019; 11(3):208-226.

PMID: 30918594 PMC: 6425332. DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v11.i3.208.

References
1.
Goldstein N, Soman A, Sacksner J . Disparate surgical margin lengths of colorectal resection specimens between in vivo and in vitro measurements. The effects of surgical resection and formalin fixation on organ shrinkage. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999; 111(3):349-51. DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/111.3.349. View

2.
Iversen L, Norgaard M, Jepsen P, Jacobsen J, Christensen M, Gandrup P . Trends in colorectal cancer survival in northern Denmark: 1985-2004. Colorectal Dis. 2007; 9(3):210-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.01130.x. View

3.
Bertelsen C, Neuenschwander A, Erik Jansen J, Wilhelmsen M, Kirkegaard-Klitbo A, Tenma J . Disease-free survival after complete mesocolic excision compared with conventional colon cancer surgery: a retrospective, population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2015; 16(2):161-8. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71168-4. View

4.
Heald R, Moran B, Ryall R, Sexton R, Macfarlane J . Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978-1997. Arch Surg. 1998; 133(8):894-9. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.133.8.894. View

5.
Fielding L, Arsenault P, Chapuis P, Dent O, Gathright B, Hardcastle J . Clinicopathological staging for colorectal cancer: an International Documentation System (IDS) and an International Comprehensive Anatomical Terminology (ICAT). J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1991; 6(4):325-44. DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.1991.tb00867.x. View