» Articles » PMID: 7676694

Problem of Proximal Third Gastric Carcinoma

Overview
Journal World J Surg
Publisher Wiley
Specialty General Surgery
Date 1995 Jul 1
PMID 7676694
Citations 15
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The prevalence of proximal third gastric carcinoma increases rapidly in the Western world. An analysis of prognostic factors indicates that the poor prognosis usually associated with these tumors is due at least in part to late presentation and advanced tumor stages. The current TNM classification usually understages these tumors because it does not take the partly retroperitoneal location of the proximal stomach into account. After correction of the TNM classification a proximal tumor location has no influence on survival. Because these tumors benefit most from radical lymph node dissection, the retroperitoneal lymphatic drainage must be taken into account when performing lymphadenectomy for proximal third gastric cancer. To avoid pancreatic fistulas and the associated morbidity, a pancreas-preserving splenectomy and lymphadenectomy should be adapted if an extended lymph node resection of the retroperitoneum is performed. Because of the high prevalence of "intestinal type" tumors in the proximal third of the stomach the extent of the luminal resection margins can be limited; that is, a total gastrectomy with transhiatal resection of the distal esophagus usually suffices to achieve complete tumor removal at the oral margin.

Citing Articles

Prognostic Significance of Esophagogastric Junction Invasion in Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Cardia or Subcardia.

Oh S, Park S, Ahn S, An J, Lee J, Sohn T Cancers (Basel). 2023; 15(6).

PMID: 36980541 PMC: 10046536. DOI: 10.3390/cancers15061656.


Functional benefits of the double flap technique after proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Saze Z, Kase K, Nakano H, Yamauchi N, Kaneta A, Watanabe Y BMC Surg. 2021; 21(1):392.

PMID: 34740344 PMC: 8569978. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-021-01390-1.


Comparison of clinicopathologic profiles and prognosis of gastric cancer in the upper, middle and lower third of the stomach: A retrospective cohort study.

Ma X, Zhang C, Wang C, Miao W, Zhou W, An J Medicine (Baltimore). 2020; 99(30):e21261.

PMID: 32791705 PMC: 7387008. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021261.


Clinicopathological Characteristics and Prognosis of Proximal and Distal Gastric Cancer during 1997-2017 in China National Cancer Center.

Zhao L, Huang H, Zhao D, Wang C, Tian Y, Yuan X J Oncol. 2019; 2019:9784039.

PMID: 31312217 PMC: 6595386. DOI: 10.1155/2019/9784039.


CT findings in diagnosis of gastric bare area invasion: potential prognostic factors for proximal gastric carcinoma.

Sun R, Tang L, Li X, Li Z, Sun Y Jpn J Radiol. 2019; 37(7):518-525.

PMID: 30941618 DOI: 10.1007/s11604-019-00837-z.


References
1.
Haggitt R, Tryzelaar J, Ellis F, COLCHER H . Adenocarcinoma complicating columnar epithelium-lined (Barrett's) esophagus. Am J Clin Pathol. 1978; 70(1):1-5. DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/70.1.1. View

2.
Bollschweiler E, Boettcher K, Hoelscher A, Sasako M, Kinoshita T, Maruyama K . Preoperative assessment of lymph node metastases in patients with gastric cancer: evaluation of the Maruyama computer program. Br J Surg. 1992; 79(2):156-60. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800790221. View

3.
Siewert J, Holscher A, Becker K, GOSSNER W . [Cardia cancer: attempt at a therapeutically relevant classification]. Chirurg. 1987; 58(1):25-32. View

4.
Bonenkamp J, van de Velde C, Sasako M, Hermans J . R2 compared with R1 resection for gastric cancer: morbidity and mortality in a prospective, randomised trial. Eur J Surg. 1992; 158(8):413-8. View

5.
Wanebo H, Kennedy B, CHMIEL J, Steele Jr G, Winchester D, Osteen R . Cancer of the stomach. A patient care study by the American College of Surgeons. Ann Surg. 1993; 218(5):583-92. PMC: 1243028. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199321850-00002. View