We have located links that may give you full text access.
The effectiveness of mediastinal lymph node evaluation in a patient with ground glass opacity tumor.
Journal of Thoracic Disease 2016 September
BACKGROUND: The prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) presenting as a ground glass opacity (GGO) nodule is better than other types of lung cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the necessity of mediastinal lymph node evaluation (MLE) in clinical N0 GGO-predominant NSCLC.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 358 patients treated for clinical N0 NSCLC that was found by curative resection to be 3 cm or smaller in size. We analyzed clinicopathological findings and survival among three groups with either GGO-predominant or solid-predominant tumor: no mediastinal lymph node evaluation (NoMLE) group, mediastinal lymph node sampling (MLS) group, and mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND) group.
RESULTS: Except for sex, there were no differences in clinicopathological characteristics among the three groups with GGO-predominant tumor or solid-predominant tumor. There was no difference in the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate among three groups in the GGO-predominant patients (100%, 92.9%, 93.8%, respectively; P=0.889). However, in the solid-predominant tumor group, the 5-year recurrence free survival of the NoMLE group was lower than in the MLND group (48.6% vs . 73.1%, P=0.007). MLE was not a significant risk factor for recurrence in GGO-predominant tumor [hazard ratio (HR) =1.021; P=0.987]. GGO-predominant tumor [odds ratio (OR) =0.063; P=0.008] was identified as the sole parameter that significantly impacted nodal upstaging.
CONCLUSIONS: MLE is not an essential procedure for clinical N0 NSCLC presenting as a 3 cm or smaller GGO-predominant nodule.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 358 patients treated for clinical N0 NSCLC that was found by curative resection to be 3 cm or smaller in size. We analyzed clinicopathological findings and survival among three groups with either GGO-predominant or solid-predominant tumor: no mediastinal lymph node evaluation (NoMLE) group, mediastinal lymph node sampling (MLS) group, and mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND) group.
RESULTS: Except for sex, there were no differences in clinicopathological characteristics among the three groups with GGO-predominant tumor or solid-predominant tumor. There was no difference in the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate among three groups in the GGO-predominant patients (100%, 92.9%, 93.8%, respectively; P=0.889). However, in the solid-predominant tumor group, the 5-year recurrence free survival of the NoMLE group was lower than in the MLND group (48.6% vs . 73.1%, P=0.007). MLE was not a significant risk factor for recurrence in GGO-predominant tumor [hazard ratio (HR) =1.021; P=0.987]. GGO-predominant tumor [odds ratio (OR) =0.063; P=0.008] was identified as the sole parameter that significantly impacted nodal upstaging.
CONCLUSIONS: MLE is not an essential procedure for clinical N0 NSCLC presenting as a 3 cm or smaller GGO-predominant nodule.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app