Search

Abstract Objective To explore whether the upper and/or middle mediastinal nodes (UMMN) should be dissected in Siewert type II adenocarcinoma (AC) according to the incidence of lymph node metastasis. Additionally, to investigate the association between the length of esophageal involvement (LEI) and the UMMN metastases. Methods A cohort with Siewert type II AC who were operated on by a surgical team that routinely treated esophagogastric junction (EGJ) tumors with esophagectomy and extended lymphadenectomy were assessed retrospectively. The primary endpoint of the research was the metastasis rate of UMMN. Results A total of 94 patients with EGJ tumor from July 2018 to September 2022 were enrolled. Station 106recR (6.4%, 6/94) was the only station among upper mediastinal nodes (UMN) that presented positive nodes. Middle mediastinal nodes (MMN) metastases of station 107, 109 and station 108 were 2.1% (2/94) and 5.0% (4/80), respectively. Among the 11 patients with MMN or UMN metastases, 63.6% (7/11) had lesser than seven metastatic nodes, and 54.5% (6/11) had a pathological N stage ≤2. LEI >3 cm (p = 0.042) showed a higher risk for MMN metastases in univariable logistic analysis. However, no independent risk factor for mediastinal node metastases was detected. Conclusion This study demonstrated that the incidence of positive MMN and UMN is relatively low in resectable Siewert type II AC, which indicated that it is not necessary to perform a routine dissection upon these stations. LEI >3 cm might be associated with higher risk for mediastinal node metastasis. Certain patients could benefit from extended lymphadenectomy since most of the patients with positive MMN or UMN have a limited number of metastatic nodes.

Abstract Background This retrospective study aimed to explore risk factors for liver metastases (LiM) in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) and to identify prognostic factors in patients initially diagnosed with LiM. Methods A total of 28 654 EC patients were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2018. A multivariate logistic regression model was utilized to identify risk factors for LiM. A Cox regression model was used to identify prognostic factors for patients with LiM. Results Of 28 654 EC patients, 4062 (14.2%) had LiM at diagnosis. The median overall survival (OS) for patients with and without LiM was 6.00 (95% CI: 5.70–6.30) months and 15.00 (95% CI: 14.64–15.36) months, respectively. Variables significantly associated with LiM included gender, age, tumor site, histology, tumor grade, tumor size, clinical T stage, clinical N stage, bone metastases (BoM), brain metastases (BrM) and lung metastases (LuM). Variables independently predicting survival for EC patients with LiM were age, histology, tumor grade, BoM, BrM, LuM, and chemotherapy. A risk prediction model and two survival prediction models were then constructed revealing satisfactory predictive accuracy. Conclusions Based on the largest known cohort of EC, independent predictors of LiM and prognostic indicators of survival for patients with LiM were identified. Two models for predicting survival as well as a risk prediction model were developed with robust predictive accuracy.

PurposeNewly diagnosed T1-2N0 esophageal cancer (EC) is generally deemed as early local disease, with distant metastases (DM) easily overlooked. This retrospective study aimed to describe the metastatic patterns, identify risk factors and established a risk prediction model for DM in T1-2N0 EC patients.MethodsA total of 4623 T1-2N0 EC patients were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database from 2004 to 2018. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for DM. A nomogram was developed for presentation of the final model.ResultsOf 4623 T1-2N0 patients, 4062 (87.9%) had M0 disease and 561 (12.1%) had M1 disease. The most common metastatic site was liver (n = 156, 47.3%), followed by lung (n = 89, 27.0%), bone (n = 70, 21.2%) and brain (n = 15, 4.5%). Variables independently associated with DM included age at diagnosis, gender, tumor grade, primary site, tumor size and T stage. A nomogram based on the variables had a good predictive accuracy (area under the curve: 0.750). Independent risk factors for bone metastases (BoM), brain metastases (BrM), liver metastases (LiM) and lung metastases (LuM) were identified, respectively.ConclusionsWe identified independent predictive factors for DM, as well as for BoM, BrM, LiM and LuM. Above all, a practical and convenient nomogram with a great accuracy to predict DM probability for T1-2N0 EC patients was established.