| Title |
The length of proximal margin does not influence the prognosis of Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction after transhiatal curative gastrectomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-016-2240-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fan Feng, Yangzi Tian, Guanghui Xu, Shushang Liu, Zhen Liu, Gaozan Zheng, Man Guo, Xiao Lian, Daiming Fan, Hongwei Zhang |
| Abstract |
The optimal length of proximal margin for Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEJ) is still need to be clarified. The aim of the present study was to investigate the appropriate length of proximal margin for Siewert type II/III AEJ through transhiatal approach. From September 2009 to December 2014, a total of 693 consecutive patients with Siewert type II/III AEJ were retrospectively analyzed. All patients received transhiatal R0 resection. The proximal margin length was measured immediately after resection. The prognostic value of proximal margin length on Siewert type II/III AEJ with transhiatal approach was analyzed. There were 404 cases of Siewert type II AEJ (58.3 %) and 289 cases of Siewert type III AEJ (41.7 %). Total gastrectomy was performed in 526 patients (75.9 %), and proximal gastrectomy was performed in 167 patients (24.1 %). The median length of the gross proximal margin was 2.4 (range 0.1-5.0) cm. Lymph node metastasis was the only independent prognostic predictor for Siewert type II AEJ. Tumor size and lymph node metastasis were independent prognostic predictors for Siewert type III AEJ. For Siewert type II/III AEJ with esophageal invasion of 3 cm or less, proximal margin length does not influence the prognosis of patients after transhiatal curative gastrectomy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 57% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,376,252
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#935
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,848
of 309,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#96
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.