...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: Official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery >Long-term survival after lung-sparing total pleurectomy for locally advanced (International Mesothelioma Interest Group Stage T3-T4) non-sarcomatoid malignant pleural mesothelioma.
【24h】

Long-term survival after lung-sparing total pleurectomy for locally advanced (International Mesothelioma Interest Group Stage T3-T4) non-sarcomatoid malignant pleural mesothelioma.

机译:肺部保留总胸膜切除术后的长期存活(国际间皮瘤兴趣组阶段T3-T4)非SARCAMATOID恶性胸膜间皮瘤。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

There is a body of opinion that advocates extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) as the only radical treatment option for locally advanced (T3/T4) malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). We tested the hypothesis that lung-sparing total pleurectomy (LSTP) can be as effective as EPP in locally advanced MPM with reduced risk.We analysed prospective data on 165 patients (128 with epithelioid and 37 with biphasic MPM) with pT3 (n?=?108) and pT4 (n?=?57) tumours. Ninety-eight (59.4%) of the patients underwent EPP and 67 (40.6%) LSTP. We compared intergroup differences in: length of stay (LOS), post-operative complications, survival, pattern of disease progression and disease-free interval (DFI).There were significantly more complications after EPP: 67 (68%) vs. 29 (43%) in LSTP, P?=?0.002. Thirty-day mortality was 7% for EPP and 3% for LSTP (P?=?0.31). LOS was similar (mean 19 days for EPP, 15 days for LSTP, P?=?0.19). We noted only minor differences in the initial site of disease progression. In 33 (41%) of EPP patients, disease progressed locally compared with 22 (44%) after LSTP. Seventeen patients post-EPP (21%) had distal progression compared with only three (6%) post-LSTP and synchronous distal and local recurrence was similar: 15 (19%) post-EPP vs. 12% for LSTP (P?=?0.11). There was no significant intergroup difference in median survival: EPP 14.7 months (SE 1.3, 95% CI 12.2-17.2) vs. LSTP 13.4 months (SE 1.9, 95% CI 9.7-17.1), P?=?0.91, nor in DFI: EPP 10.7 months (SE 0.8, 95% CI 9-12) vs. LSTP 16 months (SE 1, 95% CI 9-22). In chemonaive patients (n?=?124), adjuvant chemotherapy was received by significantly more patients after LSTP (32/53 LSTP vs. 26/71 EPP patients, P?=?0.011). Estimated 1-5 years survival for EPP was 58, 30, 11, 9 and 6% and for LSTP 52, 28, 20, 13 and 4%.In disagreement with standard opinion, we advocate LSTP as the procedure of choice in locally advanced MPM: it offers at least equally as good oncological results as EPP in this group of patients with reduced early complications. Despite a tendency for increased local recurrence in the LSTP group, overall survival is not compromised.
机译:有一种倡导倡导局部晚期(T3 / T4)恶性胸膜间皮瘤(MPM)的唯一自由基治疗选择的意见致力于倡导患者肺切除术(EPP)。我们测试了肺滥本总体肺切除术(LSTP)的假设可以在局部先进的MPM中具有降低风险的EPP。我们分析了165名患者的前瞻性数据(128患者,具有PT3(n?= ?108)和pt4(n?=Δ57)肿瘤。患有九十八(59.4%)的患者接受EPP和67(40.6%)LSTP。我们比较了互动差异:入住时间(LOS),术后并发症,存活,疾病进展模式和无病的间隔(DFI)。EPP:67(68%)与29(68%)比较显着更大并发症43%)在LSTP,P?= 0.002。 EPP的30天死亡率为7%,LSTP为3%(p?= 0.31)。 LOS是相似的(平均19天EPP,LSTP 15天,P?= 0.19)。我们只注意到疾病进展的初始差异的微小差异。在33例(41%)的EPP患者中,疾病在LSTP之后与22(44%)局部进行。 EPP后的17例患者(21%)的远端进展与LSTP后的三(6%)相比,同步远端和局部复发相似:15(19%)后EPP后的LSTP与12%(P?= ?0.11)。中位生存中没有显着的杂交差异:EPP 14.7个月(SE 1.3,95%CI 12.2-17.2)与LSTP 13.4个月(SE 1.9,95%CI 9.7-17.1),P?= 0.91,也不是DFI :EPP 10.7个月(SE 0.8,95%CI 9-12)与LSTP 16个月(SE 1,95%CI 9-22)。在宁静患者(n?= 124)中,在LSTP之后通过显着更多的患者获得佐剂化疗(32/53 LSTP与26/71 EPP患者,P?= 0.011)。估计,EPP的存活率为58,30,11,9和6%,LSTP 52,28,20,13和4%。在分歧与标准意见,我们倡导LSTP作为当地先进的选择程序MPM:它在这组患者中至少具有良好的肿瘤学结果,其患者早期并发症减少。尽管LSTP组在局部复发增加趋势,但整体生存不会受到损害。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号