Scholarlink

Background <p>This study aims to examine why we encounter a pathological circumferential resection margin (pCRM)-positive specimen whose preoperative MRI indicates negative mesorectal fascia involvement in middle to low rectal cancer.</p> Methods <p>Forty-four consecutive patients included in this study had c(yc)T1–3 primary rectal adenocarcinoma without mesorectal fascia involvement and underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) with curative intent in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of Kansai Medical University Hospital from January 2014 to April 2018. We adopted three checkpoints to investigate the misleading point causing positive pCRM (≤ 1&#xa0;mm). (1) c(yc)CRM diagnosis by two radiologists with more than 20 and 15&#xa0;years of experience in rectal cancer MRI diagnosis. (2) The specimen was assessed using the TME score presented by Nagtegaal. (3) We compared the standard sectioning according to UK guidelines (group&#xa0;A; <i>n</i> = 26) with the specimen MRI image navigation-based section (group&#xa0;B; <i>n</i> = 18) in terms of estimation of pCRM by c(yc)CRM.</p> Results <p>We achieved a “complete” resection specimen in all cases. A simple correlation coefficient in group&#xa0;B revealed a significant correlation between c(yc)CRM and pCRM (<i>r</i> = 0.663, <i>p</i> = 0.00513); this correlation was not significant in group&#xa0;A (<i>r</i> = 0.261, <i>p</i> = 0.19824). However, tests for differences between linear regression coefficients in groups&#xa0;A and B showed no significant differences (<i>p</i> = 0.12596). There were five cases of pCRM ≤ 1&#xa0;mm: three in group&#xa0;A and two in group&#xa0;B. An anterior lesion caused pCRM ≤ 1&#xa0;mm in three cases; the tumor deposits or extramural vascular invasion caused the other cases.</p> Conclusion <p>The cause of misleading pCRM was the inaccurate preoperative MRI diagnosis of c(yc)CRM.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Why did we encounter a pCRM-positive specimen whose preoperative MRI indicates negative mesorectal fascia involvement in middle to low rectal cancer?

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月17日

查看全文
  • F. Sumiyama,
  • M. Hamada,
  • T. Kobayashi,
  • Y. Matsumi,
  • R. Inada,
  • H. Kurokawa,
  • Y. Uemura

摘要

Background

This study aims to examine why we encounter a pathological circumferential resection margin (pCRM)-positive specimen whose preoperative MRI indicates negative mesorectal fascia involvement in middle to low rectal cancer.

Methods

Forty-four consecutive patients included in this study had c(yc)T1–3 primary rectal adenocarcinoma without mesorectal fascia involvement and underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) with curative intent in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of Kansai Medical University Hospital from January 2014 to April 2018. We adopted three checkpoints to investigate the misleading point causing positive pCRM (≤ 1 mm). (1) c(yc)CRM diagnosis by two radiologists with more than 20 and 15 years of experience in rectal cancer MRI diagnosis. (2) The specimen was assessed using the TME score presented by Nagtegaal. (3) We compared the standard sectioning according to UK guidelines (group A; n = 26) with the specimen MRI image navigation-based section (group B; n = 18) in terms of estimation of pCRM by c(yc)CRM.

Results

We achieved a “complete” resection specimen in all cases. A simple correlation coefficient in group B revealed a significant correlation between c(yc)CRM and pCRM (r = 0.663, p = 0.00513); this correlation was not significant in group A (r = 0.261, p = 0.19824). However, tests for differences between linear regression coefficients in groups A and B showed no significant differences (p = 0.12596). There were five cases of pCRM ≤ 1 mm: three in group A and two in group B. An anterior lesion caused pCRM ≤ 1 mm in three cases; the tumor deposits or extramural vascular invasion caused the other cases.

Conclusion

The cause of misleading pCRM was the inaccurate preoperative MRI diagnosis of c(yc)CRM.