论文部分内容阅读
AIM:To compare survival between bile duct segmental resection(BDSR)and pancreaticoduodenectomy(PD) for treating distal bile duct cancers. METHODS:Retrospective analysis was conducted for 45 patients in a BDSR group and for 149 patients in a PD group. RESULTS:The T-stage(P<0.001),lymph node invasion (P=0.010)and tumor differentiation(P=0.005)were significant prognostic factors in the BDSR group.The 3-and 5-year overall survival rates for the BDSR group and PD group were 51.7%and 36.6%,respectively and 46.0%and 38.1%,respectively(P=0.099).The BDSR group and PD group did not show any significant difference in survival when this was adjusted for the TNM stage.The 3-and 5-year survival rates were: stageⅠa[BDSR(100.0%and 100.0%)vs PD(76.9% and 68.4%)(P=0.226)];stageⅠb[BDSR(55.8% and 32.6%)vs PD(59.3%and 59.3%)(P=0.942)]; stageⅡb[BDSR(19.2%and 19.2%)vs PD(31.9%and 14.2%)(P=0.669)]. CONCLUSION:BDSR can be justified as an alternative radical operation for patients with middle bile duct inselected patients with no adjacent organ invasion and resection margin is negative.
AIM: To compare survival between bile duct segmental resection (BDSR) and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for managing distal bile duct cancers. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted for 45 patients in a BDSR group and for 149 patients in a PD group. T-stage (P <0.001), lymph node invasion (P = 0.010) and tumor differentiation (P = 0.005) were significant prognostic factors in the BDSR group. The 3-and 5-year overall survival rates for the BDSR group and PD The BDSR group and PD group did not show any significant difference in survival when this was was adjusted for the TNM stage. 3-and (P = 0.226)]; stageⅠb [BDSR (55.8% and 32.6%) vs PD (59.3% and 59.3% BDSR (19.2% and 19.2%) vs PD (31.9% and 14.2%) (P = 0.669)]. CONCLUSION: BDSR can be justified as an alternative radical operation for patients with middle bile duct in selected patients with no adjacent organ invasion and resection margin is negative.