Is mucinous adenocarcinoma of the endometrium a risk factor for lymph node involvement? A multicenter case–control study

dc.authorid0000-0002-8444-9694
dc.authorid0000-0002-2325-1756
dc.authorid0000-0002-3187-2317
dc.authorid0000-0002-7869-9662
dc.contributor.authorGüngördük, Kemal
dc.contributor.authorÖzdemir, Aykut
dc.contributor.authorErtaş, İbrahim Egemen
dc.contributor.authorSelçuk, İlker
dc.contributor.authorSolmaz, Ulaş
dc.contributor.authorÖzgü, Emre
dc.contributor.authorMat, Emre
dc.contributor.authorGökçü, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorKaradeniz, Tuba
dc.contributor.authorAkbay, Serap
dc.contributor.authorSancı, Muzaffer
dc.contributor.authorMeydanlı, Mehmet Mutlu
dc.contributor.authorAyaz, Duygu
dc.contributor.authorGüngör, Tayfun
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-13T09:03:34Z
dc.date.available2019-05-13T09:03:34Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.departmentHitit Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü
dc.description.abstractPurpose: The purpose of this multicenter case–control study was to compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with mucinous adenocarcinoma of the endometrium (MAE) and endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). Methods: A retrospective review of two cancer registry databases in Turkey was conducted to identify patients diagnosed with MAE between January 1996 and December 2012. Each patient was matched with a control EEC patient by age and tumor grade. Cases and controls were compared in terms of known risk factors for lymph node metastasis, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: The analysis included 112 patients with MAE and 112 with EEC. No significant difference in baseline characteristics was evident between the two groups. Lymphovascular space invasion, deep myometrial invasion, cervical involvement, and tumor diameter did not differ significantly between the mucinous and endometrioid cases. Multivariate analysis confirmed that only mucinous histology (OR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.1–4.5; P = 0.02) was an independent predictor of lymph node involvement. Although the median DFS and OS tended to be better in the endometrioid group, the differences were not statistically significant. Routine appendectomy was performed in 52 (46.2 %) patients with MAE. No mucinous tumor of the appendix was identified. Conclusion: Routine appendectomy is not necessary when the appendix is grossly normal at the time of surgery for MAE. Although the DFS and OS of EEC and MAE patients were similar, the risk of nodal metastasis in MAE patients was greater than that in ECC patients, and we thus suggest to perform retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy (both pelvic and para-aortic) for patients with MAE during the initial operation. © 2014, Japan Society of Clinical Oncology.
dc.identifier.citationGungorduk, K., Ozdemir, A., Ertas, I. E., Selcuk, I., Solmaz, U., Ozgu, E., ... & Sanci, M. (2015). Is mucinous adenocarcinoma of the endometrium a risk factor for lymph node involvement? A multicenter case–control study. International journal of clinical oncology, 20(4), 782-789.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10147-014-0767-2
dc.identifier.endpage789en_US
dc.identifier.issn1341-9625
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage782en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-014-0767-2
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11491/1494
dc.identifier.volume20en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringer Tokyo
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Clinical Oncology
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectAppendectomyen_US
dc.subjectEndometrioid Endometrial Carcinomaen_US
dc.subjectLymph Node Metastasesen_US
dc.subjectMucinous Endometrial Adenocarcinomaen_US
dc.titleIs mucinous adenocarcinoma of the endometrium a risk factor for lymph node involvement? A multicenter case–control study
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar