This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (32)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Surgery  • Surgical Interventions  • Endocrine Surgery  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Gastroenterology  • Liver/ Biliary Tract/ Pancreatic Diseases  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Timothy M. Pawlik, MD, MPH; Eddie K. Abdalla, MD; Carlton C. Barnett, MD; Syed A. Ahmad, MD; Karen R. Cleary, MD; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey, MD; Jeffrey E. Lee, MD; Douglas B. Evans, MD; Peter W. T. Pisters, MD

Arch Surg. 2005;140:584-591.

Hypothesis  The required sample size of a prospective randomized trial comparing standard pancreaticoduodenectomy with pancreaticoduodenectomy plus extended lymphadenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is prohibitively large, making such a trial infeasible.

Design  Retrospective cohort study.

Setting  Comprehensive cancer center.

Patients  We identified 158 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma with separate pathologic analysis of second-echelon lymph nodes, defined as lymph nodes along the proximal hepatic artery and/or the great vessels.

Main Outcome Measures  To estimate the sample size required for a randomized trial, we devised a biostatistical model with the following assumptions: extended lymphadenectomy can benefit only patients who (1) actually have disease removed from second-echelon nodes, (2) have microscopically negative (R0) primary tumor resection margins, and (3) do not have visceral metastatic (M0) disease.

Results  Seventy-six patients (48.1%) had negative first- and second-echelon lymph nodes, 65 (41.1%) had positive first-echelon and negative second-echelon lymph nodes, and 17 (10.8%) had positive first- and second-echelon lymph nodes. Patients with positive second-echelon lymph nodes had an R0 resection rate of 47.1%. At a median follow-up of 65.1 months, 4 patients with positive second-echelon lymph nodes were alive, but 3 had recurrent disease. This implies that only 1 patient (5.9%) with positive second-echelon lymph nodes may have had true M0 disease. Therefore, only 0.3% of patients (10.8% with positive second-echelon lymph nodes x 47.1% with R0 resection x 5.9% with M0 disease) may achieve a survival benefit from extended lymphadenectomy. A randomized trial of standard pancreaticoduodenectomy vs pancreaticoduodenectomy with extended lymphadenectomy would require 202 000 patients in each study arm to detect such a small difference.

Conclusions  Definitive evaluation of the potential benefits of extended lymphadenectomy would require a prohibitively large sample size. Adequately powered randomized trials to address the potential benefit of extended lymphadenectomy are infeasible.

Author Affiliations: Departments of Surgical Oncology (Drs Pawlik, Abdalla, Barnett, Ahmad, Vauthey, Lee, Evans, and Pisters) and Pathology (Dr Cleary), University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Extended Resection for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma
Reddy et al.
The Oncologist 2007;12:654-663.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT