Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. M...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Maruyama, Suguru [verfasserIn] Okamura, Akihiko [verfasserIn] Imamura, Yu [verfasserIn] Kanamori, Jun [verfasserIn] Kanie, Yasukazu [verfasserIn] Takahashi, Keita [verfasserIn] Fujiwara, Daisuke [verfasserIn] Watanabe, Masayuki [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2021 |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Annals of surgical oncology - Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994, 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:28 ; year:2021 ; number:9 ; day:08 ; month:01 ; pages:4859-4866 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR044770154 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR044770154 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230519182831.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 210808s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR044770154 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q ASE |
084 | |a 44.81 |2 bkl | ||
084 | |a 44.65 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Maruyama, Suguru |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 | ||
520 | |a Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. | ||
700 | 1 | |a Okamura, Akihiko |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Imamura, Yu |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kanamori, Jun |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kanie, Yasukazu |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Takahashi, Keita |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Fujiwara, Daisuke |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Watanabe, Masayuki |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Annals of surgical oncology |d Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994 |g 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 |w (DE-627)343969947 |w (DE-600)2074021-9 |x 1534-4681 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:28 |g year:2021 |g number:9 |g day:08 |g month:01 |g pages:4859-4866 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_636 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_711 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2093 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2107 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2472 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4328 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.81 |q ASE |
936 | b | k | |a 44.65 |q ASE |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 28 |j 2021 |e 9 |b 08 |c 01 |h 4859-4866 |
author_variant |
s m sm a o ao y i yi j k jk y k yk k t kt d f df m w mw |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:15344681:2021----::oprsnfucmseweadtoaeohgcoyfennuaienocpceetoadprneohgcoy |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
bklnumber |
44.81 44.65 |
publishDate |
2021 |
allfields |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z doi (DE-627)SPR044770154 (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl Maruyama, Suguru verfasserin aut Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. Okamura, Akihiko verfasserin aut Imamura, Yu verfasserin aut Kanamori, Jun verfasserin aut Kanie, Yasukazu verfasserin aut Takahashi, Keita verfasserin aut Fujiwara, Daisuke verfasserin aut Watanabe, Masayuki verfasserin aut Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 (DE-627)343969947 (DE-600)2074021-9 1534-4681 nnns volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 28 2021 9 08 01 4859-4866 |
spelling |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z doi (DE-627)SPR044770154 (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl Maruyama, Suguru verfasserin aut Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. Okamura, Akihiko verfasserin aut Imamura, Yu verfasserin aut Kanamori, Jun verfasserin aut Kanie, Yasukazu verfasserin aut Takahashi, Keita verfasserin aut Fujiwara, Daisuke verfasserin aut Watanabe, Masayuki verfasserin aut Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 (DE-627)343969947 (DE-600)2074021-9 1534-4681 nnns volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 28 2021 9 08 01 4859-4866 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z doi (DE-627)SPR044770154 (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl Maruyama, Suguru verfasserin aut Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. Okamura, Akihiko verfasserin aut Imamura, Yu verfasserin aut Kanamori, Jun verfasserin aut Kanie, Yasukazu verfasserin aut Takahashi, Keita verfasserin aut Fujiwara, Daisuke verfasserin aut Watanabe, Masayuki verfasserin aut Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 (DE-627)343969947 (DE-600)2074021-9 1534-4681 nnns volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 28 2021 9 08 01 4859-4866 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z doi (DE-627)SPR044770154 (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl Maruyama, Suguru verfasserin aut Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. Okamura, Akihiko verfasserin aut Imamura, Yu verfasserin aut Kanamori, Jun verfasserin aut Kanie, Yasukazu verfasserin aut Takahashi, Keita verfasserin aut Fujiwara, Daisuke verfasserin aut Watanabe, Masayuki verfasserin aut Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 (DE-627)343969947 (DE-600)2074021-9 1534-4681 nnns volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 28 2021 9 08 01 4859-4866 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z doi (DE-627)SPR044770154 (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl Maruyama, Suguru verfasserin aut Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. Okamura, Akihiko verfasserin aut Imamura, Yu verfasserin aut Kanamori, Jun verfasserin aut Kanie, Yasukazu verfasserin aut Takahashi, Keita verfasserin aut Fujiwara, Daisuke verfasserin aut Watanabe, Masayuki verfasserin aut Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 (DE-627)343969947 (DE-600)2074021-9 1534-4681 nnns volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.81 ASE 44.65 ASE AR 28 2021 9 08 01 4859-4866 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Annals of surgical oncology 28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866 volume:28 year:2021 number:9 day:08 month:01 pages:4859-4866 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
dewey-raw |
610 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
Annals of surgical oncology |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Maruyama, Suguru @@aut@@ Okamura, Akihiko @@aut@@ Imamura, Yu @@aut@@ Kanamori, Jun @@aut@@ Kanie, Yasukazu @@aut@@ Takahashi, Keita @@aut@@ Fujiwara, Daisuke @@aut@@ Watanabe, Masayuki @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-08T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
343969947 |
dewey-sort |
3610 |
id |
SPR044770154 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR044770154</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519182831.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210808s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR044770154</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maruyama, Suguru</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Society of Surgical Oncology 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Okamura, Akihiko</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Imamura, Yu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kanamori, Jun</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kanie, Yasukazu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Takahashi, Keita</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fujiwara, Daisuke</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Watanabe, Masayuki</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Annals of surgical oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994</subfield><subfield code="g">28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)343969947</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2074021-9</subfield><subfield code="x">1534-4681</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:28</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:9</subfield><subfield code="g">day:08</subfield><subfield code="g">month:01</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4859-4866</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_711</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">28</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">9</subfield><subfield code="b">08</subfield><subfield code="c">01</subfield><subfield code="h">4859-4866</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Maruyama, Suguru |
spellingShingle |
Maruyama, Suguru ddc 610 bkl 44.81 bkl 44.65 Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
authorStr |
Maruyama, Suguru |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)343969947 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1534-4681 |
topic_title |
610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.81 bkl 44.65 |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.81 bkl 44.65 |
topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.81 bkl 44.65 |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Annals of surgical oncology |
hierarchy_parent_id |
343969947 |
dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
hierarchy_top_title |
Annals of surgical oncology |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)343969947 (DE-600)2074021-9 |
title |
Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR044770154 (SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e |
title_full |
Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
author_sort |
Maruyama, Suguru |
journal |
Annals of surgical oncology |
journalStr |
Annals of surgical oncology |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2021 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
container_start_page |
4859 |
author_browse |
Maruyama, Suguru Okamura, Akihiko Imamura, Yu Kanamori, Jun Kanie, Yasukazu Takahashi, Keita Fujiwara, Daisuke Watanabe, Masayuki |
container_volume |
28 |
class |
610 ASE 44.81 bkl 44.65 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Maruyama, Suguru |
doi_str_mv |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z |
dewey-full |
610 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
comparison of outcomes between additional esophagectomy after noncurative endoscopic resection and upfront esophagectomy for t1n0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma |
title_auth |
Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
abstract |
Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 |
abstractGer |
Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER. © Society of Surgical Oncology 2021 |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_120 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_636 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_711 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2031 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2037 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2039 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2057 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2107 GBV_ILN_2108 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2144 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2188 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2446 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2472 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_2548 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4246 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4328 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4336 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
9 |
title_short |
Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Okamura, Akihiko Imamura, Yu Kanamori, Jun Kanie, Yasukazu Takahashi, Keita Fujiwara, Daisuke Watanabe, Masayuki |
author2Str |
Okamura, Akihiko Imamura, Yu Kanamori, Jun Kanie, Yasukazu Takahashi, Keita Fujiwara, Daisuke Watanabe, Masayuki |
ppnlink |
343969947 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z |
up_date |
2024-07-04T02:16:01.904Z |
_version_ |
1803612965472043008 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR044770154</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519182831.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">210808s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR044770154</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s10434-020-09498-z-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Maruyama, Suguru</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Comparison of Outcomes Between Additional Esophagectomy After Noncurative Endoscopic Resection and Upfront Esophagectomy for T1N0 Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Society of Surgical Oncology 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Esophagectomy with lymph node dissection is a choice of additional treatment after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER) of T1N0 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The efficacy and safety of esophagectomy in this situation remain unclear when compared with upfront esophagectomy. Methods We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of 321 patients with clinical T1N0M0 ESCC who underwent curative esophagectomy, and compared the status of lymph node metastasis, surgical results, and the prognosis between the ER and non-ER groups. Results The ER group consisted of 57 patients (17.8%), while the non-ER group consisted of 264 patients (82.2%). The incidence of lymph node metastasis was not significantly different between the ER (24.6%) and non-ER groups (30.7%), and there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between the groups. The distribution of metastatic lymph nodes was very similar between the groups. However, 13 of 14 patients (93%) with lymph node metastasis in the ER group and 63 of 82 patients (77%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN1 disease, while the remaining 18 patients (23%) with lymph node metastasis in the non-ER group had pN2 or N3 disease. Overall and relapse-free survival rates were significantly better in the ER group than in the non-ER group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). To date, no patients in the ER group experienced disease recurrence. Conclusions Additional esophagectomy is a safe and effective treatment modality for patients after noncurative ER.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Okamura, Akihiko</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Imamura, Yu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kanamori, Jun</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kanie, Yasukazu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Takahashi, Keita</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fujiwara, Daisuke</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Watanabe, Masayuki</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Annals of surgical oncology</subfield><subfield code="d">Berlin [u.a.] : Springer, 1994</subfield><subfield code="g">28(2021), 9 vom: 08. Jan., Seite 4859-4866</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)343969947</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2074021-9</subfield><subfield code="x">1534-4681</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:28</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:9</subfield><subfield code="g">day:08</subfield><subfield code="g">month:01</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:4859-4866</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09498-z</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_120</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_636</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_711</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2031</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2039</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2057</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2107</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2108</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2144</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2188</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2446</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2472</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2548</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4246</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4328</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.81</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="q">ASE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">28</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">9</subfield><subfield code="b">08</subfield><subfield code="c">01</subfield><subfield code="h">4859-4866</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.3988447 |