Distinct Clinicopathological Differences Between Early Gastric Cardiac and Non-Cardiac Carcinomas: a Single-Center Retrospective Study of 329 Radical Resection Cases

Yaohui Wang,Xiuqing Li,Lili Gao,Chenxi Wang,Yifen Zhang,Qin Huang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-020-01498-3
2020-01-01
BMC Gastroenterology
Abstract:Background Early gastric carcinoma is heterogeneous and can be divided into early gastric cardiac carcinoma (EGCC) and early gastric non-cardiac carcinoma (EGNCC) groups. At present, differences in clinicopathology remains obscure between EGCC and EGNCC fundus-corpus and antrum-angularis-pylorus subgroups, especially between EGCC with and without oesophageal invasion. Methods In this study, we studied 329 consecutive early gastric carcinoma radical gastrectomies with 70 EGCCs and 259 EGNCCs. Results Compared to the EGNCC antrum-angularis-pylorus (n = 181), but not fundus-corpus (n = 78), sub-group, EGCC showed significantly older age, lower prevalence of the grossly depressed pattern, better tumor differentiation, higher percentage of tubular/papillary adenocarcinoma, but lower frequency of mixed poorly cohesive carcinoma with tubular/papillary adenocarcinoma, and absence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in tumors with invasion up to superficial submucosa (SM1). In contrast, pure poorly cohesive carcinoma was less frequently seen in EGCCs than in EGNCCs, but mixed poorly cohesive carcinoma with tubular/papillary adenocarcinomas was significantly more common in the EGNCC antrum-angularis-pylorus sub-group than in any other group. No significant differences were found between EGCC and EGNCC sub-groups in gender, tumor size,H. pyloriinfection rate, and lymphovascular/perineural invasion. EGCC with oesophageal invasion (n = 22), compared to EGCC without (n = 48), showed no significant differences in theH. pyloriinfection rate and oesophageal columnar, intestinal, or pancreatic metaplasia, except for a higher percentage of the former in size > 2 cm and tubular differentiation. Conclusions There exist distinct clinicopathologic differences between EGCC and EGNCC sub-groups; EGCC was indeed of gastric origin. Further investigations with larger samples are needed to validate these findings.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?