Abstract:BackgroundTo assess the prognostic significance of positive circumferential resection margin on overall survival in patients with esophageal cancer, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.MethodsStudies were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Survival data were extracted from eligible studies to compare overall survival in patients with a positive circumferential resection margin with patients having a negative circumferential resection margin according to the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) criteria and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) criteria. Survival data were pooled with hazard ratios (HRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A random-effects model meta-analysis on overall survival was performed.ResultsThe pooled HRs for survival were 1.510 (95% CI, 1.329–1.717; p < 0.001) and 2.053 (95% CI, 1.597–2.638; p < 0.001) according to the RCP and CAP criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin was associated with worse survival in patients with T3 stage disease according to the RCP (HR, 1.381; 95% CI, 1.028–1.584; p = 0.001) and CAP (HR, 2.457; 95% CI, 1.902–3.175; p < 0.001) criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin was associated with worse survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy according to the RCP (HR, 1.676; 95% CI, 1.023–2.744; p = 0.040) and CAP (HR, 1.847; 95% CI, 1.226–2.78; p = 0.003) criteria, respectively.ConclusionsPositive circumferential resection margin is associated with poor prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer, particularly in patients with T3 stage disease and patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. To assess the prognostic significance of positive circumferential resection margin on overall survival in patients with esophageal cancer, a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Studies were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Survival data were extracted from eligible studies to compare overall survival in patients with a positive circumferential resection margin with patients having a negative circumferential resection margin according to the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) criteria and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) criteria. Survival data were pooled with hazard ratios (HRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A random-effects model meta-analysis on overall survival was performed. The pooled HRs for survival were 1.510 (95% CI, 1.329–1.717; p < 0.001) and 2.053 (95% CI, 1.597–2.638; p < 0.001) according to the RCP and CAP criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin was associated with worse survival in patients with T3 stage disease according to the RCP (HR, 1.381; 95% CI, 1.028–1.584; p = 0.001) and CAP (HR, 2.457; 95% CI, 1.902–3.175; p < 0.001) criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin was associated with worse survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy according to the RCP (HR, 1.676; 95% CI, 1.023–2.744; p = 0.040) and CAP (HR, 1.847; 95% CI, 1.226–2.78; p = 0.003) criteria, respectively. Positive circumferential resection margin is associated with poor prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer, particularly in patients with T3 stage disease and patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy.

Risk factors and prognostic analysis of microscopic positive esophageal margins after radical surgery for proximal gastric cancer

Prognostic Effect of Postoperative Resection-Margin Status for Intraoperative Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer

Prognostic Improvement of Reexcision for Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer.

Pathological features and survival analysis of gastric cancer patients with positive surgical margins: A large multicenter cohort study.

Prognostic Significance of Positive Circumferential Resection Margin in Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Improving the Quality of Gastric Cancer Surgery: Factors Associated with Positive Resection Margins for Gastrectomy

Risk Factors Analysis for Positive Surgical Margins in Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

Risk Factors for Positive Resection Margins after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Early Esophageal Squamous Carcinomas and Precancerous Lesions

Prognostication and Optimal Criteria of Circumferential Margin Involvement for Esophageal Cancer after Chemoradiation and Esophagectomy

Comparison of the Clinical and Prognosis Risk Factors Between Endoscopic Resection and Radical Gastrectomy for Early-Stage Gastric Cancer

Incidence, Predictors and Prognostic Implications of Positive Circumferential Resection Margin in Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Study in a Chinese High-Volume Cancer Center.

Risk Factors of Positive Surgical Margin and Biochemical Recurrence of Patients Treated with Radical Prostatectomy： a Single-Center 10-Year Report

Prognosis of patients with early gastric carcinoma treated by endoscopic submucosal dissection and risk factors for additional postoperative surgery.

Risk Factors for Positive Surgical Margins in Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

Risk Factors of Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Early Pure and Mixed Signet Ring Cell Gastric Carcinomas

Management of the Positive Proximal Margin During Total Gastrectomy: Dose Re-Excision Benefit All the Time? Findings of a Small-Sample Retrospective Study

Risk Factors of Lymph Node Metastasis in 734 Early Gastric Carcinoma Radical Resections in a Chinese population.

Long-Term Results and Prognostic Factors of Gastric Cancer Patients with Microscopic Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Is positive histologic surgical margin associated with overall survival in patients with resectable gallbladder cancer?

Risk Factors of Lymph Node Metastasis in 1620 Early Gastric Carcinoma Radical Resections in Jiangsu Province in China: A Multicenter Clinicopathological Study

Analysis of risk factors for positive circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer