Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 4 Comparison of the clinicopathological data in NSR according toSLNM risk grade

From: Risk evaluation of splenic hilar or splenic artery lymph node metastasis and survival analysis for patients with proximal gastric cancer after curative gastrectomy: a retrospective study

  SLNM low-mid risk n = (519) SLNM high risk n = (53) P
Gender    0.008
 Male 422(92.3%) 35(7.7%)  
 Female 97(84.3%) 18(15.7%)  
Age    0.103
  < 60 years 272(88.9%) 34(11.1%)  
  ≥ 60 years 247(92.9%) 19(7.1%)  
Tumor size    0.672
  < 5 cm 241(91.3%) 23(8.7%)  
  ≥ 5 cm 278(90.3%) 30(9.7%)  
Differentiation    0.873
 Well 241(90.9%) 24(9.1%)  
 Poor 278(90.6%) 29(9.4%)  
Bormann type    0.148
 Bor 1–2 101(94.4%) 6(5.6%)  
 Bor 3–4 418(89.9%) 47(10.1%)  
pT stage    0.084
 pT2 73(97.3%) 2(2.7%)  
 pT3 188(88.7%) 24(11.3%)  
 pT4a 258(90.5%) 27(9.5%)  
pTNM stage    < 0.001
 IB-IIA 138(100%)   
 IIB-IIIA 274(93.5%) 19(6.5%)  
 IIIB-IIIC 107(75.9%) 34(24.1%)  
  1. NSR: Nosplenic hilar orsplenic arteryLN resection; SLNM:splenic hilar or splenic artery LN metastases