Mediastinal lymph node dissection for non-small cell lung cancer

Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (Impact Factor: 4.17). 09/2005; 130(2):241-2. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.03.037
Source: PubMed


The role of systematic mediastinal lymph node dissection in the staging and treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the subject of ongoing debate. Surgical practice varies from simple visual inspection of the unopened mediastinum to radical, systematic lymphadenectomy of all accessible lymph node levels. As the evaluation of mediastinal lymph nodes is a precondition for accurate intraoperative staging of NSCLC we advocate for complete interlobar, hilar and mediastinal lymphadenectomy as compartment dissections in patients with NSCLC. The therapeutic effect of extensive mediastinal lymphadenectomy, however, remains controversial. In this review we discuss the role of mediastinal lymph node dissection in the management of NSCLC.Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel

101 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stage I and II non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) should be resected, but there is mounting evidence for the use of preoperative induction and postoperative adjuvant therapy in stages IB and II, as being able to prolong life. Some patients in stage IIIA should undergo induction therapy, and then have re–staging of the mediastinum by CT/PET or redo mediastinoscopy before considering resection. Stages IIIB and IV are non–surgical, except very selected cases. Reflections are made regarding the control of cigarette smoking, the difficult access of patients from developing countries to the recent costly medical, pharmacological and technical advances; reflections are also made related to some ethical issues regarding medical and surgical treatment of NSCLC.
    Revista del Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias 06/2006; 19(2):143-147.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In order to provide a precise lymph node mapping during lung cancer surgery a sterilizable plastic tray moulded in the shape of the mediastinum and lungs is presented by the author. The device makes lymph node mapping simpler, safer, quicker and methodically more structured. A positive impact is expected as a result of usage of the device from making pathologist's work easier and facilitating the flux of information on the surgeon-pathologist-oncologist-pneumonologist chain to be more disinformation-free.
    European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 03/2007; 31(2):311-2. DOI:10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.11.047 · 3.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. Despite technological, therapeutic, and scientific advances, most patients present with incurable disease and a poor chance of long-term survival. For those with potentially curable disease, lung cancer staging greatly influences therapeutic decisions. Therefore, surgical pathologists determine many facets of lung cancer patient care. To present the current lung cancer staging system and examine the importance of mediastinal lymph node sampling, and also to discuss particularly confusing and/or challenging areas in lung cancer staging, including assessment of visceral pleura invasion, bronchial and carinal involvement, and the staging of synchronous carcinomas. Published current and prior staging manuals from the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the International Union Against Cancer as well as selected articles pertaining to lung cancer staging and diagnosis accessible through PubMed (National Library of Medicine) form the basis of this review. Proper lung cancer staging requires more than a superficial appreciation of the staging system. Clinically relevant specimen gross examination and histologic review depend on a thorough understanding of the staging guidelines. Common sense is also required when one is confronted with a tumor specimen that defies easy assignment to the TNM staging system.
    Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine 08/2007; 131(7):1016-26. DOI:10.1043/1543-2165(2007)131[1016:CEDIPS]2.0.CO;2 · 2.84 Impact Factor
Show more


101 Reads
Available from