胃体癌切除范围对预后影响的临床研究

目的：探讨胃体癌切除范围对预后的影响。方法：回顾性分析2003年4月―2008年4月157例行胃体癌根治性手术患者的临床资料和随访资料,其中行全胃切除术的患者104例（全胃组）,行远端胃次全切除术53例（远端胃组）,对比两组的5年生存率,分析胃体癌预后的独立影响因素。结果：全组患者5年生存率为37.6%,其中全胃组、远端胃组5年生存率分别为24.0%、64.2%,全胃组明显低于远端胃组（χ2=10.635,P=0.001）;为消除两组术前基线资料的差异,将TNM分期分层对比的结果显示,低TNM分期患者中,远端胃组生存率明显高于全胃组（P<0.05）,而高TNM分期患者中,两组生存率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。COX回归模型分析结果显示,TNM分期（HR=1.270,95% CI=1.093~2.344）、肿瘤分化程度（HR=1.764,95% CI=1.372~2.746）是胃体癌预后的独立影响因素（均P<0.05）, 而切除范围（HR=0.547,95% CI=0.320~1.076）不是胃体癌预后的独立影响因素（P>0.05）。结论：手术切除范围并非胃体癌预后的独立影响因素,在保证根治性的前提下远端胃次全切除术是更为适宜的术式。

     

近、远端胃癌临床病理特点分析(附428例报告)

目的：进一步探讨近，远端胃癌的临床病理特点，方法：收集和分析了118例近端胃癌（PGC）的临床和病理资料，并与同期310例远端胃癌（DGC）患者的相关资料进行比较。结果：近端胃癌的发生率较低，临床分期多数为Ⅲ期和Ⅳ期，病理组织学类型以低分化，未分化及粘液腺癌为多，手术类型中全胃切除术及联合脏器切除术占较高比例，断端癌残留及淋巴结转移率显著增高，伴有食管受累的患者其淋巴结转移的阳性大大增加。随访5年生存率，PGC组显著低于DGC组，手术后并发症及手术死亡率两组间的差异无显著性意义。结论：临床晚期癌多，食管容易受累及病理组织学分化差是近端胃癌预后差的重要原因，早期诊治是提高疗效的关键。     

腹腔镜辅助全胃切除与近端胃切除术治疗胃上部癌的围手术期临床疗效对比研究

目的探讨腹腔镜辅助下,全胃切除与近端胃切除治疗胃上部癌的围手术期安全性和临床疗效。方法选取2012年1月至2015年1月期间,在解放军总医院普通外科接受腹腔镜辅助胃上部癌切除术病人130例,其中近端胃切除组53例,全胃切除组77例。收集病人临床资料,对接受两种手术方式病人的围手术期指标和临床疗效进行对比研究。结果两组病人在年龄、性别、体质量指数(BMI)、肿瘤大小情况、病理分期、手术时间、术后住院天数等方面差异均无统计学意义(均P0.05)。在术后并发症方面,两组在切口感染、切口疝、吻合口瘘、梗阻等方面差异也无统计学意义(P0.05),在反流性食管炎方面全胃切除组明显优于近端胃切除组(P=0.001)。在术后生活质量方面,全胃切除组术后Visick分级指数明显优于近端胃组(P=0.001)。结论腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术治疗胃上部癌在术后并发症发生率方面明显优于腹腔镜辅助近端胃切除术,是治疗胃上部癌更安全有效的手术方式。     

近远端胃癌预后差异及临床病理特点分析

目的研究近、远端胃癌的预后差异,并分析预后差异与胃癌临床病理特点以及手术治疗的关系。方法包头医学院第一附属医院肿瘤外科2000年7月至2003年12月所行手术治疗的近端胃癌和远端胃癌共89例,对有完整临床和生存资料的近、远端胃癌病例67例（近端25例,远端42例）作回顾性分析,临床资料来自于病历记录,生存资料通过随访获得,比较预后差异并分析其与胃癌临床病理特点以及手术治疗的关系。结果89例近端胃癌和远端胃癌随访67例,失访22例,随访率75．3％。67例中,近端胃癌25例,远端胃癌42例。近端胃癌、远端胃癌组的年龄及性别差异无显著性意义,病理组织学类型无显著差别,近端胃癌的浸润深度大于远端胃癌,淋巴结转移无显著差别,近端胃癌TNM分期大于远端胃癌,差异有统计学意义;手术方面,两组根治术切除率无统计学差异,但近端胃癌手术的全胃切除、脾脏切除率均高于远端胃癌。通过生存曲线Log．Rank法检测,近端胃癌术后5年生存率低于远端胃癌,统计学分析差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论近端胃癌中位生存时间29．5个月,远端胃癌中位生存时间54个月。近端胃癌的术后5年生存率低于远端胃癌（28．0％vs 47．6％）,统计学分析差异有显著统计学意义（P〈0．05）。分析本组病例,近端胃癌TNM分期（Ⅲ＋Ⅳ期）比例显著高于远端胃癌,可能是影响预后的主要原因。     

胃食管结合部癌514例外科治疗结果及其预后分析

目的 探讨影响胃食管结合部癌患者预后的临床病理因素.方法 回顾性分析1995年9月至2007年1月接受外科手术治疗的514例胃食管结合部癌患者的临床资料,统计分析患者临床病理因素和治疗措施对预后的影响.结果 全组514例患者,男性424例,女性90例,中位年龄63岁.全组1、3、5年生存率分别为74.8%、42.1%和29.1%.Kaplan-Meier法单因素分析显示,患者的性别、年龄与生存无明显相关性,而肿瘤大体分型、组织学类型、TNM分期、有无脉管癌栓及是否接受根治手术是影响患者预后的因素.经腹与经胸手术相比,两组患者的生存曲线未见显著差异(P＞0.05);对于分期≥Ⅱ期的患者,近端胃大部切除和全胃切除亦未显示生存差异(P＞0.05);而对于Ⅱ、Ⅲ期患者,术前化疗患者的预后要优于术前无化疗者(P＜0.05).采用Cox模型进行多因素分析显示,TNM分期和有无脉管癌栓是影响患者预后的独立因素.结论 TNM分期和有无脉管癌栓是影响患者预后的独立因素,对于Ⅱ、Ⅲ期患者,术前新辅助化疗可改善患者预后.手术应尽可能做到根治,并根据肿瘤的位置、大小、分期等因素选择合适的手术路径和切除范围.     

幽门狭窄对行D2根治术的进展期远端胃癌患者预后的影响

目的 探讨幽门狭窄对行D2根治术的进展期远端胃癌患者预后的影响.方法 回顾性分析1998年1月至2004年12月期间施行D2根治术的284例进展期远端胃癌患者的临床资料,比较分析伴有幽门狭窄（狭窄组,69例）与无伴幽门狭窄（无狭窄组,215例）两组患者的5年生存率、手术并发症发生率及手术死亡率.结果 狭窄组和无狭窄组患者术后5年生存率分别为38.8%和62.4%,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）.单因素及多因素预后分析显示,幽门狭窄、肿瘤大小、浸润深度及淋巴结转移是影响本组胃癌患者预后的独立因素（均P＜0.05）.两组患者手术并发症发生率分别为13.0%和10.2%,手术死亡率分别为2.9%和1.4%,差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）.结论 幽门狭窄是影响进展期远端胃癌患者预后的独立因素,伴幽门狭窄者预后较差,但幽门狭窄并不会增加D2根治术并发症发生率和死亡率.     

青年人食管癌临床病理特征及预后

目的 探讨青年人与中老年人食管癌的临床病理特征及预后的差异.方法 回顾性分析1990年1月至1998年12月间在中山大学肿瘤防治中心接受手术治疗的716例食管鳞状细胞癌患者的临床资料,对其中117例45岁以下 （青年组）和599例大于45岁（中老年组）患者的临床病理特征及预后进行对比分析.结果 除肿瘤分期外,青年组与中老年组临床病理特征的差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）.青年组Ⅲ期患者所占比例为47.9％（56/117）,明显高于中老年组的33.6％（201/599,P=0.010）.但青年组与中老年组患者的预后差异并无统计学意义（5年生存率：36.0％比33.8％,10年生存率：29.2％比25.0％,P=0.418）.多因素预后分析显示,患者年龄不是食管癌的独立预后因素 （P=0.160,RR=1.187,95％CI：0.935～1.506）.结论 尽管青年人食管癌的病理分期较晚,但其预后与中老年人并无明显差异.     

早期壶腹癌的局部切除治疗

目的 评估早期壶腹癌局部切除的可行性.方法 回顾性分析20年间共36例术后病理证实为Tl期(pTl)的壶腹癌,其中局部切除11例,胰十二指肠切除25例.对其术前和术中的诊断和分期进行评价,同时对不同手术方式的围手术期并发症及死亡率、住院时间、术后肿瘤复发及长期生存状况进行统计分析.结果 与胰十二指肠切除术相比,局部切除手术操作简单,围手术期并发症发生率低(P=0.031);但两组的术后住院时间(P=0.254)、围手术期死亡率(P=1.000)、术后无复发生存率(P=0.301)及长期生存率(P=0.289)之间相比差异均无统计学意义.结论 对于早期壶腹癌来说局部切除与胰十二指肠切除的治疗效果相当,且术后并发症发生率低,适用于手术风险较大或拒绝行胰十二指肠切除术的患者.     

近端胃切除与全胃切除治疗贲门癌近远期疗效比较

目的探讨近端胃切除与全胃切除治疗贲门癌的近期和远期临床疗效。方法回顾性分析老河口市第一医院2009年1月至2013年1月收治的185例行根治性手术治疗的贲门癌患者,其中近端胃切除(近端组)79例,全胃切除(全胃组)106例,比较两组患者手术相关情况、远期生存和并发症。结果两组患者均顺利完成手术,无围手术期死亡病例。全胃组手术时间和手术出血量均高于近端组(t=5.015、3.852,均P0.01),但两组患者的术后住院时间和围手术期并发症发生率差异并无统计学意义。随访时间6.2~71.5个月,随访率为88.6%。近端组1、3、5年总生存率为75.3%、28.4%、19.3%;全胃组1、3、5年总生存率为80.0%、46.8%、32.7%。两组之间的总生存率差异有统计学意义(P=0.010),但两组患者Ⅰ期、Ⅱ期及Ⅲ期总生存率比较,差异均无统计学意义。近端组术后吻合口狭窄发生率和术后1年胃食管反流问卷(GERD-Q)评分高于全胃组(均P0.05),但两组吻合口溃疡、粘连性肠梗阻发生率和术后1年营养风险筛查评估表-2002(NRS-2002)评分比较,差异并无统计学意义。结论较近端胃切除,全胃切除术治疗贲门癌可以提高远期生存率,降低吻合口狭窄发生率,减轻反流症状。     

壶腹周围癌早期诊断与外科处理(附195例报道)

目的探讨根治性胰十二指肠切除术在壶腹周围癌(AVC)中的临床治疗价值。方法回顾性分析我院1995年3月至2009年3月期间收治的195例AVC患者的临床资料,根据治疗方式分为非手术组(n=51)、姑息性手术组(n=96)和手术切除组(n=48).结果手术切除组术后1、3及5年生存率较姑息性手术组及非手术组明显提高(P0.01),但手术切除组的并发症发生率较姑息性手术组和非手术组明显升高(P0.05).外科治疗的不同部位肿瘤中,胰头癌患者根治切除率较胆总管末段癌及十二指肠乳头癌患者明显降低(P0.01),并且胰头癌患者1、3及5年生存率也明显低于胆总管末段癌及十二指肠乳头癌患者(P0.05,P0.01).术前减黄治疗组与术前未减黄治疗组的围手术期并发症发生率、死亡率及1、3、5年生存率差异均无统计学意义(P0.05).各组中年龄70岁与≤70岁者的并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P0.05);但手术切除组年龄70岁者的围手术期死亡率明显高于≤70岁者(P0.05).结论外科手术切除仍然是治疗AVC的重要手段,尤其根治性胰十二指肠切除术是治疗壶腹周围癌的惟一有效方法,可以明显延长患者术后存活期,提高其生存质量。     

Proximal Versus Distal Gastric Carcinoma—What Are the Differences?

Background: The incidence of proximal gastric third carcinoma (PGC) has been rising in recent years. Classification and surgical therapy remain controversial.Methods: Between May 1986 and October 1997, 532 patients were operated for primary gastric carcinoma. All patient data were analyzed retrospectively comparing findings in patients with PGC and those with distal gastric carcinoma (DGC).Results: Two hundred fifty patients had a PGC, and 282 patients had a DGC. The rate of R0 resections was 79.3% for PGC and 81.6% for DGC. In 93.9% of the patients with PGC total gastrectomy was performed; for DGC total gastrectomy was done in 74.5% of patients. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 29.2% for PGC and 23.8% for DGC, and 3.2% for PGC and 3.5% for DGC, respectively. Patients with advanced tumor stages (stage III and IV) were more common in the PGC group (73.3% vs. 53.6% in DGC). After R0 resection, the 5-year survival rate was 33.2% for PGC and 59.7% for DGC.Conclusions: There was no significant difference between the rates of R0 resections for PGC and DGC. Total gastrectomy can be performed with low postoperative morbidity and mortality. PGC and DGC represent the same tumor entity, and prognosis is similar, but due to more advanced tumor stages, the long-term survival is worse for patients with PGC than for those with DGC. Left retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy may be indicated for PGC.     

Proximal compared with distal gastric cancer: multivariate analysis of prognostic factors.

The major determinants of the poor prognosis of the patients with proximal-third gastric cancer (proximal gastric cancer or PGC) when compared with that of patients with more distally located gastric tumors (distal gastric cancer or DGC) rely both on the more advanced age and tumor stage at the moment of clinical presentation and on the higher postoperative mortality for PGC patients. We reviewed hospital records of 707 patients with gastric cancer (187 with PGC and 520 with DGC) observed during the period 1981 through 1996 at the same surgical unit. Demographic and pathological data, type of treatment, and hospital morbidity and mortality rates were recorded. Univariate and multivariate survival analysis was used to calculate the 5-year survival probabilities with respect to the following clinical and pathological variables: age, sex, gross appearance according to Borrmann classification, histological type according to Lauren, stage of the disease, tumor location, and type of treatment. PGC was associated with more advanced tumor stage (P < 0.0001), older age (P = 0.039), and higher necessity of extended surgery (P < 0.0001) when compared with DGC. Hospital mortality was 9.6 and 5 per cent in PGC and DGC patients respectively (P = 0.033). Overall 5-year survival was 17.7 and 36.4 per cent in PGC and DGC patients (P < 0.0001): 35.9 versus 57.6% (P = 0.0001) and 3.7 versus 7.6 per cent (P = 0.03) after radical and palliative surgery respectively. At multivariate survival analysis proximal location was found to be independently associated (P = 0.0007) with poor survival. The multivariate model shows the proximal location as an independent predictor of lesser favorable outcome in gastric cancer. The major determinants of the poor prognosis of PGC with respect to DGC rely both on the more advanced age and tumor stage at the moment of clinical presentation and on the higher postoperative morbidity for PGC patients.     

Clinicopathological Characteristics of Patients with Proximal Third Gastric Carcinoma

Objective : Epidemiological studies show a continuing rise in the prevalence of proximal third gastric carcinoma (PGC), and the prognosis of patients with this carcinoma is poorer than that of patients with more distally located gastric carcinomas. We compared the clinicopathological features and prognosis of PGC patients with those of patients with middle/distal gastric carcinoma (MGC/DGC).

Material and methods : Of the 2696 patients diagnosed with gastric carcinoma who underwent surgery in our hospital in a 15-year period, 271 patients (10.1%) were diagnosed with PGC and retrospectively reviewed. Results : T1-category tumours were less common in patients with PGC than in patients with MGC/DGC (p < 0.001). Lymph node invasion was more common in patients with PGC than in patients with MGC/DGC (p < 0.05). Tumour stage (stage I) and T category (T1) significantly influenced the 5-year survival rates of patients whose tumours were resected with curative intent. The 5-year survival rate of patients whose PGC were resected with curative intent was higher than that of patients whose PGC were resected with palliative intent (57.4 vs. 12.6%, p < 0.001). The 5-year survival rate was 49.3% for patients with PGC and 57.3% for patients with MGC/DGC (p = 0.0273). Multivariate analysis showed that tumour size, lymph node status, and resection with curative intent were significant prognostic factors for survival in patients with PGC.

Conclusion : The poor prognosis of PGC is mainly due to its more advanced stage at diagnosis compared with that of more distally located gastric carcinoma. Early detection is important for improving the prognosis of patients with proximal third gastric carcinoma.     

Proximal gastric cancers resected via a transabdominal-only approach. Results and comparisons to distal adenocarcinoma of the stomach.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcome of patients with proximal gastric cancer (PGC) treated by a transabdominal-only resection to that of patients with distal gastric cancer (DGC). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: It has been suggested that PGC is inherently more aggressive than DGC. The worse survival of PGC compared with that of DGC may be in part, because of the difficulty distinguishing PGC from distal esophageal adenocarcinoma. By defining a subset of PGC resected using an transabdominal-only approach, one may discriminate true PGC from distal esophageal adenocarcinoma. This subset of patients is a more appropriate comparison group when analyzing outcome relative to patients with DGC. METHODS: A review of the prospective database for gastric adenocarcinoma at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between July 1985 and August 1995 identified 98 patients with PGC resection via a transabdominal-only approach. Of these, 65 underwent proximal gastrectomy and 33 underwent total gastrectomy. For DGC, 258 required a distal gastrectomy and 71 required total gastrectomy. RESULTS: The overall 5-year survival of patients with PGC was 42% (median survival, 47 months), whereas the 5-year survival for patients with DGC was 61% (median survival, 106 months, p = 0.03). Within each stage, there were no significant survival differences, but in all stages, survival was better for patients with DGC. More important, the site of the primary tumor appears to affect survival, with a worse outcome as the tumor moves proximally. CONCLUSIONS: Despite excluding distal esophageal cancers, survival for patients with PGC remains worse than for those with DGC. Late stage of presentation could not explain this difference. It appears that PGCs are inherently more aggressive than are DGCs. In addition, site of the primary tumor appears to affect outcome, with a trend toward a worse outcome as the tumor moves proximally.     

联合脾切除治疗胃上部癌No．10淋巴结转移的疗效

目的探讨D2根治术联合脾切除对进展期胃上部癌No．10淋巴结转移患者预后的影响。方法1980年1月至2002年12月,对216例进展期胃上部癌N0．10淋巴结转移患者施行D2根治术,其中联合脾切除术者（切脾组）73例,未联合脾切除术者（保脾组）143例。比较两组患者术后5年生存率、No．10淋巴结清扫数目及转移数目及术后并发症发生率和病死率。结果216例进展期胃上部癌No．10淋巴结转移患者中,切脾组和保脾组术后5年生存率分别为30．0％和19．7％,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。切脾组No．10淋巴结清扫数目及转移数目均明显高于保脾组（P〈0．05）。是否联合脾切除、肿瘤浸润深度和胃切除方式为影响预后的独立因素。T3期患者切脾组与保脾组5年生存率分别为38．7％和18．9％,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;全胃切除患者切脾组与保脾组5年生存率分别为33．4％和20．7％,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。切脾组和保脾组术后并发症发生率分别为24．7％和17．5％,病死率则分别为4．1％和3．5％,两组差异均无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论联合脾切除有利于进展期胃上部癌No．10淋巴结清扫。对于T3期胃上部癌No．10淋巴结转移患者,施行全胃联合脾切除能够提高疗效,不会增加患者术后并发症发生率和病死率。     

PPARγ辅激活因子1α在胃癌中的表达及临床意义

目的探讨过氧化物酶体增殖物激活受体γ辅激活因子1α(PGC1α)在胃癌组织中的表达情况及其临床意义。方法选取随访资料完整的99例胃癌组织标本,利用免疫组化技术检测胃癌组织中PGC1α的表达情况,并分析PGC1α表达与临床病理特征之间的关系及对生存预后的影响。结果 PGC1α在胃癌患者中的表达水平与肿瘤浸润深度、淋巴结转移、pTNM分期、组织分化程度及Borrmann分型密切相关(P0.05),而与复发、肿瘤大小、远处转移、性别及年龄无关(P0.05)。COX回归分析结果显示PGC1α的表达水平与总生存预后(OS)及无复发生存预后(RFS)密切相关,差异具有统计学意义(P=0.024),是胃癌患者预后的独立预测因素。结论PGC1α的表达水平与胃癌患者OS和RFS明显相关,其高表达是胃癌患者预后的独立保护因素。     

Total Pelvic Exenteration for Primary Local Advanced Colorectal Cancer

Total pelvic exenteration (TPE) is an ultraradical operative procedure for locally advanced pelvic tumors with high morbidity and mortality rates. We retrospectively reviewed the results of TPE for primary locally advanced colorectal cancer in terms of mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival. Of 2952 patients with colorectal cancer, 50 underwent TPE for primary locally advanced colorectal cancer between 1986 and 1995. There was one operative death (2%). The other 49 cases were entered into a retrospective study. Thirty-two cases (65%) showed involvement of one or more adjacent organs. Thirty-one patients (97%) had urologic organs invaded by tumor. The overall 5-year survival rate was 49% and the overall morbidity was 37%. The survival rate for stage II was 62%, and that for stage III was 35%; there was no survival in stage IV. Early morbidity was noted in 24% of patients; late morbidity, in 15%. TNM stage appeared to be the only independent factor for survival (p = 0.022). Our study showed that TPE can be performed with relatively low operative mortality and acceptable morbidity. With thorough preoperative evaluation and adequate surgical dissection, satisfactory outcomes for a primary locally advanced colorectal cancer can be achieved, especially at the earlier stages.     

根治性切除手术与姑息性切除手术对老年胃癌患者的创伤、预后比较分析

目的探讨老年胃癌患者采用根治性切除手术或姑息性切除手术治疗对患者手术创伤、远期预后的影响作用。方法选取2003年1月至2013年4月手术治疗的137例老年胃癌患者进行回顾性研究,根据手术方法分为根治组78例、姑息组59例,对比两种手术方法对患者的手术创伤的影响;根据患者术后3年是否存活分为存活组和死亡组,统计软件采用SPSS16.0,手术时间、输血量、住院时间采用均数±标准差(x珋±s)表示,两组间比较采用t检验;并发症率、生存率等比较采用χ2检验;多因素分析采用非条件Logistic回归分析法;P值0.05表示差异具有统计学意义。结果根治组患者的输血量显著的低于姑息组患者,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);术后2年、3年,根治组患者的的生存率分别为84.6%、59.0%均显著的高于姑息组的66.1%、33.9%,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);浸润深度越深、TNM分期越高、分化程度越低、姑息性手术方法是胃癌患者远期预后的危险因素(OR=1.772,OR=1.694,OR=1.593,OR=1.443),(P0.05)。结论老年胃癌患者采用根治性切除手术较姑息性手术并不会增加手术创伤程度,同时对于患者远期预后具有积极作用。     

37例残胃癌患者外科治疗的预后分析

目的探讨外科手术对残胃癌患者预后的影响。方法回顾性分析我院1993年1月至2003年3月收治的残胃癌患者的临床资料,按胃镜检查分期和外科手术方式进行分组,采用Kaplan-Meier方法绘制生存曲线,进行累积生存率的比较。结果37例残胃癌患者中,早期残胃癌9例(24.3%),进展期残胃癌28例(75.7%),两者根治术后累积5年生存率分别为55.3%和16.5%(P<0.01)。残胃癌根治性切除21例(56.8%),与姑息性手术组相比,两者中位生存时间分别为40.3和13.0个月,生存分析显示,差异具有显著性意义(P<0.01)。结论定期胃镜复查和合理的根治手术是提高残胃癌患者生存率的有效方法。     

Clinicopathologic features of mucinous gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Mucinous gastric carcinoma (MGC) is a histopathologic subtype of gastric carcinoma with a poor prognosis. The purpose of this study was to compare the disease course of MGC with non-mucinous gastric carcinoma (NMGC) and study the clinicopathologic features that influence the prognosis of MGC patients. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 2,383 patients with a confirmed histologic diagnosis of gastric carcinoma. There were 157 patients with MGC compared to 2,226 with NMGC. RESULTS: A depth of invasion greater than T3 was more frequently found in MGC than in NMGC. The mean number of lymph nodes with metastases was 2.78 in MGC and 2.28 in NMGC (p < 0.001). There were more MGC patients with TNM stages II through IV (UICC classification). The overall survival rate was lower for the MGC group (46.5%) than for the NMGC group (64.0%; p < 0.05). Depth of invasion, lymph node metastases, and stage at diagnosis were significant factors affecting the outcome. CONCLUSION: The factors influencing the poorer prognosis (lower 5-year survival rate) of MGC are the advanced stage at the time of diagnosis, lymph node metastases, and a higher TNM status. Mucinous histologic type itself was not an independent predictive factor in survival.