Dataset related to article "The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial."
<p>This record contains data related to article "The Role of Pathological Method and Clearance Definition for the Evaluation of Margin Status after Pancreatoduodenectomy for Periampullary Cancer. Results of a Multicenter Prospective Randomized Trial."</p> <p>Background: There is extreme heterogeneity in the available literature on the determination of R1 resection rate after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD); consequently, its prognostic role is still debated. The aims of this multicenter randomized study were: to evaluate the effect of sampling and clearance definition in determining R1 rate after PD for periampullary cancer; to assess the prognostic role of R1 resection.</p> <p>Methods: PD specimens were randomized to Leeds Pathology Protocol (LEEPP) (group A) or conventional method adopted before the study (group B). R1 rate was determined adopting 0 and 1 mm clearance; the association between R1, local recurrence (LR) and overall survival (OS) was also evaluated.</p> <p>Results. One-hundred-sixty-eight PD specimens were included. With 0 mm clearance, R1 rate was 26.2% and 20.2% for groups A and B, respectively; with 1 mm, R1 rate was 60.7% and 57.1%, respectively (p > 0.05). Only in group A, R1 was found to be a significant prognostic factor: at 0 mm, median OS was 36 and 20 months for R0 and R1, respectively, while at 1 mm. median OS was not reached and 30 months. At multivariate analysis, R1 resection was found as a significant prognostic factor independent of clearance definition only in case of adoption of LEEPP.</p> <p>Conclusions. The 1 mm clearance is the most effective factor in determining R1 rate after PD. However, the pathological method is crucial to accurately evaluate its prognostic role: only R1 resections obtained with the adoption of LEEPP seem to significantly affect prognosis.</p>
ShareScore
12/100
Overall dataset sharing score
Score breakdown
These five areas show where the dataset supports — or may limit — practical reuse.
- Stewardship
- 4
- Harmonization
- 4
- Access
- 0
- Reuse readiness
- 0
- Engagement
- 4