Association between R1 resection and oncological outcome in resectable gastrointestinal stromal tumors without tumor rupture: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

BACKGROUND\nThe influence of positive microscopic margin (R1) resection on the prognosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is controversial. Tumor rupture is significantly associated with the occurrence of R1 resection and may be a confounder of R1 resection in GISTs. The present meta-analysis evaluated the real influence of R1 resection on the prognosis of GISTs by excluding the confounding effect of tumor rupture.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Studies that compared R1 with negative microscopic margin (R0) resection in GIST patients and reported the time-to-event data of recurrence-free survival (RFS) or disease-free survival (DFS) were eligible for inclusion. The quality of the observational studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf the 4896 records screened, 23 retrospective studies with 6248 participants were selected. In the overall analysis, R1 resection resulted in a significantly shorter RFS/DFS than R0 resection for GISTs (HR\xa0=\xa01.80, 95% CI\xa0=\xa01.54-2.10, P\xa0<\xa00.001, I2\xa0=\xa014%). However, the inferior RFS/DFS vanished when tumor rupture cases were excluded (HR\xa0=\xa01.34, 95% CI\xa0=\xa00.98-1.83, P\xa0=\xa00.07, I2\xa0=\xa033%). Sensitivity analysis by high-quality studies brought about a more robust HR of 1.15 (95% CI\xa0=\xa00.88-1.50, P\xa0=\xa00.29), with low heterogeneity (I2\xa0=\xa00%). The qualities of evidence for the outcomes were high.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThis meta-analysis shows that R1 resection did not influence the survival outcome of GISTs. Reresection may not be necessary when positive microscopic margins exist. This analysis could provide high-quality evidence for the development of guidelines.