Routine lymph node dissection may be not suitable for all intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients: Results of a monocentric series

Table 2 Clinicopathologic characteristics of patients in the lymph node dissection (-) and lymph node dissection (+) lymph node (-) groups

Factor	LND (-)	LND (+) LN (-)	P value
	n = 61	n = 42
Gender			1.000
Female	13	9
Male	48	33
Age			0.516
≤ 60	44	27
> 60	17	15
Viral hepatitis			1.000
Yes	36	24
No	25	18
Cirrhosis			0.694
Yes	28	21
No	33	21
Child-Pugh class			0.735
A	55	39
B	6	3
CA19-9 (U/mL)			0.553
≤ 37	30	18
> 37	31	24
Histologic differentiation			0.498
Well or Moderate	44	33
Poor	17	9
Gross type			0.433
MF	43	28
PI	4	7
IG	5	2
MF + PI	5	4
MF + IG	4	1
Tumor number			0.510
Single	45	28
Multiple	16	14
Tumor size (cm)			0.318
< 5	33	18
≥ 5	28	24
TNM classification			0.080
Early (stage I, II)	47	25
Advanced (stage III, IV)	14	17
Width of resection margin (cm)			0.229
< 1	33	17
≥ 1	28	25
Surgical procedure			0.153
Major hepatectomy	41	22
Minor hepatectomy	20	20

CA19-9: Carbohydrate antigen 19-9; IG: Intraductal growth; LN: Lymph node; LND: Lymph node dissection; MF: Mass-forming; PI: Periductal infiltrating; TNM: Tumor-node-metastasis.