Skip to main content
. 2024 May 9;24(3):280–290. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2024.24.e21

Table 3. Comparison of clinicopathological features between pseudo-fornix located MRGCs and non-pseudo-fornix located MRGCs of the non-ER group (n=12).

Variables Pseudo-fornix (n=6) Non-pseudo fornix (n=6) P-values
Interval time (mo) 60.0 (31–96) 78.0 (24–111) 1
Macroscopic type 0.182
Type 0-IIa/Type 0-IIc 3 (50.0) 6 (100.0)
Type 2/Type 3 3 (50.0) 0 (0.0)
Tumor size (mm) 36.0 (7–57) 14.0 (9–24) 0.060
Histological type 0.060
Differentiated type 2 (33.3) 6 (100.0)
Undifferentiated type 4 (66.7) 0 (0.0)
Tumor depth 0.060
≤pT1b1(SM1) 0 (0.0) 4 (66.7)
≥pT1b2(SM2) 6 (100.0) 2 (33.3)
Lymph node metastasis 0.182
Positive 3 (50.0) 0 (0.0)
Negative 3 (50.0) 6 (100.0)
Distal metastasis 0.456
Positive 2 (33.3) 0 (0.0)
Negative 4 (66.7) 6 (100.0)
Lymphovascular invasion 0.567
Positive 2 (33.3) 4 (66.7)
Negative or not evaluated 4 (66.7) 2 (33.3)
Treatment 1
Surgery 4 (66.7) 5 (83.3)
Chemotherapy or best supportive care 2 (33.3) 1 (16.7)

Values are presented as number (%) or median (range).

MRGC = metachronous remnant gastric cancer; ER = endoscopic resection.