Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer

miR-424-5p promotes proliferation of gastric cancer by targeting Smad3 through TGF-β signaling pathway

MiRNAs have been reported to regulate gene expression and be associated with cancer progression. Recently, miR-424-5p was reported to play important role in a variety of tumors. However, the role and molecular mechanisms of miR-424-5p in GC (gastric cancer) remains largely unknown. In this study, we aimed to explore the role of miR-424-5p in GC. QRT-PCR was used to determine the expression levels of miR-424-5p and Smad3. CCK8 assay, plate clone assay and cell cycle assay were used to measure the effects of miR-424-5p on GC cell proliferation. Luciferase reporter assay and western blotting were used to prove that Smad3 was one of the direct targets of miR-424-5p. Tumorigenesis assay was used to investigate the role of miR-424-5p in tumor growth of GC cells in vivo. We found that miR-424-5p was up-regulated in GC tissues and cells. Over-expression of miR-424-5p could promote the proliferation of GC cells. In addition, luciferase reporter assay and western blotting assay revealed that Smad3 was a direct target of miR-424-5p. Over-expression of Smad3 could partially reverse the effects of miR-424-5p on GC cell proliferation. Our study further revealed that miR-424-5p could inhibit TGF-β signaling pathway by Smad3.

Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a comparison with open procedure at the beginning of the learning curve

BACKGROUND

In the last decades, after some initial concern, laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) is gaining popularity also for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study is to compare a single surgeon initial experience on LSG and open subtotal gastrectomy in terms of surgical safety and radicality, postoperative recovery and midterm oncological outcomes.

METHODS

a case control study was conducted matching the first 13 LSG for AGC with 13 open procedures performed by the same surgeon. Operative and pathological data, postoperative parameters and midterm oncological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in mortality (0%) and morbidity, while the laparoscopic approach allowed lower analgesic consumption and faster bowel movement recovery. Operation time was significantly higher in LSG patients (301.5 vs 232 min, p: 0.023), with an evident learning curve effect. Both groups had a high rate of adequate lymph node harvest, but the number was significantly higher in LSG group (p: 0.033). No significant difference in survival was registered. Multivariate analysis identified age at diagnosis, diffuse-type tumor, pN and LODDS as independent predictors of worse prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG can be safely performed for the treatment of AGC, allowing faster postoperative recovery.

Gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the review published in 2013.Laparoscopic surgery is now widely performed to treat various abdominal diseases. Currently, carbon dioxide is the most frequently used gas for insufflation of the abdominal cavity (pneumoperitoneum). Although carbon dioxide meets most of the requirements for pneumoperitoneum, the absorption of carbon dioxide may be associated with adverse events. People with high anaesthetic risk are more likely to experience cardiopulmonary complications and adverse events, for example hypercapnia and acidosis, which has to be avoided by hyperventilation. Therefore, other gases have been introduced as alternatives to carbon dioxide for establishing pneumoperitoneum.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety, benefits, and harms of different gases (i.e. carbon dioxide, helium, argon, nitrogen, nitrous oxide, and room air) used for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants undergoing laparoscopic general abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2016, Issue 9), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to September 2016), Ovid Embase (1974 to September 2016), Science Citation Index Expanded (1970 to September 2016), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to September 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (September 2016), and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (September 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum in participants (irrespective of age, sex, or race) undergoing laparoscopic abdominal or gynaecological pelvic surgery under general anaesthesia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias independently. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or Peto odds ratio for very rare outcomes), and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used GRADE to rate the quality of evidence, MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs, randomising 519 participants, comparing different gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum: nitrous oxide (three trials), helium (five trials), or room air (one trial) was compared to carbon dioxide. Three trials randomised participants to nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum (100 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (96 participants). None of the trials was at low risk of bias. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide on cardiopulmonary complications (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.38 to 10.43; two studies; 140 participants; very low quality of evidence), or surgical morbidity (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.18 to 5.71; two studies; 143 participants; very low quality of evidence). There were no serious adverse events related to either nitrous oxide or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (three studies; 196 participants; very low quality of evidence). We could not combine data from two trials (140 participants) which individually showed lower pain scores (a difference of about one visual analogue score on a scale of 1 to 10 with lower numbers indicating less pain) with nitrous oxide pneumoperitoneum at various time points on the first postoperative day, and this was rated asvery low quality .Four trials randomised participants to helium pneumoperitoneum (69 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (75 participants) and one trial involving 33 participants did not state the number of participants in each group. None of the trials was at low risk of bias. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of helium or carbon dioxide on cardiopulmonary complications (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 6.12; three studies; 128 participants; very low quality of evidence) or pain scores (visual analogue score on a scale of 1 to 10 with lower numbers indicating less pain; MD 0.49 cm, 95% CI -0.28 to 1.26; two studies; 108 participants; very low quality of evidence). There were three serious adverse events (subcutaneous emphysema) related to helium pneumoperitoneum (three studies; 128 participants; very low quality of evidence).One trial randomised participants to room air pneumoperitoneum (70 participants) or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (76 participants). The trial was at unclear risk of bias. There were no cardiopulmonary complications or serious adverse events observed related to either room air or carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (both outcomes very low quality of evidence). The evidence of lower hospital costs and reduced pain during the first postoperative day with room air pneumoperitoneum compared with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum (a difference of about one visual analogue score on a scale of 1 to 10 with lower numbers indicating less pain, was rated as very low quality of evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the current evidence is very low. The effects of nitrous oxide and helium pneumoperitoneum compared with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum are uncertain. Evidence from one trial of small sample size suggests that room air pneumoperitoneum may decrease hospital costs in people undergoing laparoscopic abdominal surgery. The safety of nitrous oxide, helium, and room air pneumoperitoneum has yet to be established.Further trials on this topic are needed, and should compare various gases (i.e. nitrous oxide, helium, argon, nitrogen, and room air) with carbon dioxide under standard pressure pneumoperitoneum with cold gas insufflation for people with high anaesthetic risk. Future trials should include outcomes such as complications, serious adverse events, quality of life, and pain.

Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a comparison with open procedure at the beginning of the learning curve

BACKGROUND

In the last decades, after some initial concern, laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) is gaining popularity also for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study is to compare a single surgeon initial experience on LSG and open subtotal gastrectomy in terms of surgical safety and radicality, postoperative recovery and midterm oncological outcomes.

METHODS

a case control study was conducted matching the first 13 LSG for AGC with 13 open procedures performed by the same surgeon. Operative and pathological data, postoperative parameters and midterm oncological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in mortality (0%) and morbidity, while the laparoscopic approach allowed lower analgesic consumption and faster bowel movement recovery. Operation time was significantly higher in LSG patients (301.5 vs 232 min, p: 0.023), with an evident learning curve effect. Both groups had a high rate of adequate lymph node harvest, but the number was significantly higher in LSG group (p: 0.033). No significant difference in survival was registered. Multivariate analysis identified age at diagnosis, diffuse-type tumor, pN and LODDS as independent predictors of worse prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG can be safely performed for the treatment of AGC, allowing faster postoperative recovery.

A Step-Wise Approach to Total Laparoscopic Gastrectomy with Jejunal Pouch Reconstruction: How and Why We Do It

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is a safe alternative compared to open gastrectomy for cancer. To increase the uptake of minimally invasive approaches and facilitate their analysis and improvement a stepwise approach is warranted. This study describes our technique and experiences total laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) with jejunal pouch reconstruction for gastric cancer. Technical modifications throughout the years were described. In patients with anastomotic leakage, the CT-scan and reoperation report were reviewed to identify the location and cause of the leak. A total of 47 patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy with extracorporeal jejunal pouch reconstruction and stapled circular esophagojejunostomy from May 2007 to August 2015 were prospectively analyzed. A stepwise approach of 10 steps was designed based on video and case analysis. Median operation time was 301 (148-454) minutes and median blood loss was 300 (30-900) milliliters. Anastomotic leakage occurred in six (12.8 %) patients; additionally, one (2.12 %) jejunal-pouch staple line leak was identified. An important modification in our technique was a purse-string suture around the anvil of the circular stapler to prevent esophageal mucosa to slip away. After this modification, the leakage rate was reduced to 7 % in the last 15 procedures. In conclusion, TLG with jejunal pouch reconstruction is a feasible procedure in a selected group of patients. Our stepwise approach and technique may help surgeons to introduce jejunal pouch reconstruction during laparoscopic gastrectomy in their center.