Oncological safety of proximal gastrectomy for T2/T3 proximal gastric cancer

Current status of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy in proximal gastric cancer: Technical details and oncologic outcomes

The incidence of proximal gastric cancer has been increasing continuously. This status has prevailed despite the application of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy as a surgical treatment for early proximal gastric cancer. The widespread adoption and standardization of this surgical procedure as the primary treatment for the abovementioned cancer has been hampered by the lack of consensus on the optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy. In addition, the oncological safety of proximal gastrectomy for advanced gastric disease remains unclear. We reviewed the English-language literature to clarify the current status of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy in proximal gastric cancer. Japanese gastric cancer guidelines have suggested three types of reconstructions for proximal gastrectomy, namely, esophagogastrostomy, double-tract reconstruction, and jejunal interposition. Optimal reconstruction methods remain to be determined because of the lack of adequately performed and well-designed randomized controlled trials. The technical complexity and challenging implementation of reconstruction procedures have resulted in several complications with anastomoses. Multicenter randomized controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the various reconstruction methods and the oncological safety of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for advanced gastric disease.

Proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database analysis

Aims: To addresses whether surgical procedure (proximal gastrectomy [PG] vs total gastrectomy [TG]) influences survival outcomes. Methods: Patients were selected from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER) database. Survival curve was used to evaluate the differences in overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Results: No significant difference was detected in OS and CSS time between PG and TG groups. Also, no significant differences were observed in OS and CSS times between the two groups with respect to clinical stage, tumor stage, node stage, age, gender and tumor differentiation. Tumor differentiation, tumor size, tumor stage, node stage and age were independent prognostic factors in patients with proximal gastric cancer. Conclusions: TG was not necessary for proximal gastric cancer patients, and PG may be considered as an ideal surgery approach.

Short and long-term outcomes after proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction for Siewert type III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a propensity score matching study from a 10-year experience in a high-volume hospital

BACKGROUND

Total gastrectomy and proximal gastrectomy (PG) are both surgical options for the treatment of Siewert type III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Currently there is no consensus on selecting which procedure to perform; in particular, there are few reports of long-term outcomes for patients with local advanced AEG. The aim of this study was to validate the usefulness of PG with double-tract reconstruction in Siewert type III AEG.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with Siewert type III AEG underwent PG with double-tract reconstruction (PG-DT) or total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis (TG-RY) at our hospital between October 2010 and October 2018. According to the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2,146 cases were enrolled in this study. A 1-to-1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare the short and long-term outcomes between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The operation time was longer in the PG-DT group, and the proportion rates of complications and recovery time was similar in the 2 groups. The rates of maintaining bodyweight and free-fat mass index were significantly higher in patients who underwent PG-DT compared to those who underwent TG-RY. While complications, recovery time and survival are similar between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding short-term outcomes, PG-DT seemed to be superior in terms of maintaining body weight and skeletal muscle compared to TG-RY, while both had similar complications. It was found that PG-DT enabled a potentially longer survival of pathological stage II and III Siewert type III AEG, although the finding was statistically insignificant. These results may help surgeons to determine the appropriate surgical approach and strategy for patients with early and locally advanced Siewert type III AEG.

Semi-embedded valve anastomosis a new anti-reflux anastomotic method after proximal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction

Background

There is a high probability of gastroesophageal reflux after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction (AEG). Various anti-reflux anastomotic methods are emerging in clinical practice; however, none of them have been widely accepted. We have innovated a new type of anti-reflux anastomotic method, named semi-embedded valve anastomosis. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility and anti-reflux effect of the new anastomotic method.

Methods

The clinical data of 28 patients with Siewert II AEG who were treated by semi-embedded valve anastomosis were collected. The key point of the operation is to reconstruct a simulated valve and form an anti-reflux barrier similar to the physiological mechanism. The gastroesophageal reflux disease questionnaire (GerdQ) and classification of gastroesophageal reflux under electron microscopy were used to evaluate gastroesophageal reflux after the operation.

Results

The mean operative duration was 164.3 ± 19.0 min, the median intraoperative haemorrhage volume was 65 ml, the average number of lymph nodes dissected was 23 ± 2.6, the time for valve construction was 15.8 ± 3.2 min, the time for anastomotic reconstruction was 35.4 ± 4.8 min, the median time to first flatus was 3 d, and the median hospitalization duration was 12 d. There was one case of postoperative anastomotic stenosis. The GerdQ score [median (range)] was as follows: 2 (0–6), preoperation; 0 (0–8), 1 month postoperation; 2 (0–12), 3 months postoperation; and 3 (0–12), 6 months postoperation. The Wilcoxon signed-rank sum test was carried out at different times after the operation and the day before the operation, and the differences were not significant. There was one case of grade B gastroesophageal reflux according to the Los Angeles classification system among the gastrofibroscopic re-examination reports of 28 cases.

Conclusion

Semi-embedded valve anastomosis is safe and feasible after proximal gastrectomy for Siewert II AEG and has good anti-reflux effects.

Treatment Selection and Survival Outcomes in Locally Advanced Proximal Gastric Cancer: A National Cancer Data Base Analysis

Background: We aimed to assess long-term survival between locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (LAPGC) patients who underwent proximal gastrectomy (PG) and those who underwent total gastrectomy (TG) to evaluate the optimal extent of resection and adjuvant therapy.

Materials and Methods: Patients diagnosed with locally advanced proximal gastric adenocarcinoma were selected from the National Cancer Data Base (2004–2015) in America. Survival analysis was performed via Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models.

Results: A total of 4,381 eligible patients were identified, 1,243 underwent PG and 3,138 underwent TG. Patients in TG group had a poor prognosis (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03–1.25) compared with those in PG group. Moreover, postoperative chemoradiation therapy was associated with improved overall survival compared to surgery alone (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53–0.97) in LAPGC patients who had PG, while preoperative chemotherapy (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.59–0.92) was associated with improved survival among patients who had TG.

Conclusions: Our study suggested that LAPGC patients underwent PG experienced better long-term outcomes than those underwent TG. It also suggested that multimodality treatment of LAPGC, including preoperative chemotherapy followed by TG or postoperative chemotherapy followed by PG, should be considered to achieve better long-term outcomes.

Current status of proximal gastrectomy for gastric and esophagogastric junctional cancer: A review

Proximal gastrectomy (PG) is one of the function-preserving surgical methods for the treatment of upper gastric cancer. Favorable postoperative results have been reported in comparison with total gastrectomy. However, because there are challenges, such as postoperative reflux esophagitis, anastomotic stenosis, and residual food, appropriate selection of a reconstruction method is crucial. Some methods include esophagogastric anastomosis, including simple esophagogastrostomy, tube-like stomach esophagogastrostomy, side overlap with fundoplication by Yamashita, and double-flap technique, and reconstruction using the small intestine, including double-tract methods, jejunal interposition, and jejunal pouch interposition. However, standard reconstruction methods are yet to be established. PG has also been employed in early gastric cancer of the upper third of the stomach, and indications have also been extended to esophagogastric junction cancer, which has shown an increase in recent years. Although many retrospective studies have revealed the functional benefits or oncological safety of PG, the characteristics of each surgical procedure should be understood so that an appropriate reconstruction method, with a reflux prevention mechanism and minimal postoperative injury, can be selected.