Total and subtotal laparoscopic gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma

Totally robotic proximal gastrectomy with esophagogastrostomy using a double-flap technique

Proximal gastrectomy (PG) with D1 + lymphadenectomy and anti-reflux reconstruction is a standard surgical procedure for early-stage (EGC) proximal gastric cancer (PGC) in the East. The double-flap technique (DFT) for esophagogastrostomy has been established as an optimal anti-reflux reconstructive method after PG. However, its technical difficulty makes it a procedure not yet performed in the West. We present the technique of robotic PG with D1 + lymphadenectomy and DFT. The technique was learned during a period of attendance at the National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan. A 70-year-old patient was submitted to endoscopic submucosal dissection for EGC-PGC. The pathologic report showed pT1b R1 disease. Additional surgery was recommended. Surgery was accomplished via a totally robotic approach (da Vinci Xi Surgical System). The patient was placed in a supine position with legs apart. Four robotic trocars and two laparoscopic trocars were placed above the transversal umbilical line. The surgical steps are summarized as follows: opening of the lesser omentum; dissection of the abdominal esophagus and lymphadenectomy of no. 1, 2 stations; partial omentectomy with lymphadenectomy of no. 4sa and 4sb stations and ligation of the left gastro-epiploic vessels; lymphadenectomy of no. 3a, 7, 8a, 9, 11p stations; transection of the esophagus; proximal gastrectomy; dissection of the posterior aspect of the remnant stomach; creation of the seromuscular flap; posterior esophageal suspension; anastomosis; flap closure. Pathology report showed the absence of residual disease with 27 lymph nodes collected from the specimen. After 1 year, the patient is disease free; no reflux esophagitis, weight loss, or anastomotic stricture was reported on follow-up. To the best of our knowledge, no other previous cases have been reported in the West describing the present surgical technique. The authors propose that PG with DFT seems feasible in a Western setting, representing an important and desirable skill for any referral center for gastric cancer surgical oncology.

Importance of duodenal stump reinforcement to prevent stump leakage after gastrectomy: a large-scale multicenter retrospective study (KSCC DELICATE study)

BACKGROUND

The significance of reinforcement of the duodenal stump with seromuscular sutures and the effectiveness of reinforced staplers in preventing duodenal stump leakage remain unclear. We aimed to explore the importance of duodenal stump reinforcement and determine the optimal reinforcement method for preventing duodenal stump leakage.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2021, with data analyzed between December 1, 2022 and September 30, 2023. This multicenter study across 57 institutes in Japan included 16,475 patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomies. Elective open or minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) gastrectomy was performed in patients with gastric cancer.

RESULTS

Duodenal stump leakage occurred in 153 (0.93%) of 16,475 patients. The proportions of males, patients aged ≥ 75 years, and ≥ pN1 were higher in patients with duodenal stump leakage than in those without duodenal stump leakage. The incidence of duodenal stump leakage was significantly lower in the group treated with reinforcement by seromuscular sutures or using reinforced stapler than in the group without reinforcement (0.72% vs. 1.19%, p = 0.002). Duodenal stump leakage incidence was also significantly lower in high-volume institutions than in low-volume institutions (0.70% vs. 1.65%, p = 0.047). The rate of duodenal stump leakage-related mortality was 7.8% (12/153). In the multivariate analysis, preoperative asthma and duodenal invasion were identified as independent preoperative risk factors for duodenal stump leakage-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The duodenal stump should be reinforced to prevent duodenal stump leakage after radical gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer.

A Systematic Review of Varying Definitions and the Clinical Significance of Fredet's Fascia in the Era of Complete Mesocolic Excision

BACKGROUND

Fredet's fascia represents a crucial landmark for vascular surgical anatomy, especially in minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right-sided colon adenocarcinoma. Fredet's fascia allows access to the gastrocolic trunk of Henle (GCTH), the most critical step in both open and minimally invasive right-sided CME techniques. Despite this, a recent workshop of expert surgeons on the standardization of the laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME did not recognize or include the term of Fredet's fascia or area. Hence, we undertook a systematic review of articles that include the terms "Fredet's fascia or area", or synonyms thereof, with special emphasis on the types of articles published, the nationality, and the relevance of this area to surgical treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review up to 15 July 2022 on PubMed, WOS, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

The results of the study revealed that the term "Fredet's fascia" is poorly used in the English language medical literature. In addition, the study found controversial and conflicting data among authors regarding the definition of "Fredet's fascia" and its topographical limits.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of Fredet's fascia's surgical relevance is essential for colorectal surgeons to avoid accidental injuries to the superior mesenteric vascular pedicle during minimally invasive right hemicolectomies with CME. In order to avoid confusion and clarify this fascia for future use, we suggest moving beyond the use of the eponymous term by using a "descriptive term" instead, based on the fascia's anatomic structure. Fredet's fascia could, therefore, be more appropriately renamed "sub-mesocolic pre-duodenopancreatic fascia".

Factors affecting the quality of laparoscopic D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: a cohort study from two randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic D2 lymph node dissection (LND) for gastric cancer has a wide range and high difficulty. In the past, the quality of surgery was often judged by the time of the operation or the amount of blood loss, but the analysis based on surgical video was rarely reported. The purpose of this study was to analyze the relationship between the quality of laparoscopic D2 LND for gastric cancer and postoperative complications.

METHODS

The surgical video and clinicopathological data of 610 patients in two randomized controlled trials in our center from 2013 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Klass-02-QC LND scale and general error score tool were used to quantitatively evaluate the intraoperative performance of D2 LND. Logistic regression was used to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of complications (CD classification≥2) was 20.6%; the incidence of surgical complications was 6.9%. According to whether the LND score reached 44, patients were divided into a qualified group (73%) and a not-qualified group (27%). Event score (ES) by quartile was divided into grade 1 (21.7%), grade 2 (26%), grade 3 (28%), and grade 4 (24.3%) from low to high. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that ES greater than or equal to 3, tumor size greater than or equal to 35 mm, and cTNM >II were independent risk factors for not-qualified LND. Male,tumor size greater than or equal to 35 mm and cTNM >II were independent risk factors for grade 4 ES. Not-qualified LND (OR=1.62, 95% CI: 1.16-3.89, P =0.021), grade 4 ES (OR=3.21, 95% CI: 1.52-3.90, P =0.035), and cTNM >II (OR=1.74, 95% CI: 1.39-7.33, P =0.041) were independent risk factors for postoperative surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The qualification of LND and intraoperative events based on surgical video are the independent influencing factors of postoperative complications of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery. Specialist training and teaching based on surgical video may help to improve the surgical skills of specialists and improve the postoperative outcome of patients.

Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Gastric Cancer in Western Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

Background. The advantages of a laparoscopic approach for the treatment of gastric cancer have already been demonstrated in Eastern Countries. This review and meta-analysis aims to merge all the western studies comparing laparoscopic (LG) versus open gastrectomies (OG) to provide pooled results and higher levels of evidence. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE(PubMed), Embase, WebOfScience and Scopus for studies comparing laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in western centers from 1980 to 2021. Results. After screening 355 articles, 34 articles with a total of 24,098 patients undergoing LG (5445) or OG (18,653) in western centers were included. Compared to open gastrectomy, laparoscopic gastrectomy has a significantly longer operation time (WMD = 47.46 min; 95% CI = 31.83−63.09; p < 0.001), lower blood loss (WMD = −129.32 mL; 95% CI = −188.11 to −70.53; p < 0.0001), lower analgesic requirement (WMD = −1.824 days; 95% CI = −2.314 to −1.334; p < 0.0001), faster time to first oral intake (WMD = −1.501 days; 95% CI = −2.571 to −0.431; p = 0.0060), shorter hospital stay (WMD = −2.335; 95% CI = −3.061 to −1.609; p < 0.0001), lower mortality (logOR = −0.261; 95% the −0.446 to −0.076; p = 0.0056) and a better 3-year overall survival (logHR 0.245; 95% CI = 0.016−0.474; p = 0.0360). A slight significant difference in favor of laparoscopic gastrectomy was noted for the incidence of postoperative complications (logOR = −0.202; 95% CI = −0.403 to −0.000 the = 0.0499). No statistical difference was noted based on the number of harvested lymph nodes, the rate of major postoperative complication and 5-year overall survival. Conclusions. In Western centers, laparoscopic gastrectomy has better short-term and equivalent long-term outcomes compared with the open approach, but more high-quality studies on long-term outcomes are required.

Laparoscopic vs. Open Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Case-Control Study

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries, the use of minimally invasive techniques has not attained the same widespread acceptance for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its feasibility and oncological adequacy. We aimed to examine the safety and oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic technique with radical intent for the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer by comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy at two Western regional institutions. Methods: The trial was designed as a retrospective comparative matched case-control study for postoperative pathological diagnoses of locally advanced gastric carcinoma. Between January 2015 and September 2021, 120 consecutive patients who underwent curative-intent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were retrospectively recruited and compared with 120 patients who received open gastrectomy. In order to obtain a comparison that was as homogeneous as possible, the equal control group of pairing (1:1) patients submitted to open gastrectomy who matched those of the laparoscopic group was statistically generated by using a propensity matched score method. The following potential confounder factors were aligned: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidity, ASA, adjuvant therapy, tumour location, type of gastrectomy, and pT stage. Patient demographics, operative findings, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: In the case-control study, the two groups were clearly comparable with respect to matched variables, as was expected given the intentional primary selective criteria. No statistically significant differences were revealed in overall complications (16.7% vs. 20.8%, p = 0.489), rate of reoperation (3.3% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.714), and mortality (4.2% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.987) within 30 days. Pulmonary infection and wound complications were observed more frequently in the OG group (0.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.01, for each of these two categories). Anastomotic and duodenal stump leakage occurred in 5.8% of the patients after laparoscopic gastrectomy and in 3.3% after open procedure (p = 0.072). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly longer operative time (212 vs. 192 min, p < 0.05) but shorter postoperative length of stay (9.1 vs. 11.6 days, p < 0.001). The mean number of resected lymph nodes after D2 dissection (31.4 vs. 33.3, p = 0.134) and clearance of surgical margins (97.5% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.432) were equivalent between the groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection appears to be safe and feasible in terms of perioperative morbidity for locally advanced gastric cancer, with comparable oncological equivalency with respect to traditional open surgery.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: has the time come for considered it a standard procedure?

Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymphadenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer. A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase III evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer. At present, laparoscopic gastrectomy is considered a standard procedure for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries. On the other hand, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer have been recently published, in particular concerning the latest results obtained by laparoscopic approach to advanced gastric cancer. It seems very useful to update the review of literature in light of these new evidences for this subject and draw some considerations.

Laparoscopic Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy for pT1a Adenocarcinoma: Case Report and Literature Review

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignancies, associated with a high mortality and morbidity rate, especially in the elderly, the fourth leading cause of cancer mortality in Europe. Although the rate of diagnosis has declined in recent years, the prognosis of the disease and the mortality rate is still quite high. Laparoscopic surgery, accompanied by lymphadenectomy, is a curative method of treatment, used more and more frequently, especially in Eastern countries, both in the incipient disease and in advanced stages of the disease, which has many advantages over classical surgery.

We report the case of an 86-year-old man, who presented for marked physical asthenia, weight loss and severe anemia, in whom we performed laparoscopic distal radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy and Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Histopathological examination established the diagnosis of low-grade / well-differentiated tubular adenocarcinoma G1 (WHO) / intestinal carcinoma (Lauren), with invasion in the lamina propria, developed on an intestinal-type adenoma. 21 lymph nodes were taken without tumor invasion.

This case highlights the complexity of laparoscopic intervention, with the proven advantages for the patient, like reduced surgical trauma and pain, with the decrease of postoperative complications, but also the difficulty of the surgical technique which requires advanced laparoscopic skills. Thus, in addition to its proven efficacy in cases of early gastric cancer, the technique can be extended to advanced malignancies, without affecting the oncological safety limit.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic technique has been widely applied for early gastric cancer, with the advantages of minimal invasion and quick recovery. However, there is no report about the safety and oncological outcome of laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

CASE SUMMARY

A 60-year-old man was diagnosed with advanced distal gastric cancer, cT4aN1M0 stage III. The neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was performed based on the regimen of gross tumor volume 50G y/25 f and clinical target volume 45 Gy/25 f, as well as concurrent S-1 60 mg Bid. Then laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection was undertaken successfully for him after achieving partial response evaluated by radiological examination. The patient recovered smoothly without moderate or severe postoperative complications. The postoperative pathological stage was ypT3N0M0 with American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor regression grade 1. He was still in good condition after 5 years of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by laparoscopic technique could be applicable and may achieve satisfactory oncological outcomes. Our finding requires further validation by cohort studies.

[Evidence in minimally invasive oncological gastric surgery]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence on laparoscopic and robotic distal and total gastrectomy in comparison to open surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search of EMBASE and PubMed was conducted and 197 randomized (RCT) and non-randomized (non-RCT) studies were identified. An evaluation of early gastric cancer (EGC) and advanced (AGC) gastric cancer was carried out.

RESULTS

For EGC and laparoscopic distal resection (LDG) and total gastrectomy (LTG) a total of 10 RCT and 6 non-RCT, including 4329 patients (laparoscopic 2010 vs. open 2319) were identified. At a high evidence level (1+, 1++) there was no significant difference in terms of feasibility, intraoperative outcome and oncological quality, mortality and long-term oncological outcome compared to open gastrectomy (OG). After LDG and LTG patients showed a significantly faster early postoperative recovery and lower total morbidity. In contrast, the operation times were significant longer compared to ODG and OTG. For distal AGC and LDG in 6 RCT, including 2806 patients (LDG 1410 vs. ODG 1369) comparable results could be found also with a high evidence level (1++). The evidence for LTG in cases of AGC was lower (2-, 2+). Currently ,only 6 non-RCT with a total of 1090 patients (LTG 539 vs. OTG 551) are available, which showed comparable results to LDG but further high-quality RCTs are necessary. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is currently being evaluated. According to the first studies RG for EGC seems to be equivalent to LDG; however, the evidence is currently low (3 to 2-).

Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer: The European Point of View

Objective

Multiple Asian studies have proved the feasibility of laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of gastric cancer. The difference between Asian and European patients could limit their application in Europe. We reviewed the literature for European studies comparing open gastrectomy with laparoscopic approach in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Method

We searched the keywords gastric cancer and laparoscopy in MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included all studies published between 1990 and 2016 and conducted in Europe.

Result

We found 1 randomized and 13 cohort studies which compared laparoscopic with open gastrectomy. We found no mean difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested between laparoscopic and open group (mean difference: -0.49; 95% CI: -2.42; 1.44, p=0.62) and no difference of short-term or long-term mortality (short-term odds ratio: 0.74, p=0.47; long-term odds ratio: 0.65, p=0.11). We found a longer operative time in the laparoscopic group (mean difference: 35.75 minutes, p<0.01) but lesser reoperation rate than the open group (odds ratio: 1.55 p=0.01).

Conclusion

European based population studies found results comparable with their Asian counterpart. In the current state of evidence, minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is safe and can achieve the same oncological results.

Comparison of Outcomes for Elderly Gastric Cancer Patients at Least 80 Years of Age Following Gastrectomy in the United States and China

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare gastric cancer (GC) patients aged 80 years or older undergoing gastrectomy at two high-volume cancer centers in the US and China.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 80 years who underwent R0 resection at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in New York, USA (n = 159), and Fujian Medical University Union Hospital (FMUUH) in Fujian, China (n = 118) from January 2000 to December 2013 were included. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic variables were compared, and factors associated with survival were determined via multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The number of patients increased annually in the FMUUH cohort but not in the MSKCC cohort. Patients at MSKCC were slightly older (mean age 83.7 vs. 82.7 years), more commonly female (38 vs. 19%), and had higher average body mass index (BMI; 26 vs. 23). Treatment at FMUUH more frequently employed total gastrectomy (59 vs. 20%) and laparoscopic surgery (65 vs. 7%), and less frequently included adjuvant therapy (11 vs. 18%). In addition, FMUUH patients had larger tumors of more advanced T, N, and TNM stage. Morbidity (35 vs. 25%, p = 0.08) and 30-day mortality (2.5 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.67) were similar between the cohorts. For each TNM stage, there was no significant difference between MSKCC and FMUUH patients in 5-year overall survival and disease-specific survival (DSS). TNM stage was the only independent predictor of DSS for both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients ≥ 80 years of age selected for gastrectomy for GC at MSKCC and FMUUH had acceptable morbidity and mortality, and DSS was primarily dependent on TNM stage.

Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma in a western country: Safety and oncological issues

Background

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma is a widely diffused operation in eastern countries, but there are only a few reports from western centers. We assessed a single surgeon's experience at a single, nonacademic, community hospital.

Methods

Short-term outcome of patients undergoing laparoscopic total gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma (June 2005-March 2010) was assessed.

Results

Fourteen patients (5 males, 9 females; median age, 66.8 years [interquartile range, 59.7–71.8]) underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy. The median operative time was 240 min. There were five stage 1 patients, five stage 2, and four stage 3; R0 resection was obtained in all 14 patients, and the median number of lymph nodes retrieved was 38. Mortality and overall morbidity rates were 0% and 35.7%, respectively.

Conclusions

The outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma performed by a well-trained laparoscopic surgeon working in a community hospital are good in terms of safety for the patients and response to the oncological criteria used in open surgery.

Short-term outcomes in minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy: the differences between East and West. A systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive surgical techniques for gastric cancer are gaining more interest worldwide. Several Asian studies have proven the benefits of minimally invasive techniques over the open techniques. Nevertheless, implementation of this technique in Western countries is gradual. The aim of this systematic review is to give insight in the differences in outcomes and patient characteristics in Asian countries in comparison to Western countries.

METHODOLOGY

An extensive systematic search was conducted using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Analysis of the outcomes was performed regarding operative results, postoperative recovery, complications, mortality, lymph node yield, radicality of the resected specimen, and survival. A total of 12 Asian and 8 Western studies were included.

RESULTS

Minimally invasive gastrectomy shows faster postoperative recovery, fewer complications, and similar outcomes regarding mortality in both the Eastern and Western studies. However, patient characteristics such as age and BMI differ between these populations. Comparison of overall outcomes in minimally invasive and open procedures between East and West showed differences in complications, mortality, and number of resected lymph nodes in favor of the Asian population.

CONCLUSION

Improved outcomes are observed following minimally invasive gastrectomy in comparison to open procedures in both Western and Asian studies. There are differences in patient characteristics between the Western and Asian populations. Overall outcomes seem to be in favor of the Asian population. These differences may fade with centralization of care for gastric cancer patients in the West and increasing surgical experience.

Laparoscopic Reinforcement Suture (LARS) on Staple Line of Duodenal Stump Using Barbed Suture in Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Prospective Single Arm Phase II Study

Purpose

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is accepted as a standard treatment for patients with early gastric cancer in Korea, Japan, and China. However, duodenal stump leakage remains a fatal complication after gastrectomy. We conducted a prospective phase II study to evaluate the safety of the new technique of laparoscopic reinforcement suture (LARS) on the duodenal stump.

Materials and Methods

The estimated number of patients required for this study was 100 for a period of 18 months. Inclusion criteria were histologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma treated with laparoscopic distal or total gastrectomy and Billroth II or Roux-en-Y reconstruction. The primary endpoint was the incidence of duodenal stump leakage within the first 30 postoperative days. The secondary endpoints were early postoperative outcomes until discharge.

Results

One hundred patients were enrolled between February 2016 and March 2017. The study groups consisted of 65 male and 35 female patients with a mean age (years) of 62.3. Of these, 63 (63%) patients had comorbidities. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 38. The mean operation time was 145 minutes including 7.8 minutes of mean LARS time. There was no occurrence of duodenal stump leakage. Thirteen complications occurred, with one case of reoperation for splenic artery rupture and one case of mortality.

Conclusions

Based on the results of this prospective phase II study, LARS can be safely performed in a short operation period without development of duodenal stump leakage. A future randomized prospective controlled trial is required to confirm the surgical benefit of LARS compared to non-LARS.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in UK: current status and future perspectives

The aim of this study is to review the literature and report the various minimally invasive methods used to treat gastric cancer in the UK and compare it with worldwide practice. Published randomised studies, non-randomised studies and case series reporting the use of minimal invasive approach to treat gastric cancer were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and their outcomes were highlighted suggesting their effectiveness. Several randomised, controlled trials and meta-analyses have proven the clinical and oncological safety of the laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Similarly, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR (endoscopic mucosal resection) and ESD (endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection) have also been proven feasible and safe to treat gastric cancer of various stages in prospective and retrospective comparative studies. However, UK based studies on minimally invasive surgery to treat gastric cancer is scarce and the paucity of trials led to uncertain outcomes. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR and ESD are feasible procedures in terms of clinical and oncological safety but mainly being practiced in Asian countries with high prevalence of stomach cancer. The UK based practice is still small and limited but the introduction of MIGOCS and STOMACH trial might help to widen the application of this technique.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has been used as an alternative to open gastrectomy (OG) to treat early gastric cancer. However, the use of LG for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has been in debate.

METHODS

Literature retrieval was performed by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library up to July 2014. Potential studies comparing the surgical effects between LG with OG were evaluated and data were extracted accordingly. Meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan. The pooled risk ratio and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis. LG had some advantages over OG, including shorter hospitalization (WMD, -3.63, 95 % CI, -4.66 to -2.60; P < 0.01), less blood loss (WMD, -161.37, 95 % CI, -192.55 to -130.18; P < 0.01), faster bowel recovery (WMD, -0.78, 95 % CI, -1.05 to -0.50; P < 0.01), and earlier ambulation (WMD, -0.95, 95 % CI, -1.47 to -0.44; P < 0.01). In terms of surgical and oncological safety, LG could achieve similar lymph nodes (WMD, -0.49, 95 % CI, -1.78 to 0.81; P = 0.46), a lower complication rate [odds ratio (OR), 0.71, 95 % CI, 0.59 to 0.87; P < 0.01], and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) comparable to OG.

CONCLUSIONS

For AGCs, LG appeared comparable with OG in short- and long-term results. Although more time was needed to perform LG, it had some advantages over OG in achieving faster postoperative recovery. Ongoing trials and future studies could help to clarify this controversial issue.

Comparison Between Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in Europe: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

AIMS

We compared laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomies with open gastrectomies and with each other that were held for gastric cancer in Europe.

METHODS

We searched for studies conducted in Europe and published up to 20 February 2015 in the PubMed database that compared laparoscopic or robotic with open gastrectomies for gastric cancer and with each other.

RESULTS

We found 18 original studies (laparoscopic vs open: 13; robotic vs open: 3; laparoscopic vs robotic: 2). Of these, 17 were non-randomized trials and only 1 was a randomized controlled trial. Only four studies had more than 50 patients in each arm. No significant differences were detected between minimally invasive and open approaches regarding the number of retrieved lymph nodes, anastomotic leakage, duodenal stump leakage, anastomotic stenosis, postoperative bleeding, reoperation rates, and intraoperative/postoperative mortality. Nevertheless, laparoscopic procedures provided higher overall morbidity rates when compared with open ones, but robotic approaches did not differ from open ones. On the contrary, blood loss was less and hospital stay was shorter in minimally invasive than in open approaches. However, the results were controversial concerning the duration of operations when comparing minimally invasive with open gastrectomies. Additionally, laparoscopic and robotic procedures provided equivalent results regarding resection margins, duodenal stump leakage, postoperative bleeding, intraoperative/postoperative mortality, and length of hospital stay. On the contrary, robotic operations had less blood loss, but lasted longer than laparoscopic ones. Finally, there were relatively low conversion rates in laparoscopic (0%-6.7%) and robotic gastrectomies (0%-5.6%) in most studies.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomies may be considered alternative approaches to open gastrectomies for treating gastric cancer. Minimally invasive operations are characterized by less blood loss and shorter hospital stay than open ones. In addition, robotic procedures have less blood loss, but last longer than laparoscopic ones.

Assessing the safety and efficacy of full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy is increasingly used in gastric cancer patients. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Three hundred and eleven patients were randomized into an open gastrectomy group or a robotic gastrectomy group, and digestive restorations were performed under direct vision and with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis, respectively. Length of postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph node dissections, surgical duration, blood loss, and complication rate after surgery were recorded.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the number of lymph node dissections (30.9 ± 10.4 vs. 29.3 ± 9.7 days, P = 0.281) or complication rates (10.3 vs. 9.3%, P = 0.756) between the two groups. Surgical duration was significantly longer in the robotic gastrectomy group than in the open gastrectomy group (242.7 ± 43.8 vs. 192.4 ± 31.5 min, P = 0.002), whereas blood loss was less (94.2 ± 51.5 vs. 152.8 ± 76.9 ml, P < 0.001), length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (5.6 ± 1.9 vs. 6.7 ± 1.9 days, P = 0.021), and postoperative restoration of bowel function was earlier (2.6 ± 1.1 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2 days, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer is safe and does not increase the complication risk during or after surgery. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:397-404. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

SAGES TAVAC safety and effectiveness analysis: da Vinci ® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA)

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci(®) Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is a computer-assisted (robotic) surgical system designed to enable and enhance minimally invasive surgery. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared computer-assisted surgical systems for use by trained physicians in an operating room environment for laparoscopic surgical procedures in general, cardiac, colorectal, gynecologic, head and neck, thoracic and urologic surgical procedures. There are substantial numbers of peer-reviewed papers regarding the da Vinci(®) Surgical System, and a thoughtful assessment of evidence framed by clinical opinion is warranted.

METHODS

The SAGES da Vinci(®) TAVAC sub-committee performed a literature review of the da Vinci(®) Surgical System regarding gastrointestinal surgery. Conclusions by the sub-committee were vetted by the SAGES TAVAC Committee and SAGES Executive Board. Following revisions, the document was evaluated by the TAVAC Committee and Executive Board again for final approval.

RESULTS

Several conclusions were drawn based on expert opinion organized by safety, efficacy, and cost for robotic foregut, bariatric, hepatobiliary/pancreatic, colorectal surgery, and single-incision cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal surgery with the da Vinci(®) Surgical System is safe and comparable, but not superior to standard laparoscopic approaches. Although clinically acceptable, its use may be costly for select gastrointestinal procedures. Current data are limited to the da Vinci(®) Surgical System; further analyses are needed.

Laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy: a simplified approach

Laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG), esophagojejunostomy is an effective but difficult procedure to perform. We describe a simple modification that substantially facilitates insertion of the anvil into the esophagus and avoids oral injuries and complications. After mobilization of the stomach and esophagus, a semicircumferential esophagotomy is made at the anterior esophageal wall. An OrVil anvil (Orvil, Covidien, Norwalk, CT, USA) is delivered laparoscopically and secured with a POLYSORB (Covidien) suture to the esophagus. The suture is advanced anteriorly so that the center rod penetrates the esophageal wall. The esophagus is transected with the stapler at this point. A circular-stapled esophagojejunostomy is then performed using the hemidouble stapling technique. Laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomies were performed for 40 patients with gastric cancers (T1N0M0). All procedures were completed laparoscopically without any complications. The time required to place the anvil averaged 5 min compared with 9 min reported by others. There were no major complications or mortality in this series. The major advantage of this technique is that circular stapling is much easier than linear stapling, allowing surgeons without advanced surgical skills in LATG to perform the procedure effectively and safely.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: current status and technical considerations

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy has been reported as a safe alternative to the conventional laparoscopy or open approach for treating early gastric carcinoma. To date, however, there are a limited number of published reports available in the literature.

METHODS

We assess the current status of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, focusing on the technical details and oncological considerations.

RESULTS

In gastric surgery, the biggest advantage of robotic surgery is the ease and reproducibility of D2-lymphadenectomy. Reports show that even the intracorporeal digestive restoration is facilitated by use of the robotic approach, particularly following total gastrectomy. Additionally, the accuracy of robotic dissection is confirmed by decreased blood loss, as reported in series comparing robot-assisted with laparoscopic gastrectomy. The learning curve and technical reproducibility also appear to be shorter with robotic surgery and, consequently, robotics can help to standardize and diffuse minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, even in the later stages. This is important because the application of minimally invasive surgery is limited by the complexity of performing a D2-lymphadenectomy. The potential to reproduce D2-lymphadenectomy, enlarged resections, and complex reconstructions provides robotic surgery with an important role in the therapeutic strategy of advanced gastric cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

While published reports have shown no significant differences in surgical morbidity, mortality, or oncological adequacy between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, more studies are needed to assess the indications and oncological effectiveness of robotic use in the treatment of gastric carcinoma. Herein, the authors assess the current status of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, focusing on the technical details and oncological considerations.

A comparison of outcomes of three reconstruction methods after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the short-term surgical and long-term functional outcomes of Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en-Y reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from 697 patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for operable gastric cancer between January 2009 and December 2012. The patients were classified into three groups according to the reconstruction methods: Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en-Y. The parameters evaluated included patient and tumor characteristics, operative details, and postoperative complications classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Endoscopic findings of the remnant stomach were evaluated according to the residue, gastritis, bile (RGB) classification and the Los Angeles classification 1 year postoperatively.

RESULTS

Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en-Y were performed in 165 (23.7%), 371 (53.2%), and 161 patients (23.1%), respectively. Operation time was significantly shorter (173.4±44.7 minute, P<0.001) as was time to first flatus (2.8±0.8 days, P=0.009), time to first soft diet was significantly faster (4.3±1.0 days, P<0.001), and postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (7.7±4.0 days, P=0.004) in Billroth I in comparison to the other methods. Postoperative complications higher than Clavien-Dindo grade III occurred in 61 patients (8.8%) with no statistically significant differences between groups (P=0.797). Endoscopic findings confirmed that gastric residue, gastritis, bile reflux, and reflux esophagitis were significantly lower in Roux-en-Y (P<0.001) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Roux-en-Y reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for middle-third gastric cancer is beneficial in terms of long-term functional outcome, whereas Billroth I reconstruction for distal-third gastric cancer has a superior short-term surgical outcome and postoperative weight change.

Current status of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A literature review to highlight studies limits

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer represents a great challenge for health care providers and requires a multidisciplinary approach in which surgery plays the main role. Minimally invasive surgery has been progressively developed, first with the advent of laparoscopy and more recently with the spread of robotic surgery, but a number of issues are currently being investigate, including the limitations in performing effective extended lymph node dissections and, in this context, the real advantages of using robotic systems, the possible role for advanced Gastric Cancer, the reproducibility of completely intracorporeal techniques and the oncological results achievable during follow-up.

METHOD

Searches of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were performed to identify articles published until April 2014 which reported outcomes of surgical treatment for gastric cancer and that used minimally invasive surgical technology. Articles that deal with endoscopic technology were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 362 articles were evaluated. After the review process, data in 115 articles were analyzed.

CONCLUSION

A multicenter study with a large number of patients is now needed to further investigate the safety and efficacy as well as long-term outcomes of robotic surgery, traditional laparoscopy and the open approach.

Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy versus open total gastrectomy for upper and middle gastric cancer in short-term and long-term outcomes

PURPOSE

In recent years, laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy has become the recognized procedure for treatment of early gastric cancer because of improved cosmesis and reduced postoperative pain. However, there are a few reports of laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) performed for gastric cancer in the upper third or middle third stomach due to the difficulties of surgical techniques and the safety of oncologic short-term and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Between January 2006 and December 2009, 84 patients with upper third or middle third gastric cancer underwent LATG or conventional open total gastrectomy (OTG). Of these patients, 34 patients underwent LATG and they were compared with patients who underwent OTG regarding short-term and long-term outcome.

RESULTS

The proximal margins (P=0.343) and distal margins (P=0.685) did not differ between the LATG and OTG groups. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 8 (16.0%) OTG and 6 (17.6%) LATG cases and postoperative mortality occurred 2 (4.0%) and 0 (0.0%) cases of OTG and LATG, respectively. Recurrence occurred in 8 (16.0%) cases and 1 (2.9%) case in the OTG and LATG group, respectively (P=0.077). The 5-year survival rate in the OTG group was 77.5% and in the LATG was 93.2% with no significant difference (P=0.082).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm that LATG with extended lymphadenectomy for middle or upper early and locally advanced gastric cancer can achieve a radical oncologic resection equivalent to that of OTG. In addition, LATG is a feasible and safe procedure, and has several advantages over conventional OTG.

Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery

AIM: To systematically review the surgical outcomes of totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) vs open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted. All original studies comparing TLG with OG were included for critical appraisal. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.1 software.

RESULTS: One RCT and 13 observational studies involving 1532 patients were included (721 TLG and 811 OG). TLG was associated with longer operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 58.04 min, 95%CI: 37.77-78.32, P < 0.001], less blood loss [WMD = -167.57 min, 95%CI: -208.79-(-126.34), P < 0.001], shorter hospital stay [WMD = -3.75 d, 95%CI: -4.88-(-2.63), P < 0.001] and fewer postoperative complications (RR = 0.71, 95%CI: 0.58-0.86, P < 0.001). The number of harvested lymph nodes, surgical margin, mortality and cancer recurrence rate were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: TLG may be a technically safe, feasible and favorable approach in terms of better cosmesis, less blood loss and faster recovery compared with OG.

Minimally invasive surgery for serosa-positive gastric cancer (pT4a) in patients with preoperative diagnosis of cancer without serosal invasion

BACKGROUND

Although surgeons normally use minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for patients with early gastric cancer, in Korea and Japan the procedure is also indicated for serosa-negative tumors. Serosal invasion is regarded to be a potential risk factor for peritoneal dissemination as a result of the effect of pneumoperitoneum and tumor manipulation during the operation. We compared operative outcomes between MIS and conventional open surgery for serosa-involved advanced gastric cancer patients who had a preoperative diagnosis of cancer without serosal invasion.

METHODS

A total of 61 patients (39 patients treated by MIS and 22 by open surgery) treated between 2003 and 2009 who were first diagnosed preoperatively as serosa negative on the basis of computed tomography, endoscopy, and endoscopic ultrasound but then diagnosed as serosa positive upon final pathology were studied. We retrospectively compared recurrence and survival between the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

Clinicopathologic characteristics, clinical stage, extent of surgery, and short-term operative outcome did not differ between the groups. 5-year overall survival (73.5 vs. 67.5 %, p = 0.518, respectively) and disease-free survival (67.8 vs. 54.2 %, p = 0.296, respectively) were comparable between the MIS and open surgery groups. There were recurrences in 12 patients in the MIS group and 11 patients in the open surgery group, with a median follow-up period of 64 months. Recurrence patterns did not differ between the groups; moreover, MIS did not increase peritoneal recurrences compared to open surgery (42.0 vs. 54.5 %, p = 0.537, respectively). In multivariate analyses, the type of surgery was not an independent prognostic factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar survival and recurrence patterns were observed in advanced gastric cancer patients preoperatively diagnosed as serosa negative who were treated either by MIS or open surgery. MIS may be safely applied in patients with serosa-positive tumors.

Oncologic specimen from laparoscopic assisted gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma is comparable to D1-open surgery: the experience of a Canadian centre

BACKGROUND

The Eastern experience has reported the safety of laparoscopic assisted gastrectomy (LAG) for gastric cancer. Its use in Western countries is still debated owing to concerns about its oncologic equivalence to open gastrectomy (OG). We sought to review and compare their operative outcomes and oncologic specimen quality (number of harvested lymph nodes and surgical margins) for gastric adenocarcinoma (GA).

METHODS

We reviewed the charts of all patients undergoing LAG (2007-2010) and OG (2000-2010) for GA in a single institution. Several surgeons performed the OGs, whereas 1 fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon performed LAGs. The primary outcome was quality of the surgical specimen, assessed by the number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs) and margin status. Secondary outcomes were perioperative events. Data were analyzed as intention to treat.

RESULTS

We retrieved 60 cases (47 OGs, 13 LAGs). The conversion rate was 23%. Mean operative time was 115 minutes longer and blood loss was 425 mL less (both p < 0.001) for LAGs. A mean of 14.4 (standard deviation [SD] 9.8) and 11.2 (SD 8.2) LNs were harvested for OGs and LAGs, respectively (p = 0.29). Negative margins were achieved for all patients. Mean length of stay was similar (LAG: 19 d v. OG: 18.9 d; p = 0.91). The groups did not differ on major postoperative complications (12.7% v. 23.1%; p = 0.39) or operative mortality (2.1% v. 7.7%; p = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic assisted gastrectomy is a challenging but safe and feasible procedure in experienced hands. It offers the same radical resection as OG regarding negative margins and LN retrieval. Long-term follow-up is warranted.

[Robotic hepatobiliary and gastric surgery]

Hepatobiliary surgery is a challenging surgical subspecialty that requires highly specialized training and an adequate level of experience in order to be performed safely. As a result, minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery has been met with slower acceptance as compared to other subspecialties, with many surgeons in the field still reluctant about the approach. On the other hand, gastric surgery is a very popular field of surgery with an extensive amount of literature especially regarding open and laparoscopic surgery but not much about the robotic approach especially for oncological disease. Recent development of the robotic platform has provided a tool able to overcome many of the limitations of conventional laparoscopic hepatobiliary surgery. Augmented dexterity enabled by the endowristed movements, software filtration of the surgeon's movements, and high-definition three-dimensional vision provided by the stereoscopic camera, allow for steady and careful dissection of the liver hilum structures, as well as prompt and precise endosuturing in cases of intraoperative bleeding. These advantages have fostered many centers to widen the indications for minimally invasive hepatobiliary and gastric surgery, with encouraging initial results. As one of the surgical groups that has performed the largest number of robot-assisted procedures worldwide, we provide a review of the state of the art in minimally invasive robot-assisted hepatobiliary and gastric surgery.The English full-text version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under supplemental).

Laparoscopy versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is one of the most accepted laparoscopic procedures in the field of gastric surgery. However, currently this procedure for the advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has still not reached the area of the popularization. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy with open distal gastrectomy in AGC patients using the meta-analytical techniques.

METHODS

The Medline Ovid, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and the Controlled Trials Registry were electronically searched. Randomized controlled trails and retrospective case-control studies, which were published between 2001 and 2011 on the management of AGC were collected on the basis of the predetermined eligibility criteria to establish a literature database. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software (Cochrane Library).

RESULTS

There were no randomized controlled trails available online; 7 case-control studies involving 1271 patients, of which 626 (49.2%) were laparoscopic and 645 (50.3%) were open procedures, were included in final pooled analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that LADG patients had a longer operative time [mean difference (MD), 37.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 19.92 to 54.72, P < 0.0001] but a less estimated blood loss (MD, 122.94; 95% CI, -171.13 to -74.75; P < 0.0001), a few analgesic requirement (MD, 1.62; 95% CI, -2.51 to -0.73; P = 0.004), and a shorter hospital stay (MD, 3; 95% CI, -3.14 to -2.26; P < 0.00001) compared with patients undergoing open distal gastrectomy. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in number of lymph node dissections (MD, -0.73; 95% CI, -3.04 to 1.57; P = 0.53), postoperative mortality [odds ratio (OR), 0.80; 95% CI, 0.14 to 4.73; P = 0.81], overall complications (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.53 to 2.91; P = 0.62), and a 3-year overall survival rate (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.60; P = 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

The oncologic outcomes of LADG for AGC patients were comparable with open approach. Although open distal gastrectomy may be associated with shorter operative time, patients undergoing laparoscopic approach may be benefitted from a shorter hospital stay and a faster resumption without translation into an increase in both postoperative morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, further prospective, controlled studies, and extended follow-up are needed for a more comprehensive comparison between the 2 procedures.

Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted surgery and laparotomy for treating locally advanced distal gastric antral cancer

The aim of this study was to investigate the safety, feasibility and mid-term results of laparoscopy-assisted surgery in the treatment of locally advanced gastric antral cancer. The clinical data of 50 patients who received laparoscopy-assisted surgery (Group A) and 62 patients who were treated by conventional laparotomy (Group B) from August 2009 to January 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. The surgical incision length, the volume of blood loss, the intestinal function recovery time, the postoperative complications, the postoperative 1- and 3-year cumulative survival rates and the average survival time in the two groups were observed. The results of the two groups were compared using the χ² test for the enumeration data, a t-test for the numerical data and a Wilcoxon rank sum test for the skewed data. In addition, the Kaplan-Meier method of single factor analysis was utilized to comwpare the 1- and 3-year cumulative survival rates, as well as the average survival time of the two groups. The results indicated that the duration of surgery for Group A was significantly longer compared with that of Group B (P<0.05); however, the incision length and the volume of intraoperative blood loss in Group A were significantly smaller compared with those of Group B (P<0.01). Furthermore, in Group A, the recovery of intestinal function was more rapid and the time spent in hospital was shorter. However, between Groups A and B, the respective number of dissected lymph nodes (16.3 and 17.2), 1-year survival rates (86.0 and 88.6%) and 3-year survival rates (52.6 and 53.7%) were not significantly different (P<0.05). The results indicate that laparoscopy-assisted surgery is a safe approach for the treatment of locally advanced gastric antral cancer and has beneficial treatment effects. Laparoscopy-assisted surgery is advantageous compared with laparotomy, due to the smaller incision length and reductions in intraoperative blood loss, invasiveness, postoperative recovery time and the number of complications.

Minimalinvasive Chirurgie bei Malignomen des Gastrointestinaltrakts: Magen - Pro-Position

<b><i>Hintergrund: </i></b>Wenngleich einige Studien Vorteile für laparoskopische Magenresektionen zeigen, ist die Diskussion um die laparoskopische Magenresektion beim Karzinom kontrovers. <b><i>Methode: </i></b>Literaturübersicht. <b><i>Ergebnisse: </i></b>Laparoskopische Magenresektionen beim Karzinom sind technisch sicher durchführbar und führen zu Vorteilen in der kurzfristigen Rekonvaleszenz nach der Operation im Hinblick auf geringere Schmerzen, kürzere postoperative Darmatonie, schnelleren Kostaufbau, verbesserte Lebensqualität in den ersten 3 Monaten postoperativ, eine schnellere Wiederaufnahme normaler Aktivitäten und eine kürzere Krankenhausverweildauer. Der Blutverlust ist geringer als nach offener Operation, die Operationsdauer ist länger. Einige Studien und Metaanalysen zeigen eine reduzierte Morbidität nach laparoskopischer Resektion. Die Letalität des Eingriffs unterscheidet sich nicht. Die Anzahl der bei der Operation entfernten Lymphknoten ist in vielen Studien vergleichbar, in wenigen Studien bei laparoskopischer Resektion geringer als nach offenen Operationen. Das Langzeitüberleben unterscheidet sich in den publizierten Studien nicht von dem nach konventioneller Operation. <b><i>Schlussfolgerungen: </i></b>Laparoskopische Magenresektionen beim Karzinom erscheinen sicher, zeigen zahlreiche Vorteile in der Rekonvaleszenz nach der Operation und sind in den Langzeitüberlebensraten vergleichbar. Möglichen Hinweisen auf eine eventuell reduzierte Anzahl an bei der Operation entnommenen Lymphknoten muss durch eine entsprechende Operationstechnik begegnet werden, die durch eine prospektive Qualitätssicherung abgesichert werden sollte.

A preoperative nomogram to predict the risk of perioperative mortality following gastric resections for malignancy

INTRODUCTION

Surgery remains one of the major treatment options available to patients with gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to develop a preoperative nomogram based on the presence of comorbidities to predict the risk of perioperative mortality following gastric resections for malignancy.

METHODS

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was used to create a nomogram using SAS software. The training set (years 1993, 1996-97, 1999-2000, 2002, 2004-05) was used to develop the model which was further validated using the validation set (years 1994-95, 1998, 2001, and 2003).

RESULTS

A total of 14,235 and 9,404 patients were included in the training and validation sets, respectively, with overall actual observed perioperative mortality rates of 5.9 % and 6.6 %, respectively. The decile-based calibration plots for the training and validation sets revealed a good agreement between the observed and nomogram-predicted probabilities. The accuracy of the nomogram was further reinforced by a concordance index of 0.75 (95 % confidence interval 0.73 to 0.77) which was calculated using the validation set.

CONCLUSION

This preoperative nomogram may accurately predict the risk of perioperative mortality following gastric resections for malignancy and may be used as an adjunctive clinical tool in the preoperative counseling of these patients.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer

Gastric cancer is common worldwide. Tumor location and disease stage differ between Asian and Western countries. Western patients often have higher BMIs and comorbidities that may make laparoscopic resections challenging. Multiple trials from Asian countries demonstrate the benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer while maintaining equivalent short-term and long-term oncologic outcomes compared with open surgery. The outcomes of laparoscopy seem to offer equivalent results to open surgery. In the United States, laparoscopic gastrectomy remains in its infancy and is somewhat controversial. This article summarizes the literature on the epidemiology, operative considerations and approaches, and outcomes for laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Modified techniques and early outcomes of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with side-to-side esophagojejunostomy

BACKGROUND

Construction of an esophagojejunostomy is a major concern in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG). Use of a circular stapler can be technically challenging in laparoscopic procedures. We aimed to introduce our modified techniques and to assess the early outcomes following TLTG with side-to-side esophagojejunostomy using a linear stapler in patients with gastric cancer.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

From December 2010 to June 2011, 27 patients who underwent TLTG for gastric cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Their clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical time, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 59.1 years, and the average body mass index was 24.6 kg/m(2). The mean operating time was 126.2 minutes, and the hospital stay averaged 8.1 days. No conversion to open laparotomy was required. There were 2 luminal bleeding cases and 1 intra-abdominal bleeding case, but all were successfully managed with conservative treatment only. No patient experienced reoperation, anastomosis leakage, stricture, duodenal stump leakage, or wound problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Our TLTG with side-to-side esophagojejunostomy method can be a feasible and safe option for patients with gastric cancer.

Quality of care indicators for the surgical treatment of gastric cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Quality assurance is increasingly acknowledged as a crucial factor for the (surgical) treatment of gastric cancer. The purpose of the current study was to define a minimum set of evidence-based quality of care indicators for the surgical treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature published between January 1990 and May 2011 was performed, using search terms on gastric cancer, treatment, and quality of care. Studies were selected based on predefined selection criteria. Potential quality of care indicators were assessed based on their level of evidence and were grouped into structure, process, and outcome indicators.

RESULTS

A total of 173 articles were included in the current study. For structural measures, evidence was found for the inverse relationship between hospital volume and postoperative mortality as well as overall survival. Regarding process measures, the most common indicators concerned surgical technique, perioperative care, and multimodality treatment. The only outcome indicator with supporting evidence was a microscopically radical resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Although specific literature on quality of care indicators for the surgical treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer is limited, several quality of care indicators could be identified. These indicators can be used in clinical audits and other quality assurance programs.

Comparative study of laparoscopy-assisted versus open subtotal gastrectomy for pT2 gastric cancer

PURPOSE

Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is a widely accepted surgery for early gastric cancer. However, its use in advanced gastric cancer has rarely been studied. The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility and survival outcomes of LADG for pT2 gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2004 and December 2009, we evaluated 67 and 52 patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy (ODG) and LADG, respectively, with diagnosis of pT2 gastric cancer. The clinicopathological characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and survival were retrospectively compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences in the proximal margin of the clinicopathological parameters. The operation time was significantly longer in LADG than in ODG (207.7 vs. 159.9 minutes). There were 6 (9.0%) and 5 (9.6%) complications in ODG and LADG, respectively. During follow-up periods, tumor recurrence occurred in 7 (10.4%) patients of the ODG and in 4 (7.7%) patients of the LADG group. The 5-year survival rate of ODG and LADG was 88.6% and 91.3% (p=0.613), respectively. In view of lymph node involvement, 5-year survival rates were 96.0% in ODG versus 97.0% in LADG for patients with negative nodal metastasis (p=0.968) and 80.9% in ODG versus 78.7% in LADG for those with positive nodal metastasis (p=0.868).

CONCLUSION

Although prospective study is necessary to compare LADG with open gastrectomy for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy might be considered as an alternative treatment for some pT2 gastric cancer.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer

Application of minimally invasive techniques to gastric cancer in the West has been curbed by concerns of feasibility and oncologic adequacy. Growing evidence supports improved short-term and equivalent oncologic outcomes in selected patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for early-stage disease. Laparoscopic resection for advanced gastric cancer remains controversial due to few reliable studies on long-term outcomes. We focus on important studies from Asia and highlight the Western experience with laparoscopic and robotic surgery for gastric carcinoma.

Laparoscopic gastrectomies for cancer: The ACOI-IHTSC national guidelines

Guidelines for laparoscopy and cancer of stomach have been outlined by several scientific societies: The main recommendation being that laparoscopy should be used only by surgeons already highly skilled in gastric surgery. The laparoscopic approach to gastric cancer surgery has become more and more frequent in most Italian centers. On behalf of the Guideline Committee of the Italian Society of Hospital Surgeons and the Italian Hi-Tech Surgical Club, a panel of experts analyzed the highest evidence of all scientific papers focusing on laparoscopic gastrectomies for cancer and published from 2003 to 2011, and drew these national guidelines. Laparoscopic gastrectomy may be considered as a safe procedure with better short-term and comparable long-term results. compared to open gastrectomy (Grade A). There is a general agreement that a laparoscopic approach to the treatment of gastric cancer should be chosen only by surgeons already highly skilled in gastric surgery and other advanced laparoscopic interventions. Furthermore, the first procedures should be carried out during a tutoring program. Diagnostic laparoscopy is strongly recommended as the first step of laparoscopic as well as laparotomic gastrectomies (Grade B). Additional randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compare and investigate the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic assisted gastrectomy are required.

Single-institute prospective trial of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with systemic lymph node dissection for early gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) is an advanced surgery that requires the mastery of complex surgical skills. We evaluate the feasibility of LAG with systemic lymph node dissection when participating surgeons have sufficient knowledge and experience to conduct open surgery for gastric cancer and basic laparoscopic skills.

METHODS

All operations were performed by two Japan Surgical Society board-certified attending surgeons who had performed over 50 conventional gastrectomies and 30 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. The surgeons went through an established program, including training at the wet and dry laboratories. In addition, surgeries for the first 10 cases were assisted by an expert surgeon with experience of >300 cases. To be eligible for the LAG procedure, patients had to have a preoperative diagnosis of T1, N0 and M0 gastric carcinoma. The morbidity rate was used as the study endpoint. Variables such as operating time, intraoperative blood loss and number of retrieved lymph nodes were evaluated as complementary surgical endpoints. These variables were compared between the first 25 cases and the latter 25 cases.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients who were scheduled to undergo LAG were prospectively enrolled between 2005 and 2008. Morbidity rate was 4% (2/50), with one case due to intestinal injury and one case due to an intra-abdominal abscess. Complications related to laparoscopy were observed in 2% (1/50), with one case of mesenteric injury. The conversion rate to laparotomy was 6% (3/50). However, there were no serious consequences in converted cases. The operating time was 263.7 ± 45.0 min. The intraoperative blood loss was 94.5 ± 106.5 g. The total number of regional lymph nodes retrieved was 34.7 ± 12.2. A significant improvement in the blood loss was only noted after the first 25 procedures. All patients are alive and disease-free after a median follow-up of 38.8 months.

CONCLUSION

An adequate training program, including site visits by expert surgeons, in conjunction with basic laparoscopy skills and solid backgrounds in open gastrectomy from the perspective of the trainees are currently key to the successful and safe implementation of LAG. Whether the procedure is oncologically feasible remains to be confirmed by long-term follow-up.

D2 dissection in laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM: To evaluate the radicalness and safety of laparoscopic D2 dissection for gastric cancer.

METHODS: Clinicopathological data from 209 patients with gastric cancer, who underwent radical gastrectomy with D2 dissection between January 2007 and February 2011, were analyzed retrospectively. Among these patients, 131 patients underwent laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) and 78 underwent open gastrectomy (OG). The parameters analyzed included operative time, blood loss, blood transfusion, morbidity, mortality, the number of harvested lymph nodes (HLNs), and pathological stage.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences in sex, age, types of radical resection [radical proximal gastrectomy (PG + D2), radical distal gastrectomy (DG + D2) and radical total gastrectomy (TG + D2)], and stages between the LAG and OG groups (P > 0.05). Among the two groups, 127 cases (96.9%) and 76 cases (97.4%) had 15 or more HLNs, respectively. The average number of HLNs was 26.1 ± 11.4 in the LAG group and 24.2 ± 9.3 in the OG group (P = 0.233). In the same type of radical resection, there were no significant differences in the number of HLNs between the two groups (PG + D2: 21.7 ± 7.5 vs 22.4 ± 9.3; DG + D2: 25.7 ± 11.0 vs 22.3 ± 7.9; TG + D2: 30.9 ± 13.4 vs 29.3 ± 10.4; P > 0.05 for all comparisons). Tumor free margins were obtained in all cases. Compared with OG group, the LAG group had significantly less blood loss, but a longer operation time (P < 0.001). The morbidity of the LAG group was 9.9%, which was not significantly different from the OG group (7.7%) (P = 0.587). The mortality was zero in both groups.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic D2 dissection is equivalent to OG in the number of HLNs, regardless of tumor location. Thus, this procedure can achieve the same radicalness as OG.

Laparoscopic resection for gastric carcinoma: Western experience

There has been much speculation regarding differences in outcome for patients who have gastric cancer in the Eastern versus Western world. Among other factors, these differences have contributed to a unique cohort of patients and experience in the Western staging/evaluation of gastric cancer and in the application of minimally invasive approaches for treatment. This review summarizes the current state of laparoscopic approaches for the staging and treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma for patients presenting in Western countries, with their associated unique presentation, comorbidities, and outcomes.