Outcome of unresected gastric cancer after laparoscopic diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis

Role of Computed Tomography in the Evaluation of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) refers to metastatic spread of tumor into the peritoneal cavity. Earlier, PC was thought to be associated with grave clinical outcome. However, various advances in treatment options including cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy or early post-operative chemotherapy can prolong survival of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. These treatment options are associated with high morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this article is to acquaint the radiologist about various appearances of peritoneal carcinomatosis in order to help clinicians in selecting candidates for surgery and avoid unnecessary potentially debilitating surgeries in patients with unresectable PC.

What the Radiologist Should Know About Treatment of Peritoneal Malignancy

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to discuss the role of the radiologist in the treatment of peritoneal cancer, with focus placed on advanced treatment options and selection of patients with resectable disease for whom complete cytoreduction can be achieved.

CONCLUSION

Peritoneal cancers traditionally have been associated with significant morbidity and universal mortality; however, the management of such cancers has evolved substantially. Advanced treatment options, including cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy, are associated with significantly improved long-term patient survival. To ensure that patients benefit from aggressive multimodality treatments, the radiologist plays a pivotal role in the multidisciplinary team to ensure careful patient selection, identifying individuals with resectable disease for whom complete cytoreduction can be achieved.

Depth of tumor invasion and tumor-occupied portions of stomach are predictive factors of intra-abdominal metastasis

Objective

Diagnostic laparoscopy is recommended for the pretherapeutic staging of gastric cancer to detect any unexpected or unconfirmed intra-abdominal metastasis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role and indications of diagnostic laparoscopy in the detection of intra-abdominal metastasis.

Methods

Standard diagnostic laparoscopy with peritoneal cytology examination was performed prospectively on patients who were clinically diagnosed with primary local advanced gastric cancer (cT≥2M0). We calculated the rate of intra-abdominal metastases identified by diagnostic laparoscopy, and examined the relationship between peritoneal dissemination (P) and cytology results (CY). Split-sample method was applied to find clinical risk factors for intra-abdominal metastasis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis and receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed in training set to find out risk factors of intra-abdominal metastasis, and then validate it in testing set.

Results

Out of 249 cM0 patients, 51 (20.5%) patients with intra-abdominal metastasis were identified by diagnostic laparoscopy, including 20 (8.0%) P1CY1, 17 (6.8%) P0CY1 and 14 (5.6%) P1CY0 patients. In the training set, multivariate logistic regression analysis and ROC analysis showed that the depth of tumor invasion on computer tomography (CT) scan ≥21 mm and tumor-occupied ≥2 portions of stomach are predictive factors of metastasis. In the testing set, when diagnostic laparoscopy was performed on patients who had one or two of these risk factors, the sensitivity and positive predictive value for detecting intra-abdominal metastasis were 90.0% and 32.1%, respectively.

Conclusions

According to our results, depth of tumor invasion and tumor-occupied portions of stomach are predictive factors of intra-abdominal metastasis.

Effectiveness of laparoscopic stomach-partitioning gastrojejunostomy for patients with gastric outlet obstruction caused by advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Distal advanced gastric cancer (AGC) occasionally causes gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). We developed a laparoscopic stomach-partitioning gastrojejunostomy (LSPGJ) to restore the ability of food intake.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study performed at a single institution. Of consecutive 78 patients with GOO caused by AGC between 2006 and 2012, 43 patients who underwent LSPGJ were enrolled. The procedure was performed in an antiperistaltic Billroth II fashion, and the afferent loop was elevated and fixed along the staple line of the proximal partitioned stomach. Then, patients for whom R0 resection was planned received chemotherapy prior to laparoscopic gastrectomy. The primary end point was food intake at the time of discharge, which was evaluated using the GOO scoring system (GOOSS). Short- and long-term outcomes were assessed as secondary end points. Overall survival was estimated and compared between the groups who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (NAC group), definitive chemotherapy followed by curative resection (Conversion group), and best supportive care (BSC group).

RESULTS

The median operative time was 92 min, blood loss did not exceed 30 g in any patient, and postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2) were only seen in four patients (9.3 %). The median time to food intake was 3 days, and GOOSS scores were significantly improved in 41 patients (95.3 %). Chemotherapy was administered to 38 patients (88.4 %), of whom 11 later underwent radical resection, and 4 of 11 patients underwent conversion surgery following definitive chemotherapy. Median survival times were significantly superior in the NAC (n = 7; 46.8 months) and Conversion (n = 4; 35.9 months) groups than in the BSC group (n = 26; 12.2 months); however, the difference was not significant between the Conversion and NAC groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LSPGJ is a feasible and safe minimally invasive induction surgery for patients with GOO from surgical and oncological perspectives.

Novel imaging strategies for upper gastrointestinal tract cancers

Accurate pretherapeutic imaging is the cornerstone of all cancer treatment. Unfortunately, modern imaging modalities have several unsolved problems and limitations. The differentiation between inflammation and cancer infiltration, false positive and false negative findings as well as lack of confirming biopsies in suspected metastases may have serious negative consequences in cancer patients. This review describes some of these problems and challenges the use of conventional imaging by suggesting new combined strategies that include selective use of confirming biopsies and complementary methods to detect microscopic cancer dissemination.

A systematic review of the accuracy and indications for diagnostic laparoscopy prior to curative-intent resection of gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite improved preoperative imaging techniques, patients with incurable or unresectable gastric cancer are still subjected to non-therapeutic laparotomy. Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) has been advocated by some to be essential in decision-making in gastric cancer. We aimed to identify and synthesize findings on the value of DL for patients with gastric cancer, in this era of improved preoperative imaging.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches were conducted using Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2009. We calculated the change in management and avoidance of laparotomy based on the addition of DL and laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS). The accuracy, agreement (kappa), sensitivity, and specificity of DL in assessing tumor extent, nodal involvement, and the presence of metastases with respect to the gold standard (pathology) were also calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-one articles were included. DL showed moderate to substantial agreement with final pathology for T stage, but only fair agreement for N stage. For M staging, DL had an overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity ranging from 85-98.9%, 64.3-94%, and 80-100%, respectively. The use of DL altered treatment in 8.5-59.6% of cases, avoiding laparotomy in 8.5-43.8% of cases. LUS provided additional benefit in 5.8-7.2% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evolving preoperative imaging techniques, diagnostic laparoscopy continues to be of substantial value in staging patients with gastric cancer and in avoiding unnecessary laparotomy. The current data support DL for all patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Does non-curative gastrectomy improve survival in patients with metastatic gastric cancer?

BACKGROUND

The role of non-curative or palliative gastrectomy remains controversial. Our aim was to compare retrospective patients who have undergone non-curative gastrectomy to the patients with surgical exploration only.

METHODS

Between years 2000 and 2009, 488 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were treated at the Department of Surgery, Helsinki University Central Hospital. Fifty-five patients had metastatic disease but their symptoms were not severe enough to require palliative surgery. Thirty-two of them underwent operative exploration (Group A), and 23 non-curative gastrectomy (Group B). All operations were initiated with curative intent.

RESULTS

The difference in median survival between Groups A and B was insignificant (5.7 months in Group A and 10.8 months in Group B, P = 0.152). However, 33 patients with postoperative chemotherapy had significantly better median survival than the others (14.2 months vs. 1.9 months, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between Groups A and B in the rate of late postoperative gastrointestinal obstruction or bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-curative gastrectomy does not improve survival in patients with metastatic gastric cancer, nor reduces the rate of late occlusions. There is no need for prophylactic palliative gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer who do not have bleeding or obstruction preoperatively. Among those patients, postoperative chemotherapy seems to improve survival.

Accuracy and clinical relevance of computed tomography scan interpretation of peritoneal cancer index in colorectal cancer peritoneal carcinomatosis: a multi-institutional study

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of peritoneal metastases by computed tomography (CT) scans is challenging and has been reported to be inaccurate.

METHODS

A multi-institutional prospective observational registry study of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer was conducted and a subset analysis was performed to examine peritoneal cancer index (PCI) based on CT and intraoperative exploration.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients (mean age 52.6 ± 12.4 years) from 16 institutions were included in this study. Inaccuracies of CT-based assessment of lesion sizes were observed in the RUQ (P = 0.004), LLQ (P < 0.0005), RLQ (P = 0.003), distal jejunum (P = 0.004), and distal ileum (P < 0.0005). When CT-PCI was classified based on the extent of carcinomatosis, 17 cases (33%) were underestimations, of which, 11 cases (21%) were upstaged from low to moderate, 4 cases (8%) were upstaged from low to severe, and 2 cases (4%) were upstaged from moderate to severe. Relevant clinical discordance where an upstage occurred to severe carcinomatosis constituted a true inaccuracy and was observed in six cases (12%).

CONCLUSIONS

The actual clinical impact of inaccuracies of CT-PCI was modest. CT-PCI will remain as a mandatory imaging tool and may be supplemented with other tools including positron emission tomography scan or diagnostic laparoscopy, in the patient selection for cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.