Bursectomy in gastric cancer surgery: surgical technique and operative safety. Updates Surg. 2013;65:95-101. [PMID: 23592040 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-013-0210-7]

Lack of Oncological Benefit from Bursectomy in Radical Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Resection of the omental bursa has been suggested to reduce peritoneal recurrence and facilitate a complete oncological resection during a gastrectomy. The addition of this procedure increases technical complexity and prolongs the procedure. Published data regarding the oncological benefit of this procedure are conflicting. We hypothesized that a bursectomy during a radical gastrectomy does not improve overall survival.

METHODS

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, a comprehensive literature search of 3 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Embase) was conducted to identify the clinical studies that compared bursectomy with no-bursectomy in radical gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Qualitative and quantitative data synthesis was performed using RevMan software. A random-/fixed-effect modeling was used depending upon the heterogeneity. Bias and quality assessment tools were applied. The study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42019116556).

RESULTS

Of 8 studies assessing the role of bursectomy in gastric adenocarcinoma, 6 (75%) were included - of which 2 (33%) are randomized controlled trials. Of 2,904 patients, 1,273 (%) underwent a bursectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in either overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.89, 95% CI 0.75-1.06, I2 = 14%) or disease recurrence (HR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.84-1.20, I2 = 22%) in the bursectomy group compared to the no-bursectomy group.

CONCLUSION

There is no additional oncological benefit of adding bursectomy to radical gastrectomy in all patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.

Ultrasonic Diagnosis of Intestinal Loop Obstruction After Introducing Loop Syndrome After Subtotal Gastrectomy

In this paper, a graphical diagnosis of intestinal loop obstruction input into the loop syndrome after subtotal gastrectomy based on ultrasound diagnosis is more fluid accumulating in the bridge loop. The pressure in the intestinal loop is constantly rising, causing bile and pancreatic juice excretion disorder, and dilation of intrahepatic and external bile ducts or dilation of pancreatic ducts, which is similar to the anatomical features of low biliary obstruction. For dilated bowel, the expansion of the upstream drainage pipe organ changes in physiological and pathological anatomy pathological bridge loop obstruction. The ultrasound can show good and on the ming stomach ultrasound pictures of patients with loop syndrome after major resection were analyzed. Most patients with hepatic shape changed the left hepatic duct dilatation, and the inner diameter is 4.8 cm and the length is 18.0 cm. The wall of the tube is a multi-layer structure, and fold-like echoes can be seen. The lumen does not pass through the angle between the superior mesenteric artery and the abdominal aorta. Patients with a history of pancreas Whillp or Child type surgery or a history of Roux-en-Y type biliary jejunum have clinical manifestations of bowel obstruction. The ultrasound of their bridge loop obstruction showed a long tubular anechoic dark area in the upper abdomen and dilation of the upstream drainage organ duct.

The role of bursectomy in the surgical management of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review

In order to delineate the exact role of bursectomy (BS) in gastric cancer surgery, we designed and conducted the present meta-analysis. This meta-analysis adhered to the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A systematic literature review of the electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science) was performed. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was introduced for the validation of the pooled analyses. The level of evidence was attributed based on the GRADE approach. Overall, nine studies and 3599 patients were included in our meta-analysis. BS did not lead to an increase in the overall morbidity rate (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97-1.42, p = 0.09). Equivalence was, also, identified in all specific postoperative complications. Similarly, mortality rates were comparable (p = 0.69). Moreover, BS was related to a significantly higher operative time (p < 0.001) and perioperative blood loss (p = 0.002). Finally, resection of the omental bursa was not associated with improved R0 excision rates (p = 0.92), lymph node harvest (p = 0.1) or survival outcomes (OS p = 0.15 and DFS p = 0.97). BS displayed a suboptimal perioperative performance without any significant oncological efficacy. Due to certain limitations and the low level of evidence, further high-quality RCTs are required.

Bursectomy Versus Nonbursectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Single-Center, Propensity-Score Matched Cohort Study in China

Background: The therapeutic value of bursectomy remains controversial for patients with gastric cancer. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to explore the safety and survival benefits of bursectomy. Materials and Methods: A total of 943 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were included in our study, and all patients were operated on by high-quality gastrointestinal surgeons. The factors associated with overall survival (OS) were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. In addition, patients in the bursectomy group and nonbursectomy group were matched with 1:1 propensity score matching for sex, age, tumor location, type of operation, tumor size, degree of differentiation, and pathological stage to reduce the possibility of choice bias. Results: Among the 943 eligible patients, 188 (19.9%) underwent bursectomy and 755 (80.1%) did not. In all patients, the number of retrieved lymph nodes (P = .0596), blood loss volume (P = .0896), operation time (P = .0747), number of postoperative complications (P = .626), and OS in the bursectomy group were similar to those in the nonbursectomy group. After a stratified analysis of TNM grade and T stage, it was found that bursectomy could lead to survival benefits for patients with stage T4 disease (P = .0398). Conclusions: Bursectomy does not increase the amount of blood loss, operation time, or incidence of postoperative complications. This procedure is an extended and safe surgical method for gastric adenocarcinoma. Bursectomy does not improve the survival of all patients, but for patients with stage T4 disease, bursectomy can provide survival benefits.

Changing Trends in Gastric Cancer Surgery

Gastric cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer-related death. It requires multimodal treatment and surgery is the most effective treatment modality. Radical surgery includes total or subtotal gastrectomy with lymph node dissection. The extent of lymphadenectomy still remains controversial. Eastern surgeons have performed D2 or more extended lymphadenectomy while their Western colleagues have performed more limited lymph node dissection. However, the trend has been changing in favour of D2 lymph node dissection in both hemispheres. Currently, D2 is the recommended type of lymphadenectomy in experienced centres in the west. In Japan, D2 lymph node dissection is the standard surgical approach. More extensive lymphadenectomy than D2 has not been found to be associated with improved survival and generally is not performed. Bursectomy and splenectomy are additional controversial issues in surgical performance, and trends regarding them will be discussed. The performance of bursectomy is controversial and there is no clear evidence of its clinical benefit. However, a trend toward better survival in patients with serosal invasion has been reported. Routine splenectomy as a part of lymph node dissection has largely been abandoned, although splenectomy is recommended in selected cases. Minimally invasive surgery has gained wide popularity and indications for minimally invasive procedures have been expanding due to increasing experience and improving technology. Neoadjuvant therapy has been shown to have beneficial effects and seems necessary to provide a survival benefit. Diagnostic laparoscopy should be kept in mind prior to treatment.

Bursectomy at radical gastrectomy

Radical gastrectomy with extended lymph node dissection and prophylactic resection of the omentum, peritoneum over the posterior lesser sac, pancreas and/or spleen was advocated at the beginning of the 1960s in Japan. In time, prophylactic routine resections of the pancreas and/or spleen were abandoned because of the high incidence of postoperative complications. However, omentectomy and bursectomy continued to be standard parts of traditional radical gastrectomy. The bursa omentalis was thought to be a natural barrier against invasion of cancer cells into the posterior part of the stomach. The theoretical rationale for bursectomy was to reduce the risk of peritoneal recurrences by eliminating the peritoneum over the lesser sac, which might include free cancer cells or micrometastases. Over time, the indication for bursectomy was gradually reduced to only patients with posterior gastric wall tumors penetrating the serosa. Despite its theoretical advantages, its benefit for recurrence or survival has not been proven yet. The possible reasons for this inconsistency are discussed in this review. In conclusion, the value of bursectomy in the treatment of gastric cancer is still under debate and large-scale randomized studies are necessary. Until clear evidence of patient benefit is obtained, its routine use cannot be recommended.

Long-term outcomes after prophylactic bursectomy in patients with resectable gastric cancer: Final analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Bursectomy, a traditional operative procedure to remove the peritoneal lining covering the pancreas and the anterior plane of the transverse mesocolon, has been performed for serosa-positive gastric cancer in Japan and Eastern Asia. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial to demonstrate the noninferiority of the omission of bursectomy.

METHODS

Between July 2002 and January 2007, 210 patients with cT2-3 gastric adenocarcinoma were randomized intraoperatively to D2 gastrectomy with or without bursectomy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). We provide the results of the final analysis of the complete 5-year follow-up data.

RESULTS

After the median follow-up of 80 months, 5-year OS was 77.5% for the bursectomy group and 71.3% for the nonbursectomy group (2-sided P = .16 for superiority; 1-sided P = .99 for noninferiority). The hazard ratio for death in the nonbursectomy group was 1.40 (95% CI, 0.87-2.25). The 5-year recurrence-free survivals were 73.7% and 66.6% in the bursectomy and nonbursectomy groups, respectively (2-sided P = .33 for superiority; 1-sided P = .99 for noninferiority). Cox multivariate analysis revealed that bursectomy was an independent prognostic factor of good OS (P = .033). Subgroup analysis showed a trend toward improved survival after bursectomy for tumors in the middle or lower third of the stomach and for pathologically serosa-positive tumors.

CONCLUSION

The final analysis could not demonstrate the noninferiority of the omission of bursectomy. Bursectomy should not be abandoned as a futile procedure.