Lymph node dissection around the splenic artery and hilum in advanced middle third gastric carcinoma

Prognostic significance of splenectomy during completion total gastrectomy in patients with remnant gastric cancer: propensity score matching analysis

Purpose

Splenectomy for patients with remnant gastric cancer has been controversial. The purpose of this study is to identify the impact of splenectomy in the treatment of remnant gastric cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 285 patients with remnant gastric cancer who underwent completion total gastrectomy with or without splenectomy in Samsung Medical Center, between September 1996 and December 2017. We used a 1:1 propensity score matching method for the analysis. The matching factors were age, sex, and pathologic stage. After the matching process, we compared the 5-year overall survival (OS) and the disease-free survival (DFS) between patients with and without splenectomy during completion total gastrectomy.

Results

The median duration of follow-up was 58.0 months (range, 0-132 months). After propensity score matching, there were no statistically significant differences between the splenectomy group (n=77) and no splenectomy group (n=77) in terms of clinicopathological features. The 5-year OS rate between the no splenectomy and splenectomy group were not significantly different. There was no significant difference between 5-year DFS of the matched groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that splenectomy is not a significant prognostic factor in terms of 5-year OS (no splenectomy vs. splenectomy; 61.5% vs. 60.2%, P=0.884) or DFS (74.9% vs. 69.8%, P=0.880).

Conclusion

Splenectomy has no impact on the OS and DFS in patients with remnant gastric cancer. Splenectomy during completion total gastrectomy may not be necessary.

Is splenic hilar lymph node dissection necessary for proximal gastric cancer surgery?

Advanced proximal gastric cancer sometimes metastasizes to the splenic hilar lymph nodes (No. 10 LN). Total gastrectomy combined with splenectomy is performed for complete removal of the No. 10 LN and was historically a standard procedure in Japan. However, splenectomy is associated with several disadvantages for patients, such as increased postoperative morbidity, risk of thrombogenic disease, fatal infection from encapsulated bacteria, and the development of other types of cancer in the long term because of loss of immune function. Therefore, splenectomy should only be performed when its estimated oncological effect exceeds such disadvantages. A Japanese randomized controlled trial (JCOG0110) clearly demonstrated that prophylactic splenectomy is not necessary unless the tumor has invaded the greater curvature; thus, splenectomy is no longer routinely performed in Japan. However, several retrospective studies have shown a comparatively high incidence of No. 10 LN metastasis and therapeutic value from LN dissection at that station in the tumors invading the greater curvature. Similar tendencies have also been reported in type 4 or remnant gastric cancer involving the greater curvature. In view of these facts, No. 10 LN dissection is presently recommended for such patients; however, robust evidence is lacking. In recent years, laparoscopic/robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar dissection utilizing augmented visualization without pancreatic mobilization has been developed. This procedure is expected to replace prophylactic splenectomy and provide an equal oncological effect with lower morbidity. In Japan, a prospective phase-II study (JCOG1809) is currently ongoing to investigate the safety and feasibility of this procedure.

Reappraise role of No. 10 lymphadenectomy for proximal gastric cancer in the era of minimal invasive surgery during total gastrectomy: a pooled analysis of 4 prospective trial

BACKGROUND

For patients with locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (LAPGC), the individualized selection of patients with highly suspected splenic hilar (No. 10) lymph node (LN) metastasis to undergo splenic hilar lymphadenectomy, is a clinical dilemma. This study aimed to re-evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy (LSPSHL) and to identify the population who would benefit from it.

METHODS

A total of 1068 patients (D2 group = 409; D2 + No. 10 group = 659) who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy from four prospective trials between January 2015 and July 2019 were analyzed.

RESULTS

No significant difference in the incidence (16.9% vs. 16.4%; P = 0.837) of postoperative complications were found between the two groups. The metastasis rate of No. 10 LN among patients in the D2 + No. 10 group was 10.3% (68/659). Based on the decision tree, patients with LAPGC with tumor invading the greater curvature (Gre), patients with non-Gre-invading LAPGC with a tumor size > 5 cm and clinical positive locoregional LNs were defined as the high-priority No. 10 dissection group. The metastasis rate of No. 10 LNs in the high-priority group was 19.4% (41/211). In high-priority group, the 3-year overall survival of the D2 + No. 10 group was better than that of the D2 group (74.4% vs. 42.1%; P = 0.005), and the therapeutic index of No. 10 was higher than the indices of most suprapancreatic stations.

CONCLUSIONS

LSPSHL for LAPGC is safe and feasible when performed by experienced surgeons. LSPSHL could be recommended for the high-priority group patients even without invasion of the Gre.

CT-based radiomics nomogram for preoperative prediction of No.10 lymph nodes metastasis in advanced proximal gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative diagnosis of No.10 lymph nodes (LNs) metastases in advanced proximal gastric cancer (APGC) patients remains a challenge. The aim of this study was to develop a CT-based radiomics nomogram for identification of No.10 LNs status in APGCs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 515 patients with primary APGCs were retrospectively selected and divided into a training cohort (n = 340) and a validation cohort (n = 175). Total incidence of No.10 LNM was 12.4% (64/515). CT based radiomics nomogram combining with radiomic signature calculated from venous CT imaging features and CT-defined No.10 LNs status evaluated by radiologists was built and tested to predict the No.10 LNs status in APGCs.

RESULTS

CT based radiomics nomogram yielded classification accuracy with areas under ROC curves, AUC = 0.896 and 0.814 in training and validation cohort, respectively, while radiomic signature and radiologist' diagnosis based on contrast-enhanced CT images yielded lower AUCs ranging in 0.742-0.866 and 0.619-0.685, respectively. In the specificity higher than 80%, the sensitivity of using radiomics nomogram, radiomic signature and radiologists' evaluation to detect No.10 LNs positive cases was 82.8% (53/64), 67.2% (43/64) and 39.1% (25/64), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The CT-based radiomics nomogram provides a promising and more effective method to yield high accuracy in identification of No.10 LNs metastases in APGC patients.

Disadvantages of Complete No. 10 Lymph Node Dissection in Gastric Cancer and the Possibility of Spleen-Preserving Dissection: Review

Splenic hilar lymph node dissection has been the standard treatment for advanced proximal gastric cancer. Splenectomy is typically performed as part of this procedure. However, splenectomy has some disadvantages, such as increased risk of postoperative complications, especially pancreatic fistula. Moreover, patients who underwent splenectomy are vulnerable to potentially fatal infection caused by encapsulated bacteria. Furthermore, several studies have shown an association of splenectomy with cancer development and increased risk of thromboembolic events. Therefore, splenectomy should be avoided if it does not confer a distinct oncological advantage. Most studies that compared patients who underwent splenectomy and those who did not failed to demonstrate the efficacy of splenectomy. Based on the results of a randomized controlled trial conducted in Japan, prophylactic dissection with splenectomy is no longer recommended in patients with gastric cancer with no invasion of the greater curvature. However, patients with greater curvature invasion or those with remnant gastric cancer still need to undergo splenectomy to facilitate splenic hilar node dissection. Spleen-preserving splenic hilar node dissection is a new procedure that may help delink splenic hilar node dissection and splenectomy. In this review, we examine the evidence pertaining to the efficacy and disadvantages of splenectomy. We discuss the possibility of spleen-preserving surgery for prophylactic splenic hilar node dissection to overcome the disadvantages of splenectomy.

The Application of Spleen-Preserving Splenic Regional Laparoscopic Lymphadenectomy with Spleen Kept In Situ and Laparotomy with Spleen Lifted Out of the Abdomen for Locally Advanced Proximal Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Background and Purpose

Findings whether laparoscopic lymphadenectomy with spleen kept in situ or laparotomy with spleen lifted out of the abdomen is more effective remain inconclusive. This study is aimed at comparing outcomes of spleen-preserving splenic regional laparoscopic lymphadenectomy with spleen kept in situ versus laparotomy with spleen lifted out of the abdomen for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer.

Methods

Data from patients with locally advanced proximal gastric cancer were collected from January 2011 to January 2014. A total of 246 patients were identified who received D2 radical total gastrectomy together with spleen-preserving splenic regional lymphadenectomy. Of those patients, 87 patients underwent laparoscopic splenic regional lymphadenectomy with spleen kept in situ (LSKS-SRLA) and 159 patients underwent laparotomy with spleen lifted out of the abdomen (LSLA-SRLA). Surgical outcomes and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

The total number of lymph node dissection, intraoperative blood loss volume, intraoperative injury cases, and postoperative complications had no statistically significant difference between the two groups. The number of splenic regional lymph node dissections was 3.90 ± 1.05 per case in the LSLA-SRLA group and 2.89 ± 1.04 in the LSKS-SRLA group. The operation time, length of the incision, and hospital days were shorter in the LSKS-SRLA group. The total recurrence and metastatic rates and 3-year cumulative survival rate had no statistically significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusions

Similar long-term outcomes were achieved in the LSKS-SRLA and LSLA-SRLA groups for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer. However, in the aspects of surgical time, length of incision, and postoperative recovery, the LSKS-SRLA group had obvious advantages.

Laparoscopic splenic hilar lymph node dissection for advanced gastric cancer: to be or not to be

The incidence of proximal gastric cancer has increased in both the East and the West. Although some novel reconstructions like double-tract or double-flap anti-reflux procedure related to proximal gastrectomy are promising, total radical gastrectomy still accounts for a significant portion of these procedures. D2 radical gastrectomy is the globally accepted standard surgical procedure for advanced gastric cancer, and lymph node (LN) dissection is considered as the critical point of radical surgery and closely related to the prognosis. The splenic hilar LNs (No. 10) are LNs that need to be removed during standard D2 surgery for proximal and total gastrectomy. Lymphadenectomy does not only provide valuable information on the prognosis of gastric cancer, but the thoroughness of the sweep itself is directly related to postoperative survival. The incidence of splenic hilar LN (No. 10) metastasis rate is not high. Although the LN metastasis pathway around the spleen is complicated, the feasibility of laparoscopic splenic hilar LN dissection in locally advanced gastric cancer has been verified. However, these results are mostly from small volume clinical studies, and the fact is that the dissection of the splenic hilar is technique-demanding even for open surgery. The rational strategy for LN dissection for surgeons is still controversial. For splenic LN dissection in radical gastric cancer surgery, whether to select individualized splenic LN dissection for those patients highly suspected of clinical metastasis or to advocate the evidence-based strategy and neglect dissection in lower risk patients to avoid over-removing of LNs, is a vital question that needs to be clarified.

Clinicopathological features of patients with middle third gastric carcinoma

AIM: To compared the prognosis of middle third gastric carcinoma (MGC) patients with those of patients with proximal/distal gastric carcinoma (PGC/DGC).

METHODS: Of 3299 patients diagnosed with gastric carcinoma who underwent surgery at our hospital over a 15-year period, 919 (27.9%) were diagnosed with MGC. For each patient, the following information was obtained from hospital records: Age, sex, tumor size, depth of invasion, histologic type, nodal involvement, extent of lymph node dissection, hepatic metastasis, peritoneal dissemination, stage at initial diagnosis, operative type, curability, and survival rate.

RESULTS: T1 category tumors were more common in patients with MGC than in patients with PGC (P < 0.001). Tumor stage (stage I), N category (N0), and T category (T1) significantly influenced the 5-year survival rates for patients with curatively resected tumors. A multivariate analysis showed that age, tumor size, serosal invasion, lymph node metastasis, and curability were significant predictors of survival in patients with MGC. The survival rate for MGC patients was similar to that for PGC/DGC patients (52.8% vs 44.4%/51.4%, P = 0.1138). The 5-year survival rate for MGC patients with curative resection was higher than that for MGC patients with non-curative resection (62.9% vs 8.7%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION: These results indicate that tumor location did not affect the prognosis. Curative resection is important for improving the prognosis of patients with MGC.

Comparisons Between Different Procedures of No. 10 Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer Patients With Total Gastrectomy

To compare the effectiveness and safety of in-vivo dissection procedure of No. 10 lymph nodes with those of ex-vivo dissection procedure for gastric cancer patients with total gastrectomy.Patients were divided into in-vivo group and ex-vivo group according to whether the dissection of No. 10 lymph nodes were performed after the mobilization of the pancreas and spleen, and migration out from peritoneal cavity. Clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival, morbidity, and mortality were compared between the 2 groups.There were 148 patients in in-vivo group, while 30 in ex-vivo group. The baselines between the 2 groups were almost comparable. The metastatic ratio of No. 10 lymph nodes were 6.1% and 10.0% (P = 0.435) and the metastatic degree were 7.9% and 13.6% (P = 0.158) for in-vivo group and ex-vivo group, respectively. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality between the 2 groups. The number of total harvested lymph nodes and No. 10 lymph nodes increased significantly in ex-vivo group at the cost of prolonged operation time. The estimated overall survival rates for patients in in-vivo group and ex-vivo group were (3-year: 52.0% vs 61.8%) and (5-year: 45.3% vs 49.5%), respectively, without statistical significance. Further multivariable analysis had showed that the procedure of No. 10 lymphadenectomy was not a significant independent prognostic factor.Both in-vivo and ex-vivo dissection of No. 10 lymph nodes could be performed safely. It seems that ex-vivo dissection of No. 10 lymph nodes can result in a higher effective dissection at the cost of the operation time, but the overall survival rates were not statistically significant between the 2 groups, which should be confirmed further in a well-designed randomized controlled trial.

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.

Survival benefit and safety of no. 10 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer patients with total gastrectomy

This study was aimed to evaluate the survival benefit and safety of No. 10 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer patients with total gastrectomy.Splenic hilar lymph nodes (LNs) are required to be dissected in total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. However, there has still not been a consensus in aspects of survival and safety on No. 10 LN resection.From January 2006 to December 2011, 453 patients undergoing total gastrectomy for gastric cancer were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were grouped according to No. 10 lymphadenectomy (10D+/10D-). Clinicopathologic characteristics were compared between the 2 groups. These patients had undergone a follow-up until January 2014. The overall survival, morbidity, and mortality rate were analyzed. Subgroup analyses which were stratified by the sex, age, tumor location, lymphadenectomy extent, curative degree, differentiation, tumor size, and TNM staging (ie, stages of tumor) were performed.There were 220 patients in 10D+ group, whereas 233 in 10D- group. In terms of prognosis, the baseline features between the 2 groups were almost comparable. The incidence of No. 10 LN metastasis was 11.82%. There was no difference in morbidity and mortality between the 2 groups. Significantly more LNs were harvested from patients in 10D+ group (P = 0.000). The estimated overall 5-year survival rates were 46.44% and 37.43% in 10D+ group and 10D- group respectively, which is not statistically significant (P = 0.3288). Although no statistical significance was found in the estimated 5-year survival rate, these data were obviously higher in patients with age >60 years, Siewert II/ III tumors, N1 status, or IIIa/IIIc stages when No. 10 lymphadenectomies were performed.Although the differences were obvious, the 5-year survival rates between the 2 groups did not reach statistical significances, which was probably caused by too small patient samples. High-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed before stronger statement can be done. Until then, the No. 10 LNs' resection might be recommended in total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy with an acceptable incidence of complications.

Laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy with D2 dissection for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy with D2 dissection (LTGD2) for gastric cancer in comparison with open total gastrectomy with D2 dissection (OTGD2).

BACKGROUND

More surgeons have chosen laparoscopic total gastrectomy as an alternative to open total gastrectomy. But no meta-analysis has been performed to evaluate the value of LTGD2.

METHODS

Original articles compared LTGD2 and OTGD2 for gastric cancer, which published in English from January 1990 to March 2013 were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge by two reviewers independently. Operative time, blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, analgesic medication, first flatus day, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and hospital mortality were compared using STATA version 10.1.

RESULTS

8 studies were selected in this analysis. A total of 1,498 patients were included (559 in LTG and 939 in OTG). LTGD2 showed longer operative time (WMD 39.29; 95 % CI 20.52, 58.06; P < 0.001), less blood loss (WMD -157.94; 95 % CI -245.25 -70.62; P < 0.001), fewer analgesic requirements (WMD -2.01; 95 % CI -3.10, -0.93; P < 0.001), earlier passage of flatus (WMD -0.73; 95 % CI -1.19, -0.27; P = 0.002), earlier hospital discharge (WMD -2.69; 95 % CI -3.42, -1.97; P < 0.001), and reduced postoperative morbidity (RR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.50, 0.98; P = 0.035). The number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD 0.27; 95 % CI -1.43, 1.98; P = 0.752) and hospital mortality rate (RR 0.57; 95 % CI 0.11, 3.09; P = 0.513) were similar.

CONCLUSION

LTGD2 was associated with less blood loss, less postoperative pain, quicker bowel function recovery, shorter hospital stay, and reduced postoperative morbidity, at the expense of longer operative time. No statistical differences were observed in lymph node dissection, and hospital mortality, which indicated the similar ability of lymph nodes clearance and short-term outcomes with OTGD2. A positive trend was indicated toward LTGD2. So we encourage the experienced surgeons to achieve LTGD2 instead of OTGD2. Whereas, due to non-randomized control trails and lack of long-term outcomes, more studies are required.

A systematic review of spleen and pancreas preservation in extended lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The overall prognosis and survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer are generally poor. Extended lymphadenectomy is recommended for patients with advanced gastric cancer; however, splenectomy and distal pancreatectomy performed with an extended lymph node dissection may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

METHOD

Electronic literature searches were conducted using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2009. Studies on gastric carcinoma investigating extended lymphadenectomy with splenectomy and/or pancreaticosplenectomy that reported data on surgical outcomes or survival were selected.

RESULTS

Forty studies were included in this review. Decreased complication rates were demonstrated with spleen preservation in two prospective studies and three retrospective studies, and with pancreas preservation in five retrospective studies. No randomized controlled trial showed survival benefit or detriment for preservation of spleen or pancreas in extended lymphadenectomy. Improved survival was demonstrated with spleen preservation in two prospective and eight retrospective studies, and with pancreas preservation in one prospective and four retrospective studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Preservation of the spleen and pancreas during extended lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer decreases complications with no clear evidence of improvement or detriment to overall survival.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 dissection for adenocarcinoma: initial experience with 17 patients

Robot-assisted gastrectomy has been practised so far in very few centres in the world. The aims of this study were to assess the feasibility of robot-assisted gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma with D2 lymph nodal dissection and to analyze our preliminary results. Between January 2006 and August 2008, as many as 17 patients (11 females, 6 males) underwent laparoscopic robot-assisted surgery for non-metastatic adenocarcinoma of the stomach by a 3-armed da Vinci(®) Robotic Surgical System. The mean age of patients was 65.9 years. This series included eight patients with early gastric cancer (EGC) and nine with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). A 4/5 laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) with D2 nodal clearance was the procedure of choice for 16 distal cancers. Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with D2 lymphadenectomy was performed for one AGC of the middle third of the stomach. No intraoperative complication was registered. Conversion to laparotomy was required in two patients with distal cancer. The mean operating time (excluding converted patients) was 352 min (348 for LSG). Morbidity consisted in one pancreatic leak that healed conservatively. One death occurred postoperatively for haemorragic stroke. On average, 25.5 ± 4 lymph nodes were collected (range 10-40). The resection margin was 6.4 ± 0.6 cm (range 4.2-8), and the margin was tumour free in all the specimens. The mean hospital stay of totally laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy was 10 ± 1.2 days (range 8-13). The mean follow-up was 14 months (range 1-29) and three patients with AGC showed recurrence after LSG and died of disease. Robotics in gastrectomy for cancer is a feasible and safe procedure, yielding adequate D2 nodal clearance with respect of oncologic principles. Robotic techniques can represent a remarkable tool to improve laparoscopic surgeon's ability and precision in small surgical fields, i.e. during D2 dissection. This study demonstrated the feasibility of robot-assisted gastrectomy for cancer although further studies are required to validate our preliminary results, especially as far as patients' benefits are concerned.