1
|
Kim TH, Kim IH, Kang SJ, Choi M, Kim BH, Eom BW, Kim BJ, Min BH, Choi CI, Shin CM, Tae CH, Gong CS, Kim DJ, Cho AEH, Gong EJ, Song GJ, Im HS, Ahn HS, Lim H, Kim HD, Kim JJ, Yu JI, Lee JW, Park JY, Kim JH, Song KD, Jung M, Jung MR, Son SY, Park SH, Kim SJ, Lee SH, Kim TY, Bae WK, Koom WS, Jee Y, Kim YM, Kwak Y, Park YS, Han HS, Nam SY, Kong SH. Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach. J Gastric Cancer 2023; 23:3-106. [PMID: 36750993 PMCID: PMC9911619 DOI: 10.5230/jgc.2023.23.e11] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/12/2023] [Revised: 01/22/2023] [Accepted: 01/25/2023] [Indexed: 02/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tae-Han Kim
- Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, Changwon, Korea
| | - In-Ho Kim
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seung Joo Kang
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital Healthcare System Gangnam Center Seoul, Seoul, Korea
| | - Miyoung Choi
- National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA), Seoul, Korea
| | - Baek-Hui Kim
- Department of Pathology, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Bang Wool Eom
- Center for Gastric Cancer, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Bum Jun Kim
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Medical Center, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Korea
| | - Byung-Hoon Min
- Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chang In Choi
- Department of Surgery, Pusan National University Hospital, Pusan, Korea
| | - Cheol Min Shin
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seungnam, Korea
| | - Chung Hyun Tae
- Department of Internal Medicine, Ewha Woman’s University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Chung sik Gong
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Asan Medical Center and University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dong Jin Kim
- Department of Surgery, Eunpyeong St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | | | - Eun Jeong Gong
- Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea
| | - Geum Jong Song
- Department of Surgery, Soonchunhyang University, Cheonan, Korea
| | - Hyeon-Su Im
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, Korea
| | - Hye Seong Ahn
- Department of Surgery, Seoul Metropolitan Government-Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Hyun Lim
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, University of Hallym College of Medicine, Anyang, Korea
| | - Hyung-Don Kim
- Department of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jae-Joon Kim
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Korea
| | - Jeong Il Yu
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University, School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Jeong Won Lee
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, Catholic Kwandong University, College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea
| | - Ji Yeon Park
- Department of Surgery, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
| | - Jwa Hoon Kim
- Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Kyoung Doo Song
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea
| | - Minkyu Jung
- Division of Medical Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University Health System, Seoul, Korea
| | - Mi Ran Jung
- Department of Surgery, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea
| | - Sang-Yong Son
- Department of Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea
| | - Shin-Hoo Park
- Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Soo Jin Kim
- Department of Radiology, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea
| | - Sung Hak Lee
- Department of Hospital Pathology, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea
| | - Tae-Yong Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Woo Kyun Bae
- Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School and Hwasun Hospital, Hwasun, Korea
| | - Woong Sub Koom
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yeseob Jee
- Department of Surgery, Dankook University Hospital, Cheonan, Korea
| | - Yoo Min Kim
- Department of Surgery, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yoonjin Kwak
- Department of Pathology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea
| | - Young Suk Park
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Hye Sook Han
- Department of Internal Medicine, Chungbuk National University Hospital, Chungbuk National University College of Medicine, Cheongju, Korea.
| | - Su Youn Nam
- Department of Internal Medicine, Kyungpook National University Chilgok Hospital, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
| | - Seong-Ho Kong
- Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital and Seoul National University College of Medicine Cancer Research Institute, Seoul, Korea.
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gastrectomy with or without Complete Omentectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Medicina (B Aires) 2022; 58:medicina58091241. [PMID: 36143918 PMCID: PMC9503724 DOI: 10.3390/medicina58091241] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2022] [Revised: 09/01/2022] [Accepted: 09/06/2022] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Surgery remains the only possible curative treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Peritoneal metastases are estimated to occur in approximately 55–60% AGC patients. Greater omentum is the most common metastatic area in AGC. At present, omentectomy alone or bursectomy are usually carried out during gastric cancer surgery. We performed a meta-analysis in order to evaluate long-term and short-term outcomes among AGC patients, who have undergone radical gastrectomy with or without complete omentectomy (CO). Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan (Computer program) Version 5.4. Results: The eight included studies covered an approximately 20 years long study period (2000–2018). Almost all included studies were retrospective ones and originated from Asian countries. Meta-analysis indicated gastrectomy without CO as significantly associated with longer 3-year (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.90–0.98, p = 0.005) and 5-year overall survivals (OS) (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.88–0.98, p = 0.007). Moreover, we found longer operative time (MD: 24.00, 95% CI: −0.45–48.45, p = 0.05) and higher estimated blood loss (MD: 194.76, 95% CI: 96.40–293.13, p = 0.0001) in CO group. Conclusions: Non-complete omentectomy (NCO) group had a statistically greater rate in 3-year and 5-year OSs than the CO group, while the CO group had significantly longer operative time and higher estimated blood loss than the NCO group. Further randomized, possibly multi-center trials may turn out of paramount importance in confirming our results.
Collapse
|
3
|
Occult Omental Metastasis in Gastric Adenocarcinoma: An Analysis of Incidence, Predictors, and Outcomes. South Asian J Cancer 2022; 11:299-308. [PMID: 36756092 PMCID: PMC9902107 DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1751096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Negine PaulIntroduction Traditionally, the concept of complete omentectomy during gastric resection for cancer was based on lymphatic drainage and the occurrence of occult omental metastasis (OM). However, recent emerging evidence has challenged this concept of complete omentectomy. We, therefore, aim to find the incidence and risk factors of occult OM and also evaluate the outcome of patients with and without such metastasis. Methods This is a single institutional, retrospective study of patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative radical gastrectomy for a period of 3 years (April 1, 2016, to March 31, 2019). A complete omentectomy was performed in all patients and the omentum and nodal stations were dissected in the resected specimen and sent for pathological analysis. Clinical and epidemiological data were collected from the hospital patient database and analysis was done. Results A total of 185 patients have been included in the study, with a mean age of 53.84 years. Twenty of the 185 patients had OM (10.8%). Age, sex, location of the tumor, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were not statistically significant in predicting OM. However, tumor size and tumor depth were found to have a significant association with OM. The occurrence of OM was more likely to be associated with disease recurrence, especially in the peritoneum. The mean overall survival was 38.15 months (±3.33 SD), whereas patients with OM had lower survival, 23.31 months (±7.79 SD), with a p -value of 0.012. Conclusion OM was not encountered in T1 and T2 gastric cancers and the incidence of OM in T3 and T4 tumors was approximately 12.7%. Therefore, complete omentectomy may be omitted in early T1/T2 tumors. OM was associated with poor prognosis, increased peritoneal recurrence, and decreased overall survival, in spite of a complete omentectomy, and may serve as a prognostic indicator for disease recurrence and overall survival.
Collapse
|
4
|
Kong M, Chen H, Zhang R, Sheng H, Li L. Overall Survival Advantage of Omentum Preservation Over Omentectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World J Surg 2022; 46:1952-1961. [DOI: 10.1007/s00268-022-06562-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
|
5
|
Chen M, He FQ, Liao MS, Yang C, Chen XD. Gastrectomy with omentum preservation versus gastrectomy with omentectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2021; 96:106176. [PMID: 34763112 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106176] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Revised: 09/14/2021] [Accepted: 11/04/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Omentectomy has been traditionally a part of standard radical gastrectomy. Its clinical benefit for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) remains controversial. This study aimed at evaluating the impact of gastrectomy with omentum preservation (GOP) on survival, recurrence, surgical outcomes and postoperative complications by comparing with gastrectomy with omentum resection (GOR). METHODS Original studies comparing GOP with GOR in LAGC were searched. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4. RESULTS Seven studies involving 1879 patients were analyzed. Compared with GOR, GOP achieved significantly better overall survival (HR = 0.75 [0.60, 0.95], P = 0.01), with similar relapse-free survival (HR = 0.84 [0.68, 1.03], P = 0.10). The two groups had similar total recurrence rate (OR = 0.86 [0.68, 1.08], P = 0.19) and no significant differences in rates of peritoneal, hematogenous, locoregional or distant lymph node recurrences. GOP had significantly less blood loss (MD = -83 [-139, -28] ml, P = 0.003) and tended to have shorter operation time (MD = -28 [-58, 2] min, P = 0.06), with similar harvested number of lymph nodes (MD = -0.4 [-2.6, 1.8], P = 0.70). The incidences of total all grade and major complications were similar in GOP and GOR (all grade: 31.8% vs. 30.3%, OR = 1.08 [0.79, 1.46], P = 0.64; major: 9.2% vs. 10.1%, OR = 1.14 [0.55, 2.34], P = 0.73). There were no significant differences in incidences of complication or postoperative mortality. CONCLUSIONS Omentum preservation did not affect curability or survival in LAGC. These findings require validation in randomized controlled trials with large sample sizes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mi Chen
- Department of Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, China The Center of Gerontology and Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China Department of Laboratory Medicine, Santai People's Hospital, China Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Sichuan Cancer Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, China
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Chai SW, Wang SH, Wang CY, Chen YC, Soong RS, Huang TS. Partial Versus Total Omentectomy in Patients with Gastric Cancer: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13194971. [PMID: 34638455 PMCID: PMC8508137 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13194971] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2021] [Revised: 10/01/2021] [Accepted: 10/01/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Surgical treatment is the key to cure localized gastric cancer. There is no strong evidence that supports the value of omentectomy. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of partial and total omentectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. All studies that compared total and partial omentectomy as treatments for gastric cancer were included. The primary outcomes were patients' overall survival and disease-free survival, while the secondary outcomes were perioperative outcome and postoperative complications. Results: A total of nine studies were examined, wherein 1043 patients were included in the partial omentectomy group, and 1995 in the total omentectomy group. The partial omentectomy group was associated with better overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.98, p = 0.04, I2 = 0%), shorter operative time, and lesser blood loss than the total omentectomy group. In addition, no statistically significant difference was observed in the number of dissected lymph nodes, length of hospital stays, complication rate, and disease-free survival. Conclusions: Our results show that, compared with total omentectomy in gastric cancer surgery, partial omentectomy had non-inferior oncological outcomes and comparable safety outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shion Wei Chai
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung Branch, No. 222, Mai-Chin Road, Keelung 20401, Taiwan; (S.W.C.); (S.-H.W.); (C.-Y.W.); (Y.-C.C.); (R.-S.S.)
| | - Suo-Hsien Wang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung Branch, No. 222, Mai-Chin Road, Keelung 20401, Taiwan; (S.W.C.); (S.-H.W.); (C.-Y.W.); (Y.-C.C.); (R.-S.S.)
| | - Chih-Yuan Wang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung Branch, No. 222, Mai-Chin Road, Keelung 20401, Taiwan; (S.W.C.); (S.-H.W.); (C.-Y.W.); (Y.-C.C.); (R.-S.S.)
| | - Yi-Chan Chen
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung Branch, No. 222, Mai-Chin Road, Keelung 20401, Taiwan; (S.W.C.); (S.-H.W.); (C.-Y.W.); (Y.-C.C.); (R.-S.S.)
| | - Ruey-Shyang Soong
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung Branch, No. 222, Mai-Chin Road, Keelung 20401, Taiwan; (S.W.C.); (S.-H.W.); (C.-Y.W.); (Y.-C.C.); (R.-S.S.)
| | - Ting-Shuo Huang
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung Branch, No. 222, Mai-Chin Road, Keelung 20401, Taiwan; (S.W.C.); (S.-H.W.); (C.-Y.W.); (Y.-C.C.); (R.-S.S.)
- Department of Chinese Medicine, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Kwei-Shan, Taoyuan 259, Taiwan
- Community Medicine Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung 20401, Taiwan
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhu A, Yin G, Liu X, Kong W, Zhang Y, Shan Y, Ying R, Zhang J, Zhou C. Efficiency of complete omentectomy in patients with resectable gastric cancer: a meta‑analysis and systematic review. BMC Gastroenterol 2021; 21:346. [PMID: 34521366 PMCID: PMC8439052 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-021-01921-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/05/2021] [Accepted: 08/24/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background We performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of complete omentectomy (CO) in patients undergoing radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods We conducted a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases for clinical research that compared CO with non-complete omentectomy (NCO). These articles were published prior to April 2021. Overall survival (OS) rates, relapse-free survival (RFS) rates, recurrence rates, operation times, estimates of blood loss, numbers of harvested lymph nodes, complications, and lengths of hospital stays were compared using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs). RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results Nine studies that included 3329 patients (1960 in the CO group) and 1369 in the NCO group comprised the analysis. The meta-analysis showed that CO was associated with a decreased 3-year OS rate (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.90–0.98, P = 0.005) and 5-year OS rate (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.88–0.98, P = 0.007). However, it was not associated with the 3-year RFS rate (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.90–1.04, P = 0.44), 5-year RFS (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.90–1.06, P = 0.60), or recurrence rate (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.95–1.45, P = 0.15) compared to the NCO group. For surgical-related outcomes, significant heterogeneity existed between the studies. Compared to the NCO group, CO was found to be associated with significantly more estimated blood loss (WMD = 250.90, 95% CI 105.90–396.28, P = 0.0007) and less harvested lymph nodes (WMD = − 3.59, 95% CI − 6.88, − 0.29, P = 0.03). Although, there was no significant difference in the surgical time (WMD = 15.93, 95% CI − 0.21, 32.07, P = 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the rates of overall (P = 0.79) and major complications (P = 0.90), or the lengths of hospital stays (P = 0.11) between the two groups. Conclusions Based on the available evidence, CO is not superior to NCO in terms of survival. CO is not recommended as a routine surgery for gastric cancer. Future well-designed high-quality RCTs are warranted. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-021-01921-3.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akao Zhu
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Guang Yin
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Xinchun Liu
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Wencheng Kong
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Yu Zhang
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Yuqiang Shan
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Rongchao Ying
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China
| | - Jian Zhang
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
| | - Chunhua Zhou
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 31006, China.
| |
Collapse
|