Gastric carcinoma and acute perforation

Short-and long-term outcomes of one-stage versus two-stage gastrectomy for perforated gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVE

There is no scientific consensus about the treatment of perforated gastric cancer (PGC). Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate which is the better treatment option for PGC between the single-stage and two-stage strategies.

METHODS

All 81 PGC patients from 13 medical institutions were retrospectively enrolled in this study. The PGC patients who underwent R0 gastrectomy were divided into one-stage surgery and two-stage surgery groups. The clinicopathological characteristics of the two groups were compared, and 415 regular gastric cancer patients without perforation were randomly selected as a control. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to find matched regular GC patients with similar clinicopathological parameters. The OS (overall survival) and the number harvested lymph nodes from PGC patients and regular GC patients were compared.

RESULTS

Compared with PGC patients who underwent one-stage surgery, those who underwent two-stage surgery harvested significantly more lymph nodes [31(27, 38) vs 17 (12, 24), P < 0.001], required less blood transfusion [0 (0, 100) vs 200 (0, 800), P = 0.034], had a shorter ICU stay [0 (0, 1.5) vs 3 (0, 3), P = 0.009], and had a significantly better OS (Median OS: 45 months vs 11 months, P = 0.007). Compared with propensity score-matched regular GC patients without perforation, PGC patients who underwent one-stage gastrectomy had a poorer quality of lymphadenectomy [17 (12, 24) vs 29 (21, 37), P < 0.001] and suffered a worse OS (Median OS: 18 months vs 30 months, P = 0.024). Conversely, two-stage gastrectomy can achieve a comparable quality of lymphadenectomy (P = 0.506) and a similar OS (P = 0.096) compared to propensity score-matched regular GC patients.

CONCLUSIONS

For PGC patients in poor condition, two-stage treatment is a better option when D2 radical gastrectomy cannot be achieved in emergency surgery, based on our findings that two-stage gastrectomy could provide PGC patients with a better quality of lymphadenectomy and a better OS.

Management of Acute Gastric Remnant Complications After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Single-Center Case Series

PURPOSE

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is a common bariatric procedure. Its configuration creates an excluded gastric remnant, which is subject to potential acute complications such as bleeding, perforation, and necrosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database including all patients presenting between 2007 and 2019 to our institution with acute gastric remnant complications after RYGB was performed.

RESULTS

Seven patients were included, including 3 hemorrhages, two of which were treated with double-balloon enteroscopy, as well as 3 perforations and 1 necrosis, all of which required emergent surgery. Overall gastric remnant complication rate was 0.3% in this series.

CONCLUSION

Acute gastric remnant complications after RYGB are infrequent, but their diagnosis and management can be challenging. Double-balloon enteroscopy has diagnostic and therapeutic value for selected patients. Emergent surgery remains the standard of care for unstable patients and should not be delayed.

Perforated Carcinoma in the Gastric Remnant: A Case of Conservative Treatment Prior to Successful Curative R0 Resection

An 80-year-old man who had undergone distal gastrectomy and Billroth-II gastrojejunostomy 38 years previously, for a benign gastric ulcer, was diagnosed with remnant gastric cancer based on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy findings. He presented at our emergency department with acute-onset epigastric pain due to perforated remnant gastric cancer. Conservative medical management was selected, including nasogastric tube insertion, antibiotics, and proton pump inhibitors, because his peritonitis was limited to his epigastrium and his general condition was stable. Twenty-one days after the perforation occurred, curative total remnant gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy were performed. Adhesion between the lateral segment of the liver and the dissected lesser curvature of the gastric remnant may have contributed to the peritonitis in this case, which was limited to the epigastrium. This is the first report of perforated remnant gastric cancer in which conservative treatment was effective prior to curative resection. The protocol reported here may be of use to other clinicians who may encounter this clinical entity in their practices.

Perforated gastric carcinoma: a report of 10 cases and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Perforation is a rare complication of gastric carcinoma, accounting for less than 1% of all gastric cancer cases. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the prognostic value of perforation and to point out the surgical treatment options.

METHODS

A total of 10 patients with perforated gastric carcinoma were retrospectively reviewed among 2564 consecutive cases of gastric cancer operated in three Centers belonging to the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer. The clinicopathological features including tumor stage and survival were analyzed and compared to literature data.

RESULTS

Incidence rate was 0.39%. All patients underwent emergency surgery, being performed gastrectomy in 6 patients (mortality 17%) and repair surgery in 4 patients (mortality 75%). The survival of patients was related to the stage of the disease, with 2 long-survival cases.

CONCLUSION

Perforation usually occurs in advanced stages of gastric cancer; nevertheless surgeons should not be always discouraged from a radical treatment of perforated gastric cancer, since perforation even occurs in early stages and seems not to be a negative prognostic factor itself. When possible, emergency gastrectomy should be performed, leaving repair surgery for unresectable tumors. A two-stage treatment is a good treatment option for frail patients with resectable tumors.