Minimally invasivE versus open total GAstrectomy (MEGA): study protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (DRKS00025765)

[Cancer of the Esophagogastric Junction: Double Tract Reconstruction - Evidence and Technique]

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) still represent a certain surgical challenge. In contrary to the trend of thoracoabdominal surgery for AEG I and AEG II cancer, the proximal gastrectomy is regaining popularity through new reconstruction methods such as the double tract reconstruction. Proximal gastrectomy followed by double tract reconstruction represents an alternative for the thoracoabdominal approach for suitable AEG II cancer and an alternative to the total gastrectomy for AEG III cancers. Latest studies suggest a functional benefit of proximal gastrectomy and double tract reconstruction in comparison to total gastrectomy. The accurate indication for proximal gastrectomy for locally advanced cancers has to be established in the near future as well as the influence of the size of the remnant stomach on the outcome, as Asian techniques for early lesions sometimes significantly differ from European. The following article reflects the present evidence on proximal gastrectomy and double tract reconstruction as well as technical aspects in the context of cancer of the esophagogastric junction.

An international Delphi consensus for surgical quality assessment of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis in minimally invasive total gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG) is a mainstay for curative treatment of patients with gastric cancer. To define and standardize optimal surgical techniques and further improve clinical outcomes through the enhanced MITG surgical quality, there must be consensus on the key technical steps of lymphadenectomy and anastomosis creation, which is currently lacking. This study aimed to determine an expert consensus from an international panel regarding the technical aspects of the performance of MITG for oncological indications using the Delphi method.

METHODS

A 100-point scoping survey was created based on the deconstruction of MITG into its key technical steps through local and international expert opinion and literature evidence. An international expert panel comprising upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in multiple rounds of a Delphi consensus. The panelists voted on the issues concerning importance, difficulty, or agreement using an online questionnaire. A priori consensus standard was set at > 80% for agreement to a statement. Internal consistency and reliability were evaluated using Cronbach's α.

RESULTS

Thirty expert upper gastrointestinal and general surgeons participated in three online Delphi rounds, generating a final consensus of 41 statements regarding MITG for gastric cancer. The consensus was gained from 22, 12, and 7 questions from Delphi rounds 1, 2, and 3, which were rephrased into the 41 statetments respectively. For lymphadenectomy and aspects of anastomosis creation, Cronbach's α for round 1 was 0.896 and 0.886, and for round 2 was 0.848 and 0.779, regarding difficulty or importance.

CONCLUSIONS

The Delphi consensus defined 41 steps as crucial for performing a high-quality MITG for oncological indications based on the standards of an international panel. The results of this consensus provide a platform for creating and validating surgical quality assessment tools designed to improve clinical outcomes and standardize surgical quality in MITG.

[Anastomotic techniques in minimally invasive esophageal and gastric surgery]

In specialized centers minimally invasive surgery has become established as the standard of care for esophageal and gastric surgery. Offering equal oncological outcome, patients benefit with respect to lower postoperative pain and complication rates. The creation of the anastomosis during minimally invasive surgery remains a critical step and the complications are decisive for the immediate postoperative course. So far no clear consensus exists in the literature regarding the recommended techniques for placement of an anastomosis after resections in the upper gastrointestinal tract. This article summarizes and compares the various established anastomotic techniques used in minimally invasive esophageal and gastric surgery.