Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma in the West: A Case-Control Study

Impact of Minimally Invasive Surgery on Early and Late Outcomes of Patients With Gastric Cancer Treated Using Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common neoplasm and the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is recommended for Stages II-III resectable tumors, but the comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open gastrectomy (OG) post-neoadjuvant therapy has not been adequately investigated.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on patients with clinical Stage II and III gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by either MIS or OG between 2007 and 2020. Propensity score matching was utilized to compare the clinical and surgical outcomes, morbidity, and mortality, and the influence of MIS on 3-year survival rates was evaluated.

RESULTS

After matching, no statistical differences in clinical aspects were noted between the two groups. MIS was associated with increased D2 lymphadenectomy, curative intent, and complete neoadjuvant therapy. Furthermore, this therapeutic approach resulted in reduced transfusion rates and shorter hospital stays. Nonetheless, no significant differences were observed in global, clinical, or surgical complications or mortality between the two groups. Weight loss emerged as a significant risk factor for complications, but MIS did not independently affect survival rates. Extended resection and higher American Society of Anesthesiology scores were independent predictors of reduced survival.

CONCLUSION

MIS after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer appears to be a viable option, with oncological outcomes comparable to those of OG, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stays. Although MIS did not independently affect long-term survival, it offered potential benefits in terms of postoperative recovery and morbidity. Further studies are needed to validate these findings, especially across diverse populations.

Diagnosis to dissection: AI's role in early detection and surgical intervention for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer remains a formidable health challenge worldwide; early detection and effective surgical intervention are critical for improving patient outcomes. This comprehensive review explores the evolving landscape of gastric cancer management, emphasizing the significant contributions of artificial intelligence (AI) in revolutionizing both diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Despite advancements in the medical field, the subtle nature of early gastric cancer symptoms often leads to late-stage diagnoses, where survival rates are notably decreased. Historically, the treatment of gastric cancer has transitioned from palliative care to surgical resection, evolving further with the introduction of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques. In the current era, AI has emerged as a transformative force, enhancing the precision of early gastric cancer detection through sophisticated image analysis, and supporting surgical decision-making with predictive modeling and real-time preop-, intraop-, and postoperative guidance. However, the deployment of AI in healthcare raises significant ethical, legal, and practical challenges, including the necessity for ongoing professional education and the development of standardized protocols to ensure patient safety and the effective use of AI technologies. Future directions point toward a synergistic integration of AI with clinical best practices, promising a new era of personalized, efficient, and safer gastric cancer management.

Advances in Gastric Cancer Surgical Management

The goal of a gastric cancer operation is a microscopically negative resection margin and D2 lymphadenectomy. Minimally invasive techniques (laparoscopic and robotic) have been proven to be equivalent for oncologic care, yet with faster recovery. Endoscopic mucosal resection can be used for T1a N0 tumor resection. Better understanding of hereditary gastric cancer and molecular subtypes has led to specialized recommendations for MSI-high tumors and patients with pathogenic CDH1 mutations. In the future, surgical management will support minimally invasive approaches and personalized cancer care based on subtype.

Impact of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy on the Completion Rate of the Perioperative Chemotherapy Regimen in Gastric Cancer: A Swedish Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

Omission of prescheduled chemotherapy following surgery for gastric cancer is a frequent clinical problem. This study examined whether laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) had a positive impact on compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with open (OG).

METHODS

Patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 adenocarcinoma treated with gastrectomy and perioperative chemotherapy between 2015 and 2020 were identified in the Swedish national register. Additional information regarding chemotherapy was retrieved from medical records. Regression models were used to investigate the association between surgical approach and the following outcomes: initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy, modification, and time interval from surgery to start of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 247 patients were included (121 OG and 126 LG, conversion rate 11%), of which 71.3% had performance status ECOG 0 and 77.7% clinical stage II/III. In total, 86.2% of patients started adjuvant chemotherapy, with no significant difference between the groups (LG 88.1% vs OG 84.3%, p = 0.5). Reduction of chemotherapy occurred in 37.4% of patients and was similar between groups (LG 39.4% vs OG 35.1%, p = 0.6), as was the time interval from surgery. In multivariable analysis, LG was not associated with the probability of starting adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 1.36, p = 0.4) or the need for reduction (OR 1.29, p = 0.4). Conversely, major complications had a significant, negative impact on both outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study demonstrated a high rate of adjuvant chemotherapy initiation after curative intended surgery for gastric cancer. A beneficial effect of LG compared with OG on the completion rate was not evident.

Impact of Hospital Volume on Utilization of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer is increasingly performed. The purpose of this study is to evaluate trends in utilization of laparoscopic and robotic techniques compared to open surgery as well as utilization based on hospital volume.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to query patients who underwent gastrectomy from 2010 to 2017 for adenocarcinoma. Regression analyses were used to determine associations between MIS and clinical factors, the trend of MIS over time, and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 18,380 patients met inclusion criteria. The annual rates of MIS increased for all hospital volumes, though lower volume centers were less likely to undergo MIS. MIS was associated with a shorter length of stay compared to open, and robotic gastrectomy had a higher rate of obtaining at least 15 lymph nodes and lower rate of having a positive margin.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS utilization for resection of gastric cancer increased over time, with robotic surgery increasing at a higher rate than laparoscopic surgery. Importantly, this occurred without increased in mortality or sacrificing adequate oncologic outcomes.

Safety and feasibility of reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a phase I/II clinical trial using the da Vinci Single Port(SP) robotic system

Minimally invasive surgery reduces surgical trauma and the size and number of incisions. The da Vinci SP robotic surgical system was designed to overcome the technical demands of single-incision laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of single-port (SP) robotic distal gastrectomy (SPRDG) for patients with gastric cancer using the da Vinci SP system (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). This study was designed as a single-arm prospective phase I/II clinical trial of SPRDG (first posted date: 21/09/2021, NCT05051670; clinicaltrials.gov). SPRDG using the da Vinci SP system was performed on 19 patients with gastric cancer between December 2021 and October 2022. The primary outcome was the safety of SPRDG as measured by major postoperative complications. The secondary outcomes were operation time, bleeding amount, bowel motility recovery, and length of hospital stay. SPRDG was performed in all 19 patients without unexpected events, such as use of additional trocars or conversion to laparoscopic or open surgery. No major complications occurred postoperatively (0/19, 0.0%). The mean operation time was 218 min (range 164-286 min). The mean hospital stay duration was 3.2 days (range 2-4 days). This phase I/II clinical trial, performed by a single expert surgeon, demonstrated the safety and feasibility of SPRDG with the da Vinci SP system in selected patients with gastric cancer. SPRDG could be a reasonable alternative to conventional or reduced-port minimally invasive gastrectomy, as it has cosmetic advantages, early recovery, and safe discharge.

Laparoscopic compared to open approach for distal gastrectomy may reduce pneumonia risk for patients with gastric cancer

Background

Whether laparoscopic approach to gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC) reduces the risk of pneumonia remains unknown. In this study, we compared pneumonia outcomes for patients with GC who underwent either laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) or open gastrectomy (OG).

Methods

The ACS NSQIP database was queried to identify patients with GC who underwent LG or OG between Jan 2012 - Dec 2018. Outcomes were compared using regression models. A post-hoc analysis was performed for elderly patients.

Results

The study cohort included 2661 patients, 23.4 % undergoing LG. Laparoscopic approach lowered pneumonia risk (OR 0.47, p = .028) and reduced hospital length of stay, (5.3 vs 7.1 days, p < .001). Elderly patients undergoing LG demonstrated similar benefits. Risk factors for pneumonia included advanced age, dyspnea and weight-loss, whereas laparoscopic approach reduced this risk.

Conclusions

LG in patients with GC has both statistically and clinically significant advantages over OG with respect to pneumonia. Further studies are needed to validate the relationship between postoperative pneumonia and surgical approach for gastrectomy.

Improved survival after laparoscopic compared to open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a Swedish population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression.

RESULTS

In total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery.

A national survey on the current status of minimally invasive gastric practice on behalf of GIRCG

Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG), during the 2013 annual Consensus Conference to gastric cancer, stated that laparoscopic or robotic approach should be limited only to early gastric cancer (EGC) and no further guidelines were currently available. However, accumulated evidences, mainly from eastern experiences, have supported the application of minimally invasive surgery also for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of our study is to give a snapshot of current surgical propensity of expert Italian upper gastrointestinal surgeons in performing minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of gastric cancer in order to answer to the question if clinical practice overcome the recommendation. Experts in the field among the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer (GIRCG) were invited to join a web 30-item survey through a formal e-mail from January 1st, 2020, to June 31st, 2020. Responses were collected from 46 participants out of 100 upper gastrointestinal surgeons. Percentage of surgeons choosing a minimally invasive approach to treat early and advanced gastric cancer was similar. Additionally analyzing data from the centers involved, we obtained that the percentage of minimally invasive total and partial gastrectomies in advanced cases augmented with the increase of surgical procedures performed per year (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04 respectively). It is reasonable to assume that there is a widening of indications given by the current national guideline into clinical practice. Propensity of expert Italian upper gastrointestinal surgeons was to perform minimally invasive surgery not only for early but also for advanced gastric cancer. Of interest volume activity correlated with the propensity of surgeons to select a minimally invasive approach.

Late complication after gastrectomy for clinical stage I cancer: supplementary analysis of JCOG0912

BACKGROUND

Late complications following gastric cancer surgery, including postgastrectomy syndromes, are complex problems requiring a solution. Reported risk factors for developing late complications include surgery-related factors, such as the surgical approach and the extent of resection and reconstruction. However, this has not been assessed in a prospective study with a large sample size. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate associations between surgery-related factors and the development of late complications. Data from the JCOG0912 trial were used. It compared laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) to open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in clinical stage I gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

This study included 881/921 patients enrolled in the JCOG0912 trial. The incidence of late complications was compared between the ODG and the LADG arms. In addition, associations between surgery-related factors and the development of late complications were assessed by multivariable analyses using the proportional odds model to identify relevant risk factors.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the type or number of patients with late complications between the LADG and the ODG arms. The multivariable analysis for each late complication revealed that the Billroth-I reconstruction (vs. R-en-Y or Billroth-II) had a lower risk of cholecystitis [odds ratio (OR) 0.187, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.039-0.905, P = 0.037] or ileus (OR 0.116, 95%CI 0.033-0.406, P < 0.001), and pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (vs. R-en-Y or Billroth-II) had a higher risk of reflux esophagitis (OR 3.348, 95% CI 1.371-8.176, P = 0.008). The surgical approach was not a risk factor for any late complications.

CONCLUSION

Differences in surgical approaches did not constitute a risk for developing late complications after gastrectomy. Billroth-I reconstruction reduced the risk of ileus and cholecystitis, but pylorus-preserving gastrectomy carried a risk for reflux esophagitis.

Open versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis of survival in a western population-on behalf of the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in the West have been poorly investigated. The aim of the present study was to compare survival outcomes in patients undergoing curative-intent laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in several centres belonging to the Italian Research Group for Gastric Cancer.

METHODS

Data of patients operated between 2015 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed. Propensity Score Matching was performed to balance baseline characteristics of patients undergoing laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. The primary endpoint was 3-year overall survival. Secondary endpoints were 3-year disease-free survival and short-term outcomes. Multivariable regression analyses for survival were conducted.

RESULTS

Data were retrieved from 20 centres. Of the 717 patients included, 438 patients were correctly matched, 219 per group. The 3-year overall survival was 73.6% and 68.7% in the laparoscopic and open group, respectively (p = 0.40). When compared with open gastrectomy, laparoscopic gastrectomy showed comparable 3-year disease-free survival (62.8%, vs 58.9%, p = 0.40), higher rate of return to intended oncologic treatment (56.9% vs 40.2%, p = 0.001), similar 30-day morbidity/mortality. Prognostic factors for survival were ASA Score ≥ 3, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5, lymph node ratio ≥ 0.15, p/ypTNM Stage III and return to intended oncologic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer offers similar rates of survival when compared to open gastrectomy, with higher rates of return to intended oncologic treatment. ASA score, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index, lymph node ratio, return to intended oncologic treatment and p/ypTNM Stage, but not surgical approach, are prognostic factors for survival.

Fifty years of progress in gastric cancer

As with every human malignancy, the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of patients with gastric cancer have undergone enormous evidence-based change over the last 50 years, largely as a result of increasingly rapid developments in technology and science. Some of the changes in clinical practice have derived from prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whereas others have come from study of meticulously maintained prospective databases, which define the disease's natural history over time, and occasionally from in-depth analysis of a single patient with an unexpectedly good or poor outcome. Herein we summarize the more important changes in gastric cancer management and the data supporting those changes.

Convenience of Adding a Needle Grasper in Single-Incision Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy With Billroth I Anastomosis for Clinical Early Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE

To overcome the technical difficulties of single-incision laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (SILDG), needle grasper (Endo Relief^TM)-assisted SILDG (NASILDG) was developed. Here, we compared the operative convenience and postoperative outcomes between SILDG and NASILDG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A needle grasper was inserted into the right upper abdomen and used in the NASILDG. We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent D1 + dissection and delta-shaped Billroth I anastomosis with SILDG or NASILDG performed by a single surgeon between September 2015 and August 2018.

RESULTS

The SILDG (male, 50.0%) and NASILDG (male, 60.0%) groups included 10 and 15 patients, respectively. The operative time without combined operation and anastomosis was significantly shorter in the NASILDG group. Early complications and scar characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

By adding a needle grasper, SILDG became more convenient without decreasing cosmetic results. NASILDG could be a recommended method to reduce the technical difficulty of SILDG.

Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Gastric Cancer in Western Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

Background. The advantages of a laparoscopic approach for the treatment of gastric cancer have already been demonstrated in Eastern Countries. This review and meta-analysis aims to merge all the western studies comparing laparoscopic (LG) versus open gastrectomies (OG) to provide pooled results and higher levels of evidence. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE(PubMed), Embase, WebOfScience and Scopus for studies comparing laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in western centers from 1980 to 2021. Results. After screening 355 articles, 34 articles with a total of 24,098 patients undergoing LG (5445) or OG (18,653) in western centers were included. Compared to open gastrectomy, laparoscopic gastrectomy has a significantly longer operation time (WMD = 47.46 min; 95% CI = 31.83−63.09; p < 0.001), lower blood loss (WMD = −129.32 mL; 95% CI = −188.11 to −70.53; p < 0.0001), lower analgesic requirement (WMD = −1.824 days; 95% CI = −2.314 to −1.334; p < 0.0001), faster time to first oral intake (WMD = −1.501 days; 95% CI = −2.571 to −0.431; p = 0.0060), shorter hospital stay (WMD = −2.335; 95% CI = −3.061 to −1.609; p < 0.0001), lower mortality (logOR = −0.261; 95% the −0.446 to −0.076; p = 0.0056) and a better 3-year overall survival (logHR 0.245; 95% CI = 0.016−0.474; p = 0.0360). A slight significant difference in favor of laparoscopic gastrectomy was noted for the incidence of postoperative complications (logOR = −0.202; 95% CI = −0.403 to −0.000 the = 0.0499). No statistical difference was noted based on the number of harvested lymph nodes, the rate of major postoperative complication and 5-year overall survival. Conclusions. In Western centers, laparoscopic gastrectomy has better short-term and equivalent long-term outcomes compared with the open approach, but more high-quality studies on long-term outcomes are required.

Intraoperative Tumor Identification During Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy: a Novel Fluorescent Clip Marking Versus Metal Clip Marking and Intraoperative Gastroscope

BACKGROUND

In complete laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, the gastric resection line is difficult to determine due to a lack of tactile sensation. The use of intraoperative gastroscopy and intraoperative radiography has been reported, but the burden on personnel and technical complexity present impediments. In our department, based on lesion extent determined with preoperative gastroscopy, a fluorescent clip is used to mark the oral side of the lesion, which is resected after confirmation with a fluorescent laparoscopic system. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of fluorescent clip marking (FCM) in achieving an accurate resection line and reducing the operative time.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients with gastric cancer who underwent complete laparoscopic distal gastrectomy from January 2018 to March 2021 were divided into two groups: the FCM group (n = 32) and the conventional metal clip marking and intraoperative gastroscopy (MCMG) group (n = 24). Short-term outcomes, including the resection margins, gastric resection time, and operative time, were compared and examined.

RESULTS

The fluorescent clips were visible in all cases, and all stumps were negative according to permanent preparations. The operative times for FCM and MCMG were 350 (216-533) vs. 373.5 (258-651) min, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.316), while the gastric resection times were 636.5 (321-2572) vs. 1457.5 (843-4973) s, respectively, and were significantly shorter in the FCM group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

FCM shortened the gastric resection time and could possibly shorten the operative time. FCM is feasible and safe and can potentially be used as a tumor-marking agent to determine accurate surgical resection lines.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Examination of Gastric Cancer, Research Ethics Committee of the Kawaguchi Municipal Medical Centre (Saitama, Japan), approval number: 2019-33. https://kawaguchi-mmc.org/wp-content/uploads/clinicalresearch-r02.pdf.

Analysis of Opioid Use in Patients Undergoing Open Versus Robotic Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive, robotic gastrectomy is associated with better short-term outcomes and quicker functional recovery. However, the degree to which the robotic approach influences postoperative pain and opioid use after gastrectomy is unknown. Our primary aim was to determine whether the robotic approach to gastrectomy reduces postoperative opioid use compared with the open approach.

METHODS

Patients who underwent gastrectomy (November 2018 to September 2021) were identified retrospectively. Clinical characteristics, short-term surgical outcomes, oral morphine equivalent (OME) use, and pain scores were collected. Both groups were managed through an enhanced recovery program in the perioperative period.

RESULTS

Of 81 patients, 50 underwent open and 31 underwent robotic gastrectomy. Compared with open gastrectomy patients, robotic gastrectomy patients had longer surgery time (360 vs. 288 min), less blood loss (50 vs. 138 mL), and shorter hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days) (all medians, P < 0.001). Robotic gastrectomy patients used lower OMEs on postoperative days 0-4 (all P < 0.05) and in total for days 0-4 (total mean dose 65.0 vs. 169.5 mg; P < 0.001) than did open gastrectomy patients. The robotic gastrectomy patients were prescribed a lower mean OME dose than the open gastrectomy patients (19.0 vs. 29.0 mg, respectively; P = 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that robotic approach was associated with lower opioid use (odds ratio 3.70; 95% CI 1.01-14.3; P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy reduces opioid use in the early postoperative period and is associated with fewer OME discharge prescriptions and shorter hospital stay.

Open and minimally invasive gastrectomy in Eastern and Western patient populations: A review of the literature and reasons for differences in outcomes

Randomized trials in the East have established minimally invasive gastrectomy as possibly superior for short-term outcomes and noninferior for long-term survival. Smaller randomized studies from Western countries have supported these findings. However, there are marked disparities in morbidity, mortality, and overall survival noted between Eastern and Western studies. In this article, we review the literature comparing open and minimally invasive gastrectomy in the East and West, and describe the possible reasons for differences in outcomes.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for stage II and III advanced gastric cancer: long‑term follow‑up data from a Western multicenter retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

There has been an increasing interest for the laparoscopic treatment of early gastric cancer, especially among Eastern surgeons. However, the oncological effectiveness of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy (LG) for Advanced Gastric Cancer (AGC) remains a subject of debate, especially in Western countries where limited reports have been published. The aim of this paper is to retrospectively analyze short- and long-term results of LG for AGC in a real-life Western practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All consecutive cases of LG with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC performed from January 2005 to December 2019 at seven different surgical departments were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was diseases-free survival (DFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), number of retrieved lymph nodes, postoperative morbidity and conversion rate.

RESULTS

A total of 366 patients with stage II and III AGC underwent either total or subtotal LG. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 25 ± 14. The mean hospital stay was 13 ± 10 days and overall postoperative morbidity rate 27.32%, with severe complications (grade ≥ III) accounting for 9.29%. The median follow-up was 36 ± 16 months during which 90 deaths occurred, all due to disease progression. The DFS and OS probability was equal to 0.85 (95% CI 0.81-0.89) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.92-0.97) at 1 year, 0.62 (95% CI 0.55-0.69) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.71) at 5 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study has led us to conclude that LG for AGC is feasible and safe in the general practice of Western institutions when performed by trained surgeons.

Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer: A Review

Importance

Surgery plays a critical role in the management of all stages of gastric cancer.

Observations

For patients with early gastric cancer and low risk of lymph node metastasis, endoscopic therapy or surgery alone is potentially curative. Novel techniques, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy, may allow for greater use of stomach-sparing procedures that could improve quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes; however, experience with these techniques is rare outside of East Asia, and studies of long-term outcomes are still ongoing. Patients with later-stage localized gastric cancer benefit from more extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodality therapy, as they are at risk for nodal and distant metastases. There have been recent advances in chemotherapy that have led to improved survival, but the optimal sequencing of multimodality therapy is still being investigated. Better systemic therapy may also increase the role of surgery for patients with oligometastatic disease. There are ongoing studies examining the efficacy of peritoneal-directed therapies in both patients with low-volume peritoneal disease and patients at high risk of peritoneal recurrence.

Conclusions and Relevance

The management of gastric cancer continues to evolve. Surgeons should be aware of novel surgical approaches currently under investigation as well as how surgery fits into the contemporary multidisciplinary approach to this disease.

Open distal gastrectomy versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) is gaining popularity because its early postoperative effect has been shown to be better than open distal gastrectomy (ODG). However, to our knowledge, there are no studies demonstrating ODG is oncologically equivalent to LDG.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study based on the prospectively maintained database of the People's Hospital of Jinan City. Patients with operable, pathologically confirmed early-stage gastric cancer were included, while those with advanced disease or carcinoma in situ were excluded. Extracted data included age, body mass index (BMI), sex, clinical TNM stage, and pathologic stage. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival, and the secondary outcomes included cancer-specific survival, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 126 patients were finally enrolled and included 61 in the ODG group and 65 in the LDG group. Baseline clinical and pathological characteristics were generally balanced between the two groups. After a median follow-up of 8.31 years, the 5-year overall survival rate was estimated to be 82.8% (95% CI: 69.4-90.7%) for the ODG group and 86.7% (95% CI: 73.9-93.5%) for the LDG group and the recurrence patterns were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data showed that the surgical results of both approaches are satisfactory, and LDG offers a reasonable option to ODG in patients with early gastric cancer.

The Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Gastric Cancer

Objective: This study aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in gastric cancer and to compare MIS versus open gastrectomy (OG) in terms of early mortality and morbidity, long-term oncological outcomes, and recurrence rates.

Methods: A total of 75 patients who underwent MIS or OG for gastric cancer at Koç University School of Medicine between December 2014 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative complications and disease-specific survival were compared between surgical approaches.

Results: Of the patients, 44 were treated with MIS and 31 with OG. In the MIS group, 33 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 11 patients underwent robotic gastrectomy. Duration of operation was significantly longer in the MIS group than in the OG group (p<0.0001). The median amount of blood loss was 142.5 (range, 110 to 180) mL in the MIS group and 180.4 (range, 145 to 230) mL in the OG group (p<0.706). The median number of lymph node dissection was 38.9 (range, 15 to 66) and 38.7 (range, 12 to 70) in the MIS and OG groups, respectively (p<0.736). The median length of hospitalization, twelve days in the OG group and nine days in the MIS group. Median follow-up was 19.1 (range, 2 to 61) months in the MIS group and 22.1 (range, 2 to 58) months in the OG group. The median OS and DFS rates were 56.8 months and 39.6 months in the MIS group, respectively (log-rank; p=0.004) and 31.6 months and 23.1 months in the OG group, respectively (log-rank; p=0.003).

Conclusion: Our study results suggest that, despite its technical challenges, MIS is an effective and safe method in treating gastric cancer with favorable early mortality and morbidity rates and long-term oncological outcomes, and acceptable recurrence rates.

Signet ring cell cancer of stomach and gastro-esophageal junction: molecular alterations, stage-stratified treatment approaches, and future challenges

Purpose

There has been an increase in the incidence of signet ring cell cancer (SRCC) of the stomach and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ). The multistage carcinogenesis involving genetic and epigenetic aberrations may have a major role in the increasing incidence of SRCC. Although there are numerous studies on the prognostic value of SRCC, they are markedly inconsistent in their results, making it impossible to draw any meaningful conclusions. We aimed to examine the available evidences on molecular alterations and stage-stratified treatment approaches in SRCC of the stomach and GEJ.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out in PubMed. Studies available in English related to SRCC of stomach and gastro-esophageal junction were identified and evaluated.

Results

This study reviewed the current evidence and provided an insight into the molecular alterations, stage-stratified treatment approaches, and future challenges in the management of SRCC of the stomach and GEJ. Specific therapeutic strategies and personalized multimodal treatment have been recommended based on the tumor characteristics of SRCC.

Conclusion

Multistage carcinogenesis involving genetic and epigenetic aberrations in SRCC is interlinked with stage-dependent prognosis. Specific therapeutic strategy and personalized multimodal treatment should be followed based on the tumor characteristics of SRCC. Endoscopic resection, radical surgery, and perioperative chemotherapy should be offered in carefully selected patients based on stage and prognostic stratification. Future studies in genetic and molecular analysis, histopathological classification, and options of multimodality treatment will improve the prognosis and oncological outcomes in SRCC of gastric and GEJ.

Short- and long-term oncological outcomes of totally laparoscopic gastrectomy versus laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for clinical stage I gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG), which involves a complete intracorporeal gastric transection and the creation of an anastomosis, has been gradually adopted. However, a potential limitation of intracorporeal transection is the lack of tactile feedback, and whether this limitation influences oncological outcomes is unclear. The aim of this study is to evaluate the short- and long-term oncological safety of TLG using endoscopy-guided intracorporeal gastric transection for clinical stage (cStage) I gastric cancer.

METHODS

A total of 1875 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy for cStage I gastric cancer between January 2007 and March 2015 were enrolled in this study. Marking clips were preoperatively placed and a transection line was determined by perceiving it tactually in laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) or endoscopically in TLG. After propensity score matching, 1366 patients (683 each for LAG and TLG groups) were selected to primarily test the non-inferiority of TLG to that of LAG for relapse-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

In the propensity-matched population, the 5-year RFS rates of the LAG and TLG groups were 94.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 92.2-95.8%), and 95.6% (95% CI 93.8-96.9%), respectively. The hazard ratio (TLG/LAG) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.48-1.24, P for non-inferiority < 0.01). There were no significant differences in the recurrence profiles. The incidence of the remnant of marking clips or tumor tissue did not differ (LAG: 1.0% vs. TLG: 1.9%, P = 0.177).

CONCLUSIONS

TLG using preoperative markings and intraoperative endoscopic guidance provides cStage I gastric cancer patients with comparable oncological outcomes to the conventional method.

Establishment of a Fast-Track Gastrectomy Pathway for Patients with Gastric Adenocarcinoma at a U.S. Academic Cancer Center

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of fast-track perioperative care pathways for gastric cancer patients in the U.S. has been challenging due to low disease incidence and limited safety and efficacy data. Our institution recently implemented such a pathway for gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy, and we sought to study its effects.

METHODS

We analyzed data from consecutive patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma from January 2014 to August 2020. Patients who had surgery for recurrence, urgent surgery for obstruction, bleeding, or perforation, or an intrathoracic anastomosis were excluded. The primary predictor was whether the patient had surgery before or after implementation of a perioperative fast-track gastrectomy pathway in July 2018, and the primary outcome was length of stay.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty patients were identified, 109 pre-pathway implementation and 51 post-pathway implementation. Following pathway implementation, length of stay was significantly shorter (median 6 days versus 9 days, p < 0.001), and there was no significant difference in 30-day complication rates (29% pre versus 24% post, P = 0.56) or readmission rates (18% pre versus 16% post, P = 0.85). Using linear segmented regression analysis adjusting for age, body mass index, tumor stage (early versus late), type of surgery (distal/subtotal versus total gastrectomy), and approach (open versus minimally invasive), pathway implementation was found to be associated with a 31% decreased length of stay (effect size 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.49 - 0.98, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Fast-track gastrectomy care pathways are safe and feasible for U.S. gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy and are associated with decreased length of stay.

Clinical Outcomes Following Regionalization of Gastric Cancer Care in a US Integrated Health Care System

PURPOSE

In 2016, Kaiser Permanente Northern California regionalized gastric cancer care, introducing a regional comprehensive multidisciplinary care team, standardizing staging and chemotherapy, and implementing laparoscopic gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy for patients eligible for curative-intent surgery. This study evaluated the effect of regionalization on outcomes.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study included gastric cancer cases diagnosed from January 2010 to May 2018. Information was obtained from the electronic medical record, cancer registry, state vital statistics, and chart review. Overall survival was compared in patients with all stages of disease, stage I-III disease, and curative-intent gastrectomy patients using annual inception cohorts. For the latter, the surgical approach and surgical outcomes were also compared.

RESULTS

Among 1,429 eligible patients with gastric cancer with all stages of disease, one third were treated after regionalization, 650 had stage I-III disease, and 394 underwent curative-intent surgery. Among surgical patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy utilization increased from 35% to 66% (P < .0001), laparoscopic gastrectomy increased from 18% to 92% (P < .0001), and D2 lymphadenectomy increased from 2% to 80% (P < .0001). Dissection of ≥ 15 lymph nodes increased from 61% to 95% (P < .0001). Surgical complication rates did not appear to increase after regionalization. Length of hospitalization decreased from 7 to 3 days (P < .001). Overall survival at 2 years was as follows: all stages, 32.8% pre and 37.3% post (P = .20); stage I-III cases with or without surgery, 55.6% and 61.1%, respectively (P = .25); and among surgery patients, 72.7% and 85.5%, respectively (P < .03).

CONCLUSION

Regionalization of gastric cancer care within an integrated system allowed comprehensive multidisciplinary care, conversion to laparoscopic gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy, increased overall survival among surgery patients, and no increase in surgical complications.

East meets West: the initial results of laparoscopic gastric cancer resections with Eastern principles in a single Western centre - a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

We compared the initial experience of totally laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery with Eastern principles with the results of propensity score-matched counterparts operated with open surgery.

METHODS

From 1163 patients stored in our database, 62 PSM patients were selected for this study. The quality control was assured with video documentation and standardisation of the procedures.

RESULTS

According to the distribution of age, comorbidities, and general health, patients in the LG and OG were well-balanced. Most of the patients in both groups had advanced gastric cancer (69.3%). In the OG, 67.8% of patients received a total gastrectomy, as well as 54.8% of patients in the LG. There was no significant difference in the postoperative mortality between groups. The recovery of bowel function was significantly faster, and postoperative pain was significantly decreased in the LG. Compared to the OG, the inflammatory response was significantly smaller in the LG. There was no significant difference in the overall survival between LG and OG patients.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that laparoscopic gastrectomy with Eastern principles can be safely introduced in a high-volume Western centre with sufficient laparoscopic training. We have also shown that laparoscopy offers a significant faster bowel function recovery, less postoperative pain, and a smaller inflammatory response.

Surgical Treatment for Gastric Cancer

Surgery is an essential component of curative-intent treatment strategies for gastric cancer. However, the care of each patient with gastric cancer must be individualized based on patient and tumor characteristics. It is important that all physicians who will be caring for patient with gastric cancer understand the current best practices of surgical management to provide patients with the highest quality of care. This article aims to provide this information while acknowledging areas of surgical management that are still controversial.

Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes

The use of the robotic platform for gastrointestinal surgery was introduced nearly 20 years ago. However, significant growth and advancement has occurred primarily in the last decade. This is due to several advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery allowing for more complex dissections and reconstructions. Several randomized controlled trials and retrospective reviews have demonstrated equivalent oncologic outcomes compared to open surgery with improved short-term outcomes. Unfortunately, there are currently no universally accepted or implemented training programs for robotic surgery and robotic surgery experience varies greatly. Additionally, several limitations to the robotic platform exist resulting in a distinct learning curve associated with various procedures. Therefore, implementation of robotic surgery requires a multidisciplinary team approach with commitment and investment from clinical faculty, operating room staff and hospital administrators. Additionally, there is a need for wider distribution of educational modules to train more surgeons and reduce the associated learning curve. This article will focus on the implementation of the robotic platform for surgery of the pancreas, stomach, liver, colon and rectum with an emphasis on the associated learning curve, educational platforms to develop proficiency and perioperative outcomes.

Effect of endoscopic resection on short-term surgical outcomes of subsequent laparoscopic gastrectomy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) might affect subsequent laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) because of the electrical coagulation, but the effect remains controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to analyze the effect of ER on the short-term surgical outcomes of subsequent LG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to find eligible studies published from inception to March 21, 2021. Short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the ER-LG group and the LG-only group. The registration ID of this current meta-analysis on PROSPERO is CRD42021238031.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 3611 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The LG-only group had a higher T stage (T1-T2: OR=2.42, 95% CI=1.09 to 5.34, P=0.03; T3-T4: OR=0.41, 95% CI=0.19 to 0.91, P=0.03) than the ER-LG group. The ER-LG group showed a shorter operation time than the LG-only group (MD=-5.98, 95% CI=-10.99 to -0.97, P=0.02). However, no difference was found in operation time after subgroup analysis of propensity score matching studies. No significant difference was found in intraoperative blood loss, time to first oral feeding, or postoperative hospital stay between the ER-LG group and the LG-only group. And no significance was found in overall complications (OR=1.16, 95% CI=0.89 to 1.50, P=0.27), complications of grade ≥ II (OR=1.11, 95% CI=0.71 to 1.73, P=0.64), complications of grade ≥ III b (OR=1.47, 95% CI=0.49 to 4.43, P=0.49) between the ER-LG group and the LG-only group.

CONCLUSIONS

ER did not affect subsequent LG in terms of short-term outcomes, and the ER-LG group might have a shorter operation time than the LG-only group.

[Evidence in minimally invasive oncological gastric surgery]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence on laparoscopic and robotic distal and total gastrectomy in comparison to open surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search of EMBASE and PubMed was conducted and 197 randomized (RCT) and non-randomized (non-RCT) studies were identified. An evaluation of early gastric cancer (EGC) and advanced (AGC) gastric cancer was carried out.

RESULTS

For EGC and laparoscopic distal resection (LDG) and total gastrectomy (LTG) a total of 10 RCT and 6 non-RCT, including 4329 patients (laparoscopic 2010 vs. open 2319) were identified. At a high evidence level (1+, 1++) there was no significant difference in terms of feasibility, intraoperative outcome and oncological quality, mortality and long-term oncological outcome compared to open gastrectomy (OG). After LDG and LTG patients showed a significantly faster early postoperative recovery and lower total morbidity. In contrast, the operation times were significant longer compared to ODG and OTG. For distal AGC and LDG in 6 RCT, including 2806 patients (LDG 1410 vs. ODG 1369) comparable results could be found also with a high evidence level (1++). The evidence for LTG in cases of AGC was lower (2-, 2+). Currently ,only 6 non-RCT with a total of 1090 patients (LTG 539 vs. OTG 551) are available, which showed comparable results to LDG but further high-quality RCTs are necessary. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is currently being evaluated. According to the first studies RG for EGC seems to be equivalent to LDG; however, the evidence is currently low (3 to 2-).

Will It Play in Peoria? A Pilot Study of a Robotic Skills Curriculum for Surgical Oncology Fellows

INTRODUCTION

To implement a mastery-based robotic surgery curriculum using virtual reality (VR) and inanimate reality (IR) drills at multiple Complex General Surgical Oncology (CGSO) fellowships.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective study of curriculum feasibility and efficacy was conducted at four CGSO fellowship sites. All sites had simulators, and kits were provided to perform 19 biotissue drills. Fellows from three non-UPMC sites (n = 15) in 2016-2018 were compared with fellows from University of Pittsburgh (UPMC; n = 15) where the curriculum was validated in 2014-2018.

RESULTS

All fellows completed the pre- and post-test. There was no difference in pre-test scores between UPMC and non-UPMC sites. Only 7 of 15 non-UPMC fellows completed the VR curriculum (47% compliance) compared with all 15 UPMC fellows completing the VR curriculum (100% compliance). UPMC had higher curriculum times (217 versus 93 mins) and % mastery (86% versus 55%). Time spent on curriculum was associated with % mastery (p = 0.01). Both groups showed improvement between pre- and post-test. Post-test VR scores trended higher for UPMC (221 versus 180). Between the non-UPMC sites, there was a difference in compliance (p = 0.03) and % mastery (p = 0.03). Zero non-UPMC fellows performed the biotissue drills, while five contemporary UPMC fellows completed 253 biotissue drills. Approximately 140 UPMC faculty and 300 staff hours were spent on the pilot.

CONCLUSIONS

A proficiency curriculum can result in improved robotic console skills. However, multiple barriers to implementation potentially exist, including availability of simulators, availability of a training robot, on-site support staff, and universal buy-in from fellows, faculty, and leadership.

Comparison of Long- and Short-term Outcomes in 845 Open and Minimally Invasive Gastrectomies for Gastric Cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND

Few Western studies have evaluated the long-term oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches to gastrectomy for gastric cancer. This study aimed to compare the outcomes between minimally invasive and open gastrectomies and between laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomies at a high-volume cancer center in the United States.

METHODS

The study analyzed data for all patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma from January 2007 to June 2017. Postoperative complications and disease-specific survival (DSS) were compared between surgical approaches.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period for the 845 patients in this study was 38.5 months. The stage-stratified 5-year DSS did not differ significantly between open surgery (n = 534) and MIS (n = 311). The MIS approach resulted in significantly fewer complications, as confirmed by adjusted comparison (odds ratio [OR], 0.70; range, 0.49-1.00; p = 0.049). After adjustment, the two groups did not differ in terms of DSS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; range, 0.55-1.25; p = 0.362). The robotic operations (n = 190) had fewer conversions to open procedure (p = 0.010), a shorter operative time (212 vs 240 min; p < 0.001), more dissected nodes (27 vs 22; p < 0.001), fewer Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (5.8% vs 13.2%; p = 0.023), and a shorter postoperative stay (5 vs 6 days; p = 0.045) than the laparoscopic operations (n = 121). The DSS rate did not differ between the laparoscopic and robotic groups.

CONCLUSION

The study findings demonstrated the long-term survival and oncologic equivalency of MIS gastrectomy and the open approach in a Western cohort, supporting the use of MIS at centers that have adequate experience with appropriately selected patients.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for serosa-invasive gastric cancer: A single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Whether laparoscopic gastrectomy is suitable for patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer remains controversial. We performed this study to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic gastrectomy compared with after open gastrectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 906 consecutive patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer from January 2004 to December 2014 in our center, who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. After propensity score matching, 334 patients were included in each group. Surgical conditions and short- and long-term results were compared.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with less estimated blood loss and longer operation time, while the number of harvested lymph nodes was not significantly different between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy. Patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy had an earlier time to first flatus, first diet, and first ambulation and were discharged earlier. Overall and pulmonary postoperative complication rates were lower in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group. With a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year overall survival was 39.3% in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group and 34.3% in the open gastrectomy group, and the 5-year disease-free survival was 36.4% in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group and 32.7% in the open gastrectomy group. Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with better 5-year overall survival in patients aged ≥60 years. The overall recurrence rates and patterns were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is an alternative surgical approach for patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer in terms of short-term outcomes and long-term survival, and it might be more advantageous for certain populations.

Effect of Surgical Approach on Node Harvest in Gastrectomy: Analysis of the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Gastrectomy is the cornerstone of treatment for gastric cancer. Recent studies demonstrated significant surgical outcome advantages for patients undergoing minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy. Lymph node harvest is an indicator of adequate surgical resection, and greater harvest is associated with improved staging and patient outcomes. This study evaluated lymph node harvest based on surgical approach.

METHODS

Gastric adenocarcinoma patients were identified from NCDB who underwent gastrectomy between 2010 and 2016. Patients were classified by surgical approach into three cohorts: robotic, laparoscopic, or open gastrectomy. Clinical and demographic data were collected. Lymph node harvest was compared with univariate analysis and multivariable generalized linear mixed model. Univariate analysis with propensity matching was also performed to control for differences in patient population across cohorts.

RESULTS

We identified 10,690 patients that underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma, with 68% males and median age of 66 (IQR 5774) years. 7161 (67%) underwent open, 2841 (26.6%) laparoscopic, and 688 (6.4%) robotic gastrectomy. Multivariable analysis revealed robotic was associated with a significantly higher median node harvest (18, IQR 1326) compared to laparoscopic (17, IQR 1125) and open gastrectomy (16, IQR 1023). Laparoscopic was also associated with significantly higher node harvest then open gastrectomy. Propensity-matched analysis (6950 patients) showed robotic gastrectomy was still associated with significantly higher node harvest (18, IQR 1226) compared to laparoscopic (17, IQR 1125) and open (17, IQR 1124); however, laparoscopic and open were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Robotic approach is associated with increased node harvest compared to laparoscopic and open approach in gastrectomy patients.

Resultados tempranos en pacientes con cáncer gástrico sometidos a gastrectomía laparoscópica con intención curativa

Introducción. El manejo de pacientes con cáncer gástrico está determinado por el estadio preoperatorio y requiere de una estrategia multidisciplinaria. La cirugía radical, especialmente en pacientes con estadios tempranos, es potencialmente curativa. El abordaje por vía laparoscópica ofrece ventajas sobre la vía abierta, sin embargo, en nuestro medio no hay información en cuanto a resultados oncológicos y posoperatorios tempranos. Métodos. Estudio retrospectivo, descriptivo, de tipo transversal, en pacientes con cáncer gástrico llevados a gastrectomía laparoscópica con intención curativa, entre el 2014 y el 2019, en tres instituciones de la ciudad de Medellín. Se analizaron los datos demográficos, los resultados posoperatorios y oncológicos a corto plazo.  Resultados. Se incluyeron 75 pacientes sometidos a gastrectomía laparoscópica. La mediana de edad fue de 64 años y el estadio más frecuente fue el III. La gastrectomía fue subtotal en 50 pacientes (66,7 %) y total en 25 pacientes (33,3 %). Se hizo disección linfática D2 en 73 pacientes (97,3 %) con una mediana en el recuento ganglionar de 27. La tasa de resección R0 fue de 97,3 %. La mediana de estancia hospitalaria fue de seis días. La tasa de complicaciones mayores fue del 20 % y la mortalidad a 90 días fue del 4 %. Discusión. La calidad oncológica de la gastrectomía laparoscópica fue adecuada y cumple con las recomendaciones de las guías internacionales. Si bien la morbilidad sigue siendo alta, tiene una tasa de sobrevida del 96 % a 90 días.

Gastrectomía laparoscópica casi total con preservación de la rama ascendente de la arteria gástrica izquierda y un 5 % de remanente gástrico. ¿Existe relación con las complicaciones de la anastomosis?

Introducción. Al realizar una gastrectomía distal, el remanente gástrico es irrigado por los vasos gástricos cortos. En este estudio presentamos una serie de casos de gastrectomía distal laparoscópica, con la variante de preservar la rama superior de la arteria gástrica izquierda, con un remanente gástrico pequeño. Métodos. Estudio observacional con intensión analítica, seguimiento de una cohorte retrospectiva de pacientes con cáncer gástrico sometidos a gastrectomía distal radical laparoscópica entre enero 2017 y junio 2019. Se incluyeron todos los pacientes con cáncer gástrico a quienes se les realizó gastrectomía distal radical por laparoscopia. Se estudiaron variables clínicas de los pacientes, variables intraoperatorias, información relacionada con el informe de patología y las complicaciones de la anastomosis gastro-yeyunal. Resultados. Se revisó un total de 61 historias clínicas de pacientes sometidos a gastrectomía distal por laparoscopia, entre quienes se encontró la preservación de la rama ascendente de la arteria gástrica izquierda en el 73,8 % de los pacientes (n=45). El promedio de ganglios resecados fue de 24. Se presentaron un total de 10 complicaciones, ocho relacionadas con la anastomosis (tres estenosis, cuatro filtraciones y un paciente con hemorragia del tracto digestivo superior), y dos con colecciones intrabdominales. En el análisis estadístico no se encontró relación entre la preservación de la rama ascendente de la arteria gástrica izquierda con la presencia de complicaciones. Discusión. La variación que presentamos de la técnica de la gastrectomía distal por laparoscopia cumple con los requisitos oncológicos en los pacientes con cáncer gástrico y no se relaciona con complicaciones de la anastomosis gastró-yeyunal.

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: The KLASS-02-RCT Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

It is unclear whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy. The noninferiority of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer compared with open surgery in terms of 3-year relapse-free survival rate was evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A phase III, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted for patients with histologically proven locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma suitable for distal subtotal gastrectomy. The primary end point was the 3-year relapse-free survival rate; the upper limit of the hazard ratio (HR) for noninferiority was 1.43 between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups.

RESULTS

From November 2011 to April 2015, 1,050 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopy (n = 524) or open surgery (n = 526). After exclusions, 492 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 482 underwent open surgery and were included in the analysis. The laparoscopy group, compared with the open surgery group, suffered fewer early complications (15.7% v 23.4%, respectively; P = .0027) and late complications (4.7% v 9.5%, respectively; P = .0038), particularly intestinal obstruction (2.0% v 4.4%, respectively; P = .0447). The 3-year relapse-free survival rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 76.0% to 85.0%) for the laparoscopy group and 81.3% (95% CI, 77.0% to 85.0%; log-rank P = .726) for the open group. Cox regression analysis after stratification by the surgeon revealed an HR of 1.035 (95% CI, 0.762 to 1.406; log-rank P = .827; P for noninferiority = .039). When stratified by pathologic stage, the HR was 1.020 (95% CI, 0.751 to 1.385; log-rank P = .900; P for noninferiority = .030).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was comparable to open surgery in terms of relapse-free survival for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy could be a potential standard treatment option for locally advanced gastric cancer.

Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma in the USA: Insights and Oncologic Outcomes in 220 Patients

BACKGROUND

While multiple Asian and a few Western retrospective series have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer, its reliability for thorough resection, especially for locoregional disease, has not yet been firmly established, and reported learning curves vary widely. To support wider implementation of robotic gastrectomy, we evaluated the learning curve for this approach, assessed its oncologic feasibility, and created a selection model predicting the likelihood of conversion to open surgery in a US patient population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data on all consecutive patients who underwent robotic gastrectomy at a high-volume institution between May 2012 and March 2019.

RESULTS

Of the 220 patients with gastric cancer selected to undergo curative-intent robotic gastrectomy, surgery was completed using robotics in 159 (72.3%). The median number of removed lymph nodes was 28, and ≥ 15 lymph nodes were removed in 94% of procedures. Surgical time decreased steadily over the first 60-80 cases. Complications were generally minor: 7% of patients experienced complications of grade 3 or higher, with an anastomotic leak rate of 2% and mortality rate 0.9%. Factors predicting conversion to open surgery included neoadjuvant chemotherapy, BMI ≥ 31 kg/m², and tumor size ≥ 6 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the safety and oncologic feasibility of robotic gastrectomy for selected patients with gastric cancer. Proficiency can be achieved by 20 cases and mastery by 60-80 cases. Ideal candidates for this approach are patients with few comorbidities, BMI < 31 kg/m², and tumors < 6 cm.

Short- and long-term survival after laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: a National database study

BACKGROUND

The use of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer remains controversial. Our objective was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) vs. open total gastrectomy (OTG) for gastric adenocarcinoma using a national cancer database.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was analyzed for total gastrectomy cases performed for gastric adenocarcinoma. Patient demographics and surgical outcomes were stratified by stage and compared based on laparoscopic vs. open surgical approach. Primary outcome measures included 30-day and 90-day mortality and Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate long-term survival.

RESULTS

There were 2584 cases analyzed, including 592 (22.9%) stage I, 710 (27.5%) stage II, and 1282 (49.6%) stage III cases. The distribution of LTG vs. OTG cases was 156 (26.4%) vs. 436 (73.6%) for stage I, 163 (23.0%) vs. 547 (77.0%) for stage II, and 241 (18.8%) vs. 1041 (81.2%) for stage III. For all stages analyzed, there was no difference between laparoscopic vs. open approach for adjusted 30-day mortality (stage I: adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.52, p = 0.75; stage II: AOR 1.36, p > 0.99; stage III: AOR 0.46, p = 0.29) or 90-day mortality (stage I: AOR 0.46, p = 0.99; stage II: AOR 1.17, p = 0.99; stage III: 0.57, p = 0.29). There was no difference between LTG vs. OTG 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves for any stage (stage I: p = 0.20; stage II: p = 0.83; stage III: p = 0.46). When compared to OTG, LTG had a similar hazard ratio (HR) for mortality (HR 0.89 p = 0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy and OTG have comparable 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and long-term survival.

Adherence with operative standards in the treatment of gastric cancer in the United States

BACKGROUND

Despite multiple clinical trials and practice guidelines for the treatment of gastric cancer, oncologic outcomes have not improved in the United States. One potential reason could be differences in the quality of surgery as performed in a controlled trial versus in practice.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, rates of adherence with operative standards for gastrectomy for cancer were analyzed. Of the numerous evidence-based operative standards outlined in the manual, two were reliably measured in the NCDB: (1) achieving and R0 resection, and (2) having > 16 lymph nodes examined. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling and logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 28,705 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent gastrectomy during 2004-2014 were identified. Only 36.5% of stage 0/I patients, and 41.8% of stage II/III patients, met minimum standards. Predictors for meeting standards included age < 65, fewer comorbidities, Asian/Pacific Islander race, and treatment at academic and high-volume centers. Patients who met standards had longer OS (stage 0/I: 104.9 versus 66.6 months; stage II/III: 40.6 versus 26.0 months; p < 0.001 for both). Meeting standards was a significant predictor for improved OS for both stage 0/I and II/III patients (HR = 0.665 and HR = 0.747, respectively, p < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

For standards that are measurable in the NCDB, adherence is poor. Improved adherence with operative standards may improve survival for gastric cancer patients in the U.S. There is a need for better measuring of, and adherence with, operative standards in gastrectomy for cancer.

From biology to surgery: One step beyond histology for tailored surgical treatments of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer related death. Although its incidence is globally declined, prognosis remains dismal in the Western hemisphere, while better outcomes are evidenced in Asian countries. Endoscopic or surgical resection with or without lymphadenectomy represents the only chance of cure, with limited improvements of the prognosis in case of associated chemotherapy in a neoadjuvant or adjuvant setting. This could be mainly attributed to the uniform fashion of treatment of gastric cancer, mainly based on the histological features, that usually do not reflect the complexity of the disease. With the recent introduction of genomic technologies and new generation sequencing techniques, gastric cancer biology is now investigated in great details. This has brought to the publication of three main molecular classifications, based on the underlying molecular biology of gastric cancer. Although only few clinical reports are currently present in literature, the identification of gastric cancer molecular subtypes has shown interesting findings that may pave the way to a tailored clinical and surgical management. The aim of this review is, thus, to give a comprehensive overview of the current molecular classifications as compared to the available histopathological ones, also focusing on the potential clinical and surgical benefits and the future perspectives for a more personalized treatment of gastric cancer.

Short-term Outcomes of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy With D2 Lymphadenectomy to Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer (KLASS-02-RCT)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of KLASS-02-RCT, a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 lymphadenectomy with open distal gastrectomy (ODG).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Although several benefits of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery have been reported, strong evidence is still limited, especially in locally advanced gastric cancer which requires extensive lymph node dissection.

METHODS

Enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4a and N0-1 gastric adenocarcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, 90-day mortality, postoperative pain, and recovery were compared between LDG and ODG groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1050 patients were randomly assigned to LDG (n = 526) or ODG group (n = 524) between November 2011 and April 2015. After excluding patients who received bypass or no surgery, 1011 patients were analyzed as actual treatment group. Mean number of totally retrieved lymph nodes was similar in both groups (LDG = 46.6 vs ODG = 47.4, P = 0.451). Early morbidity rate was significantly lower after LDG (16.6%) than after ODG (24.1%; P = 0.003). Postoperative analgesics use and patients' reported pain score were significantly lower after LDG. First day of flatus was earlier after LDG (3.5 vs 3.7 d, P = 0.025) and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in LDG group (8.1 vs 9.3 d, P = 0.005). Ninety days' mortality rate was similar in both groups (LDG = 0.4% vs ODG = 0.6%, P = 0.682).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer shows benefits in terms of lower complication rate, faster recovery, and less pain compared with open surgery.

Effect of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy vs Open Distal Gastrectomy on Long-term Survival Among Patients With Stage I Gastric Cancer: The KLASS-01 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is gaining popularity over open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer because of better early postoperative outcomes. However, to our knowledge, no studies have proved whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy.

Objective

To examine whether the long-term survival among patients with stage I gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is noninferior to that among patients undergoing open distal gastrectomy.

Design

The Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group, which includes 15 surgeons from 13 institutes, conducted a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority, prospective randomized clinical trial (KLASS-01) of patients with histologically proven, preoperative clinical stage I gastric adenocarcinoma from January 5, 2006, to August 23, 2010. Survival and recurrence status of the patients was determined in December 2016.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (n = 705) or open distal gastrectomy (n = 711). Of these patients, 85 received a surgical approach opposite the one to which they were randomized (63 randomized to the open surgery group and 22 to the laparoscopic group).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Difference in 5-year overall survival between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups. The noninferiority margin was prespecified as -5% (corresponding hazard ratio of 1.54), with an assumed survival of 90% after 5 years in the open surgery group.

Results

Among the 1416 patients (mean [SD] age, 57.3 [11.1] years; 940 [66.4%] male) included in the study, the 5-year overall survival rates were 94.2% in the laparoscopic group and 93.3% in the open surgery group (log-rank P = .64). Intention-to-treat analysis confirmed the noninferiority of the laparoscopic approach compared with the open approach (difference, 0.9 percentage points; 1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.6 to infinity). The 5-year cancer-specific survival rates were similar between the 2 groups (97.1% in the laparoscopic group and 97.2% in the open surgery group, log-rank P = .91; difference, -0.03 percentage points; 1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.8 to infinity). Per-protocol analysis results were consistent with the intention-to-treat results for overall and cancer-specific survival rates.

Conclusions and Relevance

The KLASS-01 trial revealed similar overall and cancer-specific survival rates between patients receiving laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is an oncologically safe alternative to open surgery for stage I gastric cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00452751.

Utilization of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Its Association with Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used to treat gastric cancer in the USA. A potential benefit of MIS is increased likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Our objectives were (1) to assess trends and predictors of MIS for gastric cancer, (2) to evaluate the association between MIS and postoperative chemotherapy, and (3) to investigate the relationship between MIS and survival.

METHODS

Patients with T3 or greater and/or N+ gastric adenocarcinoma were identified from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2015. Patients aged ≥ 85, with metastatic disease, treated with only preoperative chemotherapy, or with contraindications to chemotherapy were excluded. Hierarchical logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards were used to assess associations between MIS and postoperative chemotherapy and survival.

RESULTS

Of 21,872 gastric resections, 6083 (27.8%) were MIS and 15,789 (72.2%) open. The majority were partial/subtotal (68.3%). Utilization of MIS increased from 18 to 37% from 2010 to 2015 (p < 0.01). Predictors of MIS were Asian race, any insurance coverage, and treatment at high-volume centers. Among 7540 patients with locally advanced disease, MIS was associated with receiving postoperative chemotherapy compared to open surgery (77.7% vs. 71.9%; OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.54). MIS was associated with improved survival before adjusting for postoperative chemotherapy (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.72-0.97) but not after (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.01).

DISCUSSION

Utilization of MIS for locally advanced gastric cancer approximately doubled during the study period. Compared to open surgery patients, MIS patients were more likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy. The increased utilization of postoperative chemotherapy may explain the associated survival advantage observed with MIS.