Laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy performed by following the perigastric fascias and the intrafascial space for advanced upper-third gastric cancer

Surgical Approach to the Upper Side of the Gastrosplenic Ligament During Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Proximal Gastric Cancer: Operative Techniques and Initial Results

Background: Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer has become widespread as minimally invasive surgical treatment, but use of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) remains limited because of the technical difficulty and complexity of lymphadenectomy at the splenic hilum. Surgical techniques and initial experiences with the surgical approach to the upper side of the gastrosplenic ligament during LTG are introduced. Materials and Methods: Between January 2019 and December 2022, 57 patients with proximal gastric cancer underwent LTG using this approach. Results: Regarding the extent of lymphadenectomy, D1+, D2, spleen-preserving D2 + 10, and D2 + 10 with splenectomy were performed in 31, 18, 4, and 4 patients, respectively. Operative time was 341 (192-724) minutes, and estimated blood loss was 30 (0-515) g. There were no conversions to laparotomy and no postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III. Conclusions: The present procedure is safe and feasible and provides an excellent operative view at the splenic hilum, making it easier to determine exactly the extent of lymphadenectomy in accordance with cancer progression.

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

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

Advantages of Splenic Hilar Lymph Node Dissection in Proximal Gastric Cancer Surgery

Gastrectomy with lymph node dissection remains the gold standard for curative treatment of gastric cancer. Dissection of splenic hilar lymph nodes has been included as a part of D2 lymph node dissection for proximal gastric cancer. Previously, pancreatico-splenectomy has been performed for dissecting splenic hilar lymph nodes, followed by pancreas-preserving splenectomy and spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy. However, the necessity of routine splenectomy or splenic hilar lymph node dissection has been under debate due to the increased morbidity caused by splenectomy and the poor prognostic feature of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis. In contrast, the relatively high incidence of splenic hilar lymph node metastasis, survival advantage, and therapeutic value of splenic hilar lymph node dissection in some patient subgroups, as well as the effective use of novel technologies, still supports the necessity and applicability of splenic hilar lymph node dissection. In this review, we aimed to evaluate the need for splenic hilar lymph node dissection and suggest the subgroup of patients with favorable outcomes.

Laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique for radical total gastrectomy

Introduction

Complete mesogastrium excision (CME) of the perigastric mesogastrium and dissection of lymph nodes (LNs) no. 10 and no. 11 remain technically challenging aspects of laparoscopic radical total gastrectomy (LRTG) plus CME. To address some of these difficulties, we introduced the laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique (LPMET) and the concept of the “enjoyable space” to partly modify the procedures of conventional radical surgery and characterize the perigastric space and the surgical plane as well as its boundaries.

Aim

To introduce the laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique (LPMET) and the “enjoyable space” when undergoing laparoscopic radical total gastrectomy.

Material and methods

From July 2016 to June 2017, 79 cases of upper gastric cancer that were treated by laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy plus CME were investigated. The retrospective database included the patient characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and morbidity and mortality rates depending on the completeness of their medical records.

Results

Laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy plus CME was successfully performed in all 79 cases. The mean surgical time was 232.5 ±46.0 min, and the intraoperative blood loss was 67.6 ±52.3 ml. A total of 2245 LNs were retrieved (mean 28.1 ±10.8 retrieved from each specimen). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 10.3 ±1.6 days. The postoperative morbidity rate was 17.7%. After a median follow-up period of 12 months, one patient experienced liver metastasis; of the other 78 patients, none died or experienced tumor recurrence or metastasis.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique and the “enjoyable space” could be a novel, minimally invasive approach and space to achieve CME and provide benefit for the dissection of LNs no. 10 and no. 11.

Effects of duodenal transection timing on clinical short-term outcomes of patients with laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy for advanced proximal gastric cancer

Background

To determine the optimal timing of duodenal transection in patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) in combination with laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy (LSPL) for advanced proximal gastric cancer (APGC).

Methods

One hundred twenty-seven patients with APGC who received LATG with duodenal transection as well as LSPL between January 2017 and July 2018 were retrospectively recruited in this study. According to the different transection timing, the patients were allocated into two groups: a conventional group (CG) who received the duodenal transection prior to the LSPL and an experimental group (EG) who were given LSPL before the duodenum was transected. Clinical short-term outcomes were compared in the two groups.

Results

Analysis of the demographical and clinical characteristics showed that the two groups were comparable with no significant differences between CG and EG in the study patients regardless of their body mass indices (BMI). The intraoperative and postoperative indicators for clinical short-term outcomes were compared between the CG and EC, and results indicated that the EG had significant shorter mean time of LSPL and total operation time than those in the CG (P < 0.05). Of note, the numbers of patients with intraoperative injury and the volume of blood loss during the LSPL procedure were significantly reduced in the EG versus CG (P < 0.05). For the obese APGC patients, administration of LSPL prior to duodenal transection significantly increased the number of dissected No.10 lymph nodes (LNs) (P < 0.05). The other intraoperative and postoperative indicators did not show any differences between the two comparison groups.

Conclusions

Our findings demonstrated that duodenal transection timing was significantly associated with clinical short-term outcomes of APGC patients. The duodenal transection prior to the LSPL is superior overall to the conventional transection timing in the treatment of APGC patients with LATG and LSPL in combination.

Current status of laparoscopic total gastrectomy

In this article, the current state of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) was reviewed, focusing on lymph node dissection and reconstruction. Lymph node dissection in LTG is technically similar to that in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer; however, LTG for advanced gastric cancer requires extended lymph node dissections including splenic hilar lymph nodes. Although a recent randomized controlled trial clearly indicated no survival benefit in prophylactic splenectomy for lymph node dissection at the splenic hilum, some patients may receive prognostic benefit from adequate splenic hilar lymph node dissection. Considering reconstruction, there are two major esophagojejunostomy (EJS) techniques, using a circular stapler (CS) or using a linear stapler (LS). A few studies have shown that the LS method has fewer complications; however, almost all studies have reported that morbidity (such as anastomotic leakage and stricture) is not significantly different for the two methods. As for CS, we grouped various studies addressing complications in LTG into categories according to the insertion procedure of the anvil and the insertion site in the abdominal wall for the CS. We compared the rate of complications, particularly for leakage and stricture. The rate of anastomotic leakage and stricture was the lowest when inserting the CS from the upper left abdomen and was significantly the highest when inserting the CS from the midline umbilical. Scrupulous attention to EJS techniques is required by surgeons with a clear understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of each anastomotic device and approach.

Development of lymph node dissection in laparoscopic gastrectomy: safety and technical tips

With the accumulation of experience in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy and the progress in surgical instruments, the laparoscopic technique has been widely applied in gastric cancer. Combining previous reports with data from our center, we believe that laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer is safe and feasible, and its surgery-related complications have an incidence that is not higher, and perhaps even lower, than that of traditional laparotomy. However, the stomach has many anatomical levels and an abundant blood supply; additionally, laparoscopic surgery is relatively difficult. Therefore, understanding the normal gastric peripheral vascular anatomy and variation, selecting an appropriate surgical approach, applying programmed surgical procedures and team cooperation, and paying attention to the details in lymph node dissection are keys to a successful laparoscopic lymph node dissection in gastric cancer.

Laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery: Current evidence and future perspectives

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely accepted as a standard alternative for the treatment of early-stage gastric adenocarcinoma because of its favorable short-term outcomes. Although controversies exist, such as establishing clear indications, proper preoperative staging, and oncologic safety, experienced surgeons and institutions have applied this approach, along with various types of function-preserving surgery, for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. With technical advancement and the advent of state-of-the-art instruments, indications for laparoscopic gastrectomy are expected to expand as far as locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic gastrectomy appears to be promising; however, scientific evidence necessary to generalize this approach to a standard treatment for all relevant patients and care providers remains to be gathered. Several multicenter, prospective randomized trials in high-incidence countries are ongoing, and results from these trials will highlight the short- and long-term outcomes of the approach. In this review, we describe up-to-date findings and critical issues regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

A scoring system to predict the risk of postoperative complications after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer based on a large-scale retrospective study

To investigate the risk factors for postoperative complications following laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer and to use the risk factors to develop a predictive scoring system.Few studies have been designed to develop scoring systems to predict complications after LG for gastric cancer.We analyzed records of 2170 patients who underwent a LG for gastric cancer. A logistic regression model was used to identify the determinant variables and develop a predictive score.There were 2170 patients, of whom 299 (13.8%) developed overall complications and 78 (3.6%) developed major complications. A multivariate analysis showed the following adverse risk factors for overall complications: age ≥65 years, body mass index (BMI) ≥ 28 kg/m, tumor with pyloric obstruction, tumor with bleeding, and intraoperative blood loss ≥75 mL; age ≥65 years, a Charlson comorbidity score ≥3, tumor with bleeding and intraoperative blood loss ≥75 mL were identified as independent risk factors for major complications. Based on these factors, the authors developed the following predictive score: low risk (no risk factors), intermediate risk (1 risk factor), and high risk (≥2 risk factors). The overall complication rates were 8.3%, 15.6%, and 29.9% for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk categories, respectively (P < 0.001); the major complication rates in the 3 respective groups were 1.2%, 4.7%, and 10.0% (P < 0.001).This simple scoring system could accurately predict the risk of postoperative complications after LG for gastric cancer. The score might be helpful in the selection of risk-adapted interventions to improve surgical safety.