Comparative study of laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy in gastric cancer management

Early Gastric Outlet Obstruction Caused by the Free End of Barbed Sutures Following Laparoscopic Gastric Resection with Roux-en-Y Reconstruction

BACKGROUND Recent developments in surgical suture material include the use of sutures with unidirectional barbs that facilitate laparoscopic suturing thanks to self-anchoring and tension-keeping properties. Complications deriving from the use of barbed sutures have been previously reported. In this report we present the case of a patient with gastric outlet obstruction by the free end of a V-Loc™ barbed suture (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) following Roux-en-Y gastric resection. CASE REPORT In February 2023, a 77-year-old man who underwent laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for cancer followed by Roux-en-Y reconstruction developed symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction a few days after discharge. The patient was readmitted to the hospital due to vomiting 4 days after being discharged after an uneventful postoperative course. Imaging confirmed the presence of an occlusion at the level of the jejunojejunal anastomosis, with a noticeable change in caliber. During laparoscopy, a loop of bowel was entrapped around the tail of the barbed suture used to close the common enterotomy of jejunojejunal anastomosis. Following laparoscopic division of the anchoring suture, the bowel regained its normal caliber. CONCLUSIONS Although complications from the use of unidirectional barbed surgical sutures are rare, this report highlights bowel obstruction as a recognized postoperative complication. The preferred treatment is laparoscopic division of the suture's tail. To prevent complications related to barbed sutures, it is essential to ensure that all barbs of the suture are properly unfolded.

Immunonutrition reduces complications rate and length of stay after laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a single unit retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative immunonutrition (IN) reduces the incidence of postoperative complications in malnourished patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal surgery. However, its effect in norm-nourished patients remains unclear. Furthermore, patients with gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) are not routinely included in protocols of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of perioperative IN in patients undergoing laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) within an established ERAS pathway.

METHODS

A comparative retrospective study of patients undergoing LTG, receiving an immune-enhancing feed plus maltodextrin load the day of surgery (Group A) versus patients who had the same operation but no IN nor fast track management (group B).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in patient demographic characteristics between the two groups but the medium age of patients in group A was older. Thirty-days postoperative complications were respectively 8.7% in Group A and 33.3% in Group B (p 0.04). Mean and median LOS for Group A and B were also significantly different: 7.2 ± 4.4 vs 10.3 ± 5.4 and 7 vs 10 days respectively.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative IN associated with ERAS protocol in normo-nourished patient undergoing LTG seems to reduce postoperative complications. Reduction in LOS is possibly associated to the ERAS protocol. Clinical trial registration Clinical trials.gov: NCT05259488.

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.

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.

Long-term and short-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open surgery for advanced gastric cancer: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of laparoscopy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains controversial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a literature search on the EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant available articles published between the time of the databases' inception and July 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 14,689 patients were included in the 41 studies identified. A total of 6976 patients were in an laparoscopic approach group (LG) and 7713 patients were in an open approach group (OG). The meta-analysis showed that in randomized control trials (RCTs), LG were better than OG in terms of estimated blood loss, time to oral intake and time to first flatus while the operation time and proximal resection margin (PRM) were significantly worse in LG than in OG. In the non-RCTs, LG had shorter hospital stays, less blood loss, less intraoperative transfusion, less time to oral intake, time to first flatus, time to ambulation; less overall or serious complications; and better 3-year and 5-year overall or disease-free survival (DFS). Operation times and PRM were significantly worse for LGs.

CONCLUSION

The safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for AGC is not inferior to that of traditional open surgery, and to a certain extent, can reduce trauma, facilitate recovery, and be validated in RCTs and non-RCTs. In the real-world cohort, laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer achieved a better survival rate and DFS rate. However, to evaluate the efficacy of these two methods more comprehensively, high-quality randomized controlled trials and longer follow-up times are still needed.

Complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation in colorectal cancer in the era of minimally invasive surgery

Since the 19th century, appropriate lymphadenectomy has been considered a cornerstone of oncologic surgery and one of the most important prognostic factors. This approach can be applied to any surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. During surgery for colon and rectal cancer, an adequate portion of the mesentery is removed together with the segment of bowel affected by the disease. The adequate number of lymph nodes to be removed is standardized and reported by several guidelines. It is mandatory to determine the appropriate extent of lymphadenectomy and to balance its oncological benefits with the increased morbidity associated with its execution in cancer patients. Our review focuses on the concept of "complete mesenteric excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL)," a radical lymphadenectomy for colorectal cancer that has gained increasing interest in recent years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the evolution of this approach over the years, its potential oncologic benefits and potential risks, and the improvements offered by laparoscopic techniques. Theoretical advantages of CME are improved local-relapse rates due to complete removal of the intact mesocolic fascia and improved distance recurrence rates due to ligation of vessels at their origin (CVL) which guarantees removal of a larger number of lymph nodes. The development and worldwide diffusion of laparoscopic techniques minimized postoperative trauma in oncologic surgery, providing the same oncologic results as open surgery. This has been widely applied to colorectal cancer surgery; however, CME entails a technical complexity that can limit its wide minimally-invasive application. This review analyzes results of these procedures in terms of oncological outcomes, technical feasibility and complexity, especially within the context of minimally invasive surgery.

Mesenteric closure with polymer-ligating clips after right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision for cancer and mesentery-based ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease

Mesenteric closure following right colectomy remains controversial and, following the advent of laparoscopic surgery, many surgeons do not routinely close the mesentery after colorectal resection. Nevertheless, especially after the introduction of operations such as right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision and ileocolic resections with extensive mesentery removal for Crohn's disease, the wide mesenteric defect resulting from the dissections can certainly expose the patients to complications such as internal hernias or volvuli. In general, mesenteric closure requires intracorporeal suturing. We describe a simple technique for the closure of the mesentery after surgical resection using polymer-ligating clips. This novel technique seems to minimize the time, effort and risk inherent to the procedure, even after large mesenteric excisions.

Central vascular ligation and mesentery based abdominal surgery

In the nineteenth century the idea of a correct surgical approach in oncologic surgery moved towards a good lymphadenectomy. In colon cancer the segment is removed with adjacent mesentery, in gastric cancer or pancreatic cancer a good oncologic resection is obtained with adequate lymphadenectomy. Many guidelines propose a minimal lymph node count that the surgeon must obtain. Therefore, it is essential to understand the adequate extent of lymphadenectomy to be performed in cancer surgery. In this review of the current literature, the focus is on "central vascular ligation", understood as radical lymphadenectomy in upper and lower gastrointestinal cancer, the evolution of this approach during the years and the improvement of laparoscopic techniques. For what concerns laparoscopic surgery, the main goal is to minimize post-operative trauma introducing the "less is more" concept whilst preserving attention for oncological outcomes. This review will demonstrate the importance of a scientifically based standardization of oncologic gastrointestinal surgery, especially in relation to the expansion of minimally invasive surgery and underlines the importance to further investigate through new randomized trials the role of extended lymphadenectomy in the new era of a multimodal approach, and most importantly, an era where minimally invasive techniques and the idea of "less is more" are becoming the standard thought for the surgical approach.

Feasibility and outcomes of ERAS protocol in elective cT4 colorectal cancer patients: results from a single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Programs of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery reduces morbidity and shorten recovery in patients undergoing colorectal resections for cancer. Patients presenting with more advanced disease such as T4 cancers are frequently excluded from undergoing ERAS programs due to the difficulty in applying established protocols. The primary aim of this investigation was to evaluate the possibility of applying a validated ERAS protocol in patients undergoing colorectal resection for T4 colon and rectal cancer and to evaluate the short-term outcome.

METHODS

Single-center, retrospective cohort study. All patients with a clinical diagnosis of stage T4 colorectal cancer undergoing surgery between November 2016 and January 2020 were treated following the institutional fast track protocol without exclusion. Short-term postoperative outcomes were compared to those of a control group treated with conventional care and that underwent surgical resection for T4 colorectal cancer at the same institution from January 2010 to October 2016. Data from both groups were collected retrospectively from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were diagnosed with T4 cancer, 49 patients were included in the ERAS cohort and 33 in the historical conventional care cohort. Both, the mean time of tolerance to solid food diet and postoperative length of stay were significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the control group (3.14 ± 1.76 vs 4.8 ± 1.52; p < 0.0001 and 6.93 ± 3.76 vs 9.50 ± 4.83; p = 0.0084 respectively). No differences in perioperative complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this cohort study from a single-center registry support the thesis that the adoption of the ERAS protocol is effective and applicable in patients with colorectal cancer clinically staged T4, reducing significantly their length of stay and time of tolerance to solid food diet, without affecting surgical postoperative outcomes.

Ileal Neuroendocrine Tumor in a Patient with Sclerosing Mesenteritis: Which Came First?

BACKGROUND Jejunoileal neuroendocrine tumors (JI-NETs) are rare tumors that can be associated with mesenteric fibrosis. This case report is of an incidental finding of a JI-NET in a patient who was previously misdiagnosed with sclerosing mesenteritis. CASE REPORT A 42-year-old man was admitted to our institution with diffuse abdominal pain and clinical and radiographic signs of bowel obstruction. He had a previous diagnosis of sclerosing mesenteritis, which had been histologically diagnosed after an exploratory laparoscopy performed in 2009 for recurrent acute abdominal pain. He was also annually monitored through computed tomography scans for an incidentally discovered, gradually enlarging mesenteric mass for which a "wait and watch" management approach was adopted. After a period of fasting and observation, the patient underwent an urgent exploratory laparotomy because of his worsening condition. Intraoperatively, an ileocecal resection was performed, along with excision of the known mesenteric mass. The pathology report revealed an ileal NET with nodal metastases within the mesentery and mesenteric tumor deposits (pT3N1). CONCLUSIONS JI-NETs are rare entities, which are usually encountered as incidental findings or in patients with unspecific abdominal pain. Our case represents a probable delayed diagnosis of JI-NET in the context of sclerosing mesenteritis; therefore, a possible association between these 2 conditions should be investigated.

Perforated gastric cancer: a critical appraisal

Gastric cancer perforation is a life-threatening condition that accounts for less than 5% of all gastric cancer patients and typically requires emergency surgery. However, preoperative diagnosis is difficult and management has a dual purpose: to treat peritonitis and to achieve a curative resection. The optimal surgical strategy is still unclear and prognosis remains poor. A search of the literature was performed using MEDLINE databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane) using terms such as "perforated gastric cancer", "perforated gastric cancer and surgery", "perforated gastric tumour" and "gastric cancer perforated". Case reports, other reviews, non-english written papers and papers written before 2010 were excluded. Eight articles published between 2010 and 2020 matched the inclusion criteria for this review. Perforated gastric cancer was more prevalent in elderly males. Distal stomach was most frequently involved. Preoperative diagnosis was uncommon. Mortality rates ranged from 2 to 46%. Patients able to receive an R0 resection demonstrated better long-term survival compared with patients who had simple closure procedures. Laparoscopic procedure was mentioned only in one study. In an emergency situation, curative RO resection should always be offered in patients without multiple adverse factors. A surgical strategy using laparoscopic local repair as first step of surgery to resolve the peritonitis followed by a radical open or laparoscopic gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy could be considered. A balance between emergency and oncological needs should drive the surgical choice on a case by case basis.

Management of Low Rectal Cancer Complicating Ulcerative Colitis: Proposal of a Treatment Algorithm

Low rectal Carcinoma arising at the background of Ulcerative Colitis poses significant management challenges to the clinicians. The complex decision-making requires discussion at the multidisciplinary team meeting. The published literature is scarce, and there are significant variations in the management of such patients. We reviewed treatment protocols and operative strategies; with the aim of providing a practical framework for the management of low rectal cancer complicating UC. A practical treatment algorithm is proposed.

Volume-outcome relationship in rectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Hospital centralization effect is reported to lower complications and mortality for high risk and complex surgery operations, including colorectal surgery. However, no linear relation between volume and outcome has been demonstrated. Aim of the study was to evaluate the increased surgical volume effect on early outcomes of patient undergoing laparoscopic restorative anterior rectal resection (ARR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing ARR with primary anastomosis between November 2016 and December 2020 after centralization of rectal cancer cases in an academic Centre. Short-term outcomes are compared to those of patients operated in the same unit during the previous 10 years before service centralization. The primary outcome was estimated anastomotic leak rate. Mean operative time, need of conversion, postoperative use of blood transfusion, radicality, in-hospital stay, number and type of complications, readmission and reoperation rate, mortality and 1-year and stoma persistence rates were evaluated as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

86 patients were operated in the study period and outcomes compared to those of 101 patients operated during the previous ten years. Difference in volume of surgery was significant between the two periods (p 0.019) and the estimated leak rate was significantly lower in the higher volume unit (p 0.047). Mean operative time, need of conversion, postoperative use of blood transfusion and in-hospital stay (p < 0.05) were also significantly reduced in Group A.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the shift toward higher volume in rectal cancer surgery is associated to decreased anastomotic leak rate. Potentiation of lower volume surgical units may yield optimal perioperative outcomes.

[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-).

Clinicopathological factors and survival outcomes of signet-ring cell and mucinous carcinoma versus adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Histological subtypes of colorectal cancer may be associated with varied prognostic features. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare clinicopathological characteristics, recurrence and overall survival between colorectal signet-ring cell (SC) and mucinous carcinoma (MC) to conventional adenocarcinoma (AC).

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid and Cochrane Library was performed for studies that reported data on clinicopathological and survival outcomes on SC and/or MC versus AC from January 1985 to May 2020. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models and between-study heterogeneity was assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty studies of 1,087,055 patients were included: 11,510 (1.06%) with SC, 110,179 (10.13%) with MC and 965,366 (88.81%) with AC. Patients with SC were younger than patients with AC (WMD - 0.47; 95% CI - 0.84 to -0.10; I2 88.6%; p = 0.014) and more likely to have right-sided disease (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.72-2.60; I2 82.9%; p < 0.001). Locoregional recurrence at 5 years was more frequent in patients with SC (OR 2.81; 95% CI 1.40-5.65; I2 0.0%; p = 0.004) and MC (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.18-3.15; I2 74.0%; p = 0.009). 5-year overall survival was significantly reduced when comparing SC and MC to AC (HR 2.54; 95% CI 1.98-3.27; I2 99.1%; p < 0.001 and HR 1.38; 95% CI 1.19-1.61; I2 98.6%; p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

SC and MC are associated with right-sided lesions, advanced stage at presentation, higher rates of recurrence and poorer overall survival. This has strong implications towards surgical and oncological management and surveillance of colorectal cancer.

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective case-matched study on perioperative outcomes

Background

This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with intraoperative hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods

In this case-matched study, we retrospectively reviewed the database of 223 patients with AGC who underwent LDG in Tangdu Hospital from April 2016 to February 2019. Among all participants, 177 patients underwent LDG alone and 46 underwent LDG with HIPEC. We matched total of 138 (1:2) patients from the LDG + HIPEC group (n 46) and the LDG group (n 92) for gender, age, date of operation, and tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage of tumor.

Results

There was no significant difference in the Clavien-Dindo classification of complications between LDG alone and LDG + HIPEC patients. Further analysis showed the morbidity of gastroparesis to be significantly increased in LDG + HIPEC patients. At the same time, we found that the operation time, the time to 1st flatus, and hospital stay were longer in LDG + HIPEC patients and the incidence of abdominal recurrence 2 years after operation was significantly higher in the LDG group than the LDG + HIPEC group.

Conclusions

The combination of LDG with intraoperative HIPEC is a safe and feasible method for AGC and HIPEC will limit the recovery of gastrointestinal functions. In addition, during the follow-up of our study, although there was no statistical difference between the two groups in abdominal recurrence at 2 years after surgery, a decreasing trend of abdominal recurrence in LDG + HIPEC patients could be seen in comparison to LDG patients.

Preoperative Immunonutrition vs. Standard Dietary Advice in Normo-Nourished Patients Undergoing Fast-Track Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Immunonutrition (IN) appears to reduce infective complications and in-hospital length of stay (LOS) after major gastrointestinal surgery, but its use in normo-nourished patients is still controversial. The primary aim of this comparative observational study was to evaluate if pre-operative IN reduces in-hospital stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer under an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. The influence of IN on time to first bowel movements, time to full oral diet tolerance, number and type of complications, reasons of prolonged LOS and readmission rate was evaluated as secondary outcome. Patients undergoing ERAS laparoscopic colorectal resection between December 2016 and December 2019 were reviewed. Patients who have received preoperative IN (group A) were compared to those receiving standard dietary advice (group B). Mean in-hospital LOS was significantly shorter in patients receiving preoperative IN than standard dietary advice (4.85 ± 2.25 days vs. 6.06 ± 3.95 days; p < 0.0492). No differences in secondary outcomes were observed. Preoperative IN associated with ERAS protocol in normo-nourished patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection seems to reduce LOS.

The Role of Active Inflammation and Surgical Therapy in Crohn's Disease Recurrence

An altered balance between effector and regulatory factors is supposed to sustain the tissue-damaging immune response in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Several studies demonstrate that severe active inflammation is a strong predictor for surgical complications and recurrence. Indeed, bowel resection in Crohn's disease (CD) patients has a high surgical recurrence rate. In this review, we examined the IBD inflammatory pathways, the current surgical treatments, and the almost inevitable recurrence. The question that might arise is if the cure of intestinal CD is to be found in the surgical approach. A selective search of two databases (PubMed and the Cochrane Library) has been carried out without considering a specific time horizon as inclusion criteria. The scope of this literature review was investigating on the role of inflammation in the management of CD. The following key words have been used to develop the query string: (i) inflammation; (ii) Crohn's disease; (iii) surgery; and (iv) postsurgical recurrence.

Pathophysiology of Crohn's disease inflammation and recurrence

Chron's Disease is a chronic inflammatory intestinal disease, first described at the beginning of the last century. The disease is characterized by the alternation of periods of flares and remissions influenced by a complex pathogenesis in which inflammation plays a key role. Crohn's disease evolution is mediated by a complex alteration of the inflammatory response which is characterized by alterations of the innate immunity of the intestinal mucosa barrier together with a remodeling of the extracellular matrix through the expression of metalloproteins and increased adhesion molecules expression, such as MAcCAM-1. This reshaped microenvironment enhances leucocytes migration in the sites of inflammation, promoting a TH1 response, through the production of cytokines such as IL-12 and TNF-α. IL-12 itself and IL-23 have been targeted for the medical treatment of CD. Giving the limited success of medical therapies, the treatment of the disease is invariably surgical. This review will highlight the role of inflammation in CD and describe the surgical approaches for the prevention of the almost inevitable recurrence.

ACTH-Independent Cushing's Syndrome Associated with Left Adrenocortical Oncocytoma of Uncertain Malignant Potential

Adrenocortical oncocytomas are rare and mostly nonfunctioning neoplasms. We report the case of a 27-year-old woman diagnosed with an ACTH-independent Cushing's syndrome due to left adrenal oncocytoma. She underwent laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Histopathological examination revealed an oncocytoma of uncertain malignant potential with a low Ki-67 proliferation index, inhibin A positivity, and chromogranin A negativity. Electron micrographs confirmed adrenal oncocytoma cells, characterized by the presence of a large amount of mitochondria. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient experienced a progressive regression of Cushing-related symptoms. Periodical follow-ups with MRI and cortisol dosage are required due to the neoplasm's uncertain malignant potential. Considerations on the diagnosis, pathology findings, clinical remarks, and interventions are made.

Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer: The European Point of View

Objective

Multiple Asian studies have proved the feasibility of laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of gastric cancer. The difference between Asian and European patients could limit their application in Europe. We reviewed the literature for European studies comparing open gastrectomy with laparoscopic approach in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Method

We searched the keywords gastric cancer and laparoscopy in MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included all studies published between 1990 and 2016 and conducted in Europe.

Result

We found 1 randomized and 13 cohort studies which compared laparoscopic with open gastrectomy. We found no mean difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested between laparoscopic and open group (mean difference: -0.49; 95% CI: -2.42; 1.44, p=0.62) and no difference of short-term or long-term mortality (short-term odds ratio: 0.74, p=0.47; long-term odds ratio: 0.65, p=0.11). We found a longer operative time in the laparoscopic group (mean difference: 35.75 minutes, p<0.01) but lesser reoperation rate than the open group (odds ratio: 1.55 p=0.01).

Conclusion

European based population studies found results comparable with their Asian counterpart. In the current state of evidence, minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is safe and can achieve the same oncological results.

Long-term oncological outcomes in laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A meta-analysis of high-quality nonrandomized studies

BACKGROUND

Multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and several meta-analyses have confirmed that laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is a safe and feasible procedure for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) in terms of short-term outcomes. However, the long-term oncological outcomes of LG for AGC are still needed for further evaluation. This study aimed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of LG with open gastrectomy (OG) for patients with AGC.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in various databases from January 1997 to August 2018. Studies comparing the long-term oncological outcomes between LG with OG were evaluated and data were extracted accordingly. We performed the meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies with 4494 patients (2273 in LG group and 2221 in OG group) were included. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.05, P = 0.28), disease-free survival (DFS) rate (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.06, P = 0.27), and recurrence rate (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.04, P = 0.13) were comparable in LG and OG. Subgroup analysis showed the publication year, study region, sample size, extent of resection, extent of lymphadenectomy, retrieved lymph nodes, proportion of stage III, and patients with serosa-positive (pT4a) did not influence the estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with AGC, LG is a feasible surgical procedure alternative to OG in terms of long-term oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: where are we now and where are we going?

INTRODUCTION

Minimally-invasive surgery is gaining increasing popularity for the management of gastric cancer (GC). Areas covered: The authors hereby comprehensively and systematically reviewed the randomized and/or prospective evidence on laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for GC. For early GC located in the distal stomach, various randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority/non-inferiority of LG especially in reducing surgical trauma and enhancing postoperative recovery without compromising surgical safety and oncologic efficacy. For advanced GC, while multicenter large-scale randomized evidence has demonstrated the safety and feasibility of LG by experienced hands, the long-term survival which is to be clarified by several ongoing trials are crucial to determine whether a more widespread application is acceptable. Randomized evidence regarding the application of laparoscopic total or proximal gastrectomy, which is technically challenging, is scarce. Various attempts in modification of the traditional laparoscopic approach to further reduce the trauma have been evaluated, such as single-incision and totally LG. LG is becoming increasingly individualized and precise. Expert commentary: The current randomized and/or prospective evidence supports the non-inferiority of laparoscopic surgery especially for the management of early GC located in the distal stomach, while the definitive efficacy of the laparoscopic approach for more surgically challenging situations remains largely explorative and investigative.

Comparison between laparoscopic and open surgery for large gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A meta-analysis

AIM

To investigate whether laparoscopic surgery is as safe and feasible as open resection for patients with larger gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) (≥ 5 cm).

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database was performed. Relevant studies of laparoscopic and open surgery for GISTs of > 5 cm published before December 2016 were identified from these databases. The quality of the studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The tumor size, operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, complication rate, and disease-free survival rate were assessed. The software Stata (version 12.0) was used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Five clinical trials comprising 209 patients with GISTs of similar larger sizes were evaluated. The pooled analysis of 100 patients in the laparoscopic resection group and 109 patients in the open resection group demonstrated that laparoscopic surgery was significantly associated with a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.001) and less blood loss (P = 0.002). Moreover, there were no statistically significant differences in the operation time (P = 0.38), postoperative complication rate (P = 0.88), or disease-free survival rate (P = 0.20) between two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed that for patients with large GISTs of comparable sizes, laparoscopic surgery did not significantly influence the operation factors or clinical outcomes compared with open surgery. This suggests that laparoscopic resection is as acceptable as open surgery for treatment of large gastric GISTs.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has been used as an alternative to open gastrectomy (OG) to treat early gastric cancer. However, the use of LG for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has been in debate.

METHODS

Literature retrieval was performed by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library up to July 2014. Potential studies comparing the surgical effects between LG with OG were evaluated and data were extracted accordingly. Meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan. The pooled risk ratio and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, 26 studies were included in this meta-analysis. LG had some advantages over OG, including shorter hospitalization (WMD, -3.63, 95 % CI, -4.66 to -2.60; P < 0.01), less blood loss (WMD, -161.37, 95 % CI, -192.55 to -130.18; P < 0.01), faster bowel recovery (WMD, -0.78, 95 % CI, -1.05 to -0.50; P < 0.01), and earlier ambulation (WMD, -0.95, 95 % CI, -1.47 to -0.44; P < 0.01). In terms of surgical and oncological safety, LG could achieve similar lymph nodes (WMD, -0.49, 95 % CI, -1.78 to 0.81; P = 0.46), a lower complication rate [odds ratio (OR), 0.71, 95 % CI, 0.59 to 0.87; P < 0.01], and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) comparable to OG.

CONCLUSIONS

For AGCs, LG appeared comparable with OG in short- and long-term results. Although more time was needed to perform LG, it had some advantages over OG in achieving faster postoperative recovery. Ongoing trials and future studies could help to clarify this controversial issue.

Comparison Between Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in Europe: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

AIMS

We compared laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomies with open gastrectomies and with each other that were held for gastric cancer in Europe.

METHODS

We searched for studies conducted in Europe and published up to 20 February 2015 in the PubMed database that compared laparoscopic or robotic with open gastrectomies for gastric cancer and with each other.

RESULTS

We found 18 original studies (laparoscopic vs open: 13; robotic vs open: 3; laparoscopic vs robotic: 2). Of these, 17 were non-randomized trials and only 1 was a randomized controlled trial. Only four studies had more than 50 patients in each arm. No significant differences were detected between minimally invasive and open approaches regarding the number of retrieved lymph nodes, anastomotic leakage, duodenal stump leakage, anastomotic stenosis, postoperative bleeding, reoperation rates, and intraoperative/postoperative mortality. Nevertheless, laparoscopic procedures provided higher overall morbidity rates when compared with open ones, but robotic approaches did not differ from open ones. On the contrary, blood loss was less and hospital stay was shorter in minimally invasive than in open approaches. However, the results were controversial concerning the duration of operations when comparing minimally invasive with open gastrectomies. Additionally, laparoscopic and robotic procedures provided equivalent results regarding resection margins, duodenal stump leakage, postoperative bleeding, intraoperative/postoperative mortality, and length of hospital stay. On the contrary, robotic operations had less blood loss, but lasted longer than laparoscopic ones. Finally, there were relatively low conversion rates in laparoscopic (0%-6.7%) and robotic gastrectomies (0%-5.6%) in most studies.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomies may be considered alternative approaches to open gastrectomies for treating gastric cancer. Minimally invasive operations are characterized by less blood loss and shorter hospital stay than open ones. In addition, robotic procedures have less blood loss, but last longer than laparoscopic ones.

Feasibility of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for patients with poor physical status: A propensity-score matching study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopically-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) has been established to be a minimally invasive treatment for early gastric cancer. However, few studies have shown the feasibility of LAG in patients with risky comorbidities according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) classification. We performed this retrospective cohort study to assess the feasibility of LG in patients with an ASA-PS class of 3 or higher.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 214 patients with an ASA-PS class of 3 or 4 among 1192 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy with lymph-node dissection between 1999 and 2014 in our hospital. Finally, 106 patients were generated by propensity-score matching between LAG and open gastrectomy (OG). Postoperative complications were compared between LAG and OG.

RESULT

The overall incidence of complications was the same in LAG (30%) and OG (30%). Surgical complications were similar in LAG and OG (19% and 17%, p = 0.80). Medical complications also did not differ significantly between LAG and OG (21% and 15%, p = 0.45).

CONCLUSION

LAG was a feasible procedure for patients with gastric cancer who had an ASA-PS class of 3 or 4 and could undergo general anesthesia. LAG can become an optional treatment for such risky patients.

Comparing the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D1+ and D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D1+ lymph node dissection (LND) for early gastric cancer has been widely accepted. However, LDG with D2 LND for advanced gastric cancer remains in limited use. The aim of this retrospective study was to clarify the safety of LDG with D2 LND for gastric cancer.

METHODS

From January 2010 to September 2014, 296 patients underwent LDG; those who received D1+ LND (n = 230) or D2 LND (n = 66) were included in this study. The clinicopathological characteristics and short-term outcomes of both groups were investigated and compared.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups. However, the frequency of infectious intra-abdominal complications was higher in the D2 LND group than in the D1+ LND group. Additionally, a lower risk of infectious intra-abdominal complications was seen with certified than with uncertified operators.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of short-term outcomes demonstrated that LDG with D2 LND is generally feasible. However, the risk of infectious intra-abdominal complications is higher with D2 LND than with D1+ LND. Also, D2 LND should be performed by trained operators.

Minimally invasive surgery for stomach cancer

Laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer has become extremely widespread in recent years especially in Asian countries due to its low invasiveness. As to evidence of indication for laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer, laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer often appears to be indicated for early gastric cancer at many institutions, while evidence was considered to be insufficient to recommend laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer at Stage II and above. There are also problems with indications for cases other than tumour factors. No meta-analyses and prospective studies have been reported, but outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer in gastric cancer patients with co-morbid and/or existing diseases have been reported in retrospective studies. Indications in the elderly appear to be favourable in terms of post-operative ambulation considering factors such as the degree of dissection in accordance with the status of the patient. Meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and several retrospective studies have compared the short-term usefulness of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer with that of conventional gastrectomy. The superiority of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer has been reported in terms of the reduced amount of bleeding, a reduction in the administration frequency and period of analgesic doses, a reduction in the duration of fever, early recovery of intestinal movement and early return to oral intake. A small-scale randomized controlled trial and several retrospective studies have demonstrated no significant differences in survival rate, recurrence rate and type of recurrence between laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer and conventional gastrectomy. The results of the aforementioned trials in early gastric cancer in Japan and Korea for which enrolment is complete remain to be published.

Potential benefits of laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy with esophagogastrostomy for cT1 upper-third gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Few reports have compared laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy (LAPG) with laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) in patients with cT1N0 gastric cancer. This study assessed the safety and feasibility of LAPG with esophagogastrostomy in these patients and compared postgastrectomy disturbances and nutritional status following LAPG and LATG.

METHODS

This study compared 40 patients who underwent LAPG with esophagogastrostomy and 59 who underwent LATG with esophagojejunostomy, both with OrVil™. Surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, nutritional status at 1 and 2 years, and relapse-free survival were compared in these two groups.

RESULTS

Operation time was significantly shorter in the LAPG group than in the LATG group (280 min vs. 365 min, P < 0.001). Although the rate of surgical complications was similar in the two groups, the rate of anastomotic stricture was significantly higher in the LAPG group than in the LATG group (28 vs. 8.4 %; P = 0.012). Rates of reflux esophagitis graded A or higher in the Los Angeles classification were 10 and 5.1 %, respectively. Hemoglobin levels 2 years after surgery, relative to baseline levels, were significantly higher in the LAPG group than in the LATG group (98.6 vs. 92.9 %, P = 0.020). Body weight, albumin and total protein concentrations, and total lymphocyte count 1 and 2 years after surgery were slightly, but not significantly, higher in the LAPG group. Relapse-free survival rates were similar, as were 5-year overall survival rates (86 vs. 79 %, P = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

LAPG with esophagogastrostomy using OrVil™ was safe and feasible for patients with cT1N0 gastric cancer. LAPG may have nutritional advantages over LATG, but the rate of anastomotic stricture was significantly higher for LAPG than for LATG.

Therapeutic effects of laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery on patients with gastric cancer

Objective:

To compare the therapeutic effects of laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery on patients with gastric cancer.

Methods:

Sixty-six patients with gastric cancer who were treated in our hospital from January 2012 to December 2013 were selected and divided into a control group and an observation group by the random number method (n=33). The control group was treated by traditional laparotomy, and the observation group was treated by laparoscopic surgery. CD₄/CD₈ ratios and IgG expressions in the patients were detected on preoperative and postoperative fourth days. Intraoperative blood loss, surgical time, time of anal gas evacuation and time of postoperative independent ambulation of the two groups were observed.

Results:

The intraoperative blood loss, surgical time, time of anal gas evacuation, time of postoperative independent ambulation, time of urinary catheter indwelling and average hospitalization stay length of the observation group were significantly different from those of the control group (P<0.05). The postoperative rates of fever and complications in the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group, and the two groups had significantly different CD₄/CD₈ ratios and IgG levels on the postoperative 4th day (P<0.05).

Conclusion:

Compared with traditional laparotomy, laparoscopic surgery can well treat patients with gastric cancer minimally invasively. Meanwhile, their postoperative recovery was facilitated due to slightly affected humoral immunity and cellular immune function.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Open vs. Laparoscopic Resection of Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

Gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common sarcoma of the gastrointestinal tract, and surgical resection is the primary treatment of early disease. Limited data exist concerning laparoscopic resections of these neoplasms. This systematic review was designed to evaluate the literature comparing laparoscopic and open surgical resection of gastric GISTs and to assess the effectiveness and safety of this minimally invasive technique. We performed a systematic search of MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, the clinical trials database and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses as well as the past 3 years of conference abstracts from the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons Annual Meetings. Studies comparing the open and the laparoscopic approaches to the resection of gastric GISTs were included in this systematic review. Two reviewers independently performed the screen of titles and abstracts, the full manuscript review, the data extraction and the risk of bias assessment. A quantitative analysis was performed. Of the 189 studies identified, seven studies were included. The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly lower length of hospital stay (3.82 days (2.14 - 5.49)). There was no observed difference in operative time, adverse events, estimated blood loss, overall survival and recurrence rates. This study supports that laparoscopic resection is safe and effective for gastric GISTs and is associated with a significantly lower length of hospital stay. Further trials are needed for cost analysis and to rigorously assess oncologic outcomes.

Is Laparoscopic Surgery the Standard of Care for GI Luminal Cancer?

As surgeons in India strive to keep pace with the technical advances in the field of laparoscopic surgery, we endeavor to evaluate the mounting global evidence regarding laparoscopic gastric and colorectal resections for cancer. We seem to be riding on the crest of excellence in traditional open surgery for gastrointestinal malignancies, opening avenues for research and for the establishment of practice guidelines in laparoscopic surgery. Results from available trials along with those from ongoing studies are paving the path toward the acceptance and standardization of these procedures. What must be ascertained is whether sound oncological principles, which are ultimately exhibited by long-term outcomes, are being preserved while garnering the established benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

Long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Many meta-analyses have confirmed the technical feasibility and favorable short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer patients, but the long-term survival outcome of LG remains controversial compared with open gastrectomy (OG). This study aimed to compare the 5-year overall survival (OS), recurrence, and gastric cancer-related death of LG with OG among gastric cancer patients. PubMed was searched to February 2014. The resectable gastric cancer patients who underwent curative LG or OG were eligible. The studies that compared 5-year OS, recurrence, or gastric cancer-related death in the LG and OG groups were included. A meta-analysis, meta-regression, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and stage-specific analysis were performed to estimate the survival outcome between the two groups and identify the potential confounders. Quality assessment was based on a tailored comparability scoring system. Twenty-three studies with 7336 patients were included. The score of comparability between two groups and the extent of lymphadenectomy were two independent confounders. Based on the well-balanced studies, the 5-year OS (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.90-1.28, P = 0.45), recurrence (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.68-1.02, P = 0.08), and gastric cancer-related death (OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.65-1.13, P = 0.28) rates were comparable in LG and OG. Several subsets such as the publication year, study region, sample size, gastrectomy pattern, extent of lymphadenectomy, number of nodes harvested, and proportion of T1-2 or N0-1 did not influence the estimates, if they were well balanced. Particularly, the stage-specific estimates obtained comparable results between the two groups. Randomized controlled trials comparing LG with OG remain sparse to assess their long-term survival outcomes. The major contributions of this systematic review compared with other meta-analyses are a comprehensive collection of available long-term survival outcomes within a much larger number of observations and a more precise consideration of confounders. Current knowledge indicates that the long-term survival outcome of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery is comparable to that of open surgery among early or advanced stage gastric cancer patients, and LG is acceptable with regard to oncologic safety.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: are the long-term results comparable with conventional open gastrectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer has been adopted to treat both early and locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC), but there are still concerns about its oncologic safety especially in AGC. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the long-term outcomes of LG with those of open gastrectomy (OG) in patients with AGC.

METHODS

The quantitative synthesis of outcomes of studies from three major databases, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central, was performed using common keywords related to gastric cancer and laparoscopy on July 31, 2012.

RESULTS

Ten studies (one randomized controlled trial and nine retrospective cohort studies) with 1,819 participants (960 patients in OG, and 859 patients in LG) were included in the current meta-analysis. Nine studies compared the overall survival rate between LG and OG for AGC, and five studies reported the disease-free survival. There was no statistical difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-1.06, P = 0.22) and disease-free survival (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.76-1.40, P = 0.86) between the two modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The current clinical evidence revealed that there was no evidence that LG is inferior to OG even for AGC if the surgeons have sufficient experience.

Cooperative techniques for surgical assistants in laparoscopy-assisted radical distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Laparoscopy-assisted radical distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer is challenging to perform, particularly when conducted with D2 lymph node dissection. Successful completion of this procedure requires collaboration among all members of the surgical team. On the basis of the clinical data of 52 patients undergone laparoscopy-assisted radical distal surgery for gastric cancer from September 2009 to October 2010, we describe cooperative techniques for first and laparoscopic-holder assistants that are required to ensure successful outcomes. Precautions for surgical assistants are also described.

Totally laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer is still controversial, particularly in terms of oncologic efficacy. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open resection for gastric cancer at a single Western institution.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This study was designed as a matched cohort study from a prospective gastric cancer database. Forty-one patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer between June 2008 and January 2012 were matched with 41 patients undergoing open gastrectomy in the same time period. Patient pairing was done according to age, gender, type of gastrectomy (subtotal or total), and tumor stage via a randomized statistical method. The short-term outcomes and oncologic adequacy of the laparoscopic and open procedures were compared. A D2 lymph node dissection was performed in the majority of patients in both groups.

RESULTS

The two study groups were similar with respect to patient and tumor characteristics. Laparoscopic procedures were associated with a decreased blood loss (118.7 versus 312.4 mL, P<.005), incidence of surgery-unrelated complications (3 versus 9 patients, P<.05), and duration of hospital stay (8.1 versus 11.5 days, P<.05) but increased operative time for both subtotal (223.5 versus 158.2 minutes, P<.001) and total (298.1 versus 185.5 minutes, P<.001) gastrectomies. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes after D2 dissection was similar: 30.0 for laparoscopic and 29.7 for open patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of a nonrandomized analysis, this study shows that the laparoscopic approach is a safe and oncologically adequate option for the treatment of gastric cancer, which compares favorably with open gastrectomy in short-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer

Gastric cancer is common worldwide. Tumor location and disease stage differ between Asian and Western countries. Western patients often have higher BMIs and comorbidities that may make laparoscopic resections challenging. Multiple trials from Asian countries demonstrate the benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer while maintaining equivalent short-term and long-term oncologic outcomes compared with open surgery. The outcomes of laparoscopy seem to offer equivalent results to open surgery. In the United States, laparoscopic gastrectomy remains in its infancy and is somewhat controversial. This article summarizes the literature on the epidemiology, operative considerations and approaches, and outcomes for laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Clinical value of laparoscopic exploration with peritoneal lavage in preoperative staging of advanced gastric cancer

AIM: To explore the clinical significance of laparoscopic exploration with peritoneal lavage in staging of gastric cancer and choice of surgical procedures.

METHODS: The clinical data for 43 patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic exploration and treatment of in the Peking University Cancer Hospital were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS: All the 43 patients with gastric cancer underwent successful laparoscopic exploration and peritoneal lavage. The procedures were performed in 30-45 min (average 32 min) with less bleeding. Fourteen cases of peritoneal metastasis were found during operation. There was once case of gastric tumor directly invading surrounding organs. Twenty-seven cases of gastric tumours penetrated through the serosa of the stomach, while the others still confined to the serosa. Endoscopic palpation was not obvious in four cases. All patients underwent peritoneal lavage, and 16 (37.2%) cases got positive cytologic findings in serous cavity effusions.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic exploration with peritoneal lavage has very important clinical significance in the staging of gastric cancer and choice of surgical procedures.

Helicobacter pylori: gastric cancer and extragastric intestinal malignancies

The greatest challenge in Helicobacter pylori-related diseases continues to remain prevention of gastric cancer. New evidence supports the beneficial effect of H. pylori eradication not only on prevention of gastric cancer but also on the regression of preneoplastic conditions of the gastric mucosa. Concerning early detection of gastric cancer there are still no adequate means and there is urgent need to define appropriate markers, for example, by genome-wide research approaches. Currently, the best available method is the "serologic" biopsy based on pepsinogen I and the pepsinogen I/II ratio for identification of patients with severe gastric atrophy at increased risk for gastric cancer development. The treatment of early gastric cancer by endoscopic techniques can be performed safely and efficiently, but patients need meticulous follow-up for detection of metachronous lesions. In case of advanced disease, laparoscopically assisted surgical procedures are safe and favorable compared to open surgery. Two phase III trials support the role of adjuvant systemic treatment with different regimens. Unfortunately, there is still only slow progress in the development of palliative treatment regimens or modification of the existing therapy protocols. There is accumulating evidence for a role of H. pylori infection also in colorectal carcinogenesis. Seropositive individuals are at higher risk for the development of colorectal adenomas and consequently adenocarcinomas of this anatomical region. This phenomenon can partly be attributed to the increase of serum gastrin as response to atrophic changes of the gastric mucosa.