Comparing Laparoscopic to Endoscopic Resections for Early Gastric Cancer in a High Volume North American Center

Factors influencing occurrence of metachronous gastric cancer after endoscopic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Metachronous gastric cancer (MGC) can occur after endoscopic resection for gastric cancer. Further studies on factors other than Helicobacter pylori infection are needed. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate risk factors for metachronous recurrence of endoscopically resected gastric cancer.

METHODS

We searched medical literature published by February 2023 and identified patients with MGC after endoscopic resection for gastric cancer. The occurrence of MGC and the presence of intestinal metaplasia (IM), severe atrophic gastritis (AG), and H. pylori infection were quantitatively analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified 2,755 patients from nine cohort studies who underwent endoscopic resection for gastric cancer by 2018. Those with severe AG or presence of IM had a significantly higher incidence of MGC than those without (RR 2.00, 95% CI 1.35-2.98, I2 = 52% for severe atrophy on antrum; RR 7.08, 95% CI 3.63-13.80, I2 = 0% for antral IM). Absolute risk difference of MGC occurrence was 7.1% in those with severe AG and 9.2% in those with IM. The difference in incidence rate per 1,000 person-years was 17.5 person-years for those with severe AG and 24.7 person-years for those with IM. However, H. pylori eradication did not significantly affect the occurrence of MGC (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.88-1.59, I2 = 10%).

CONCLUSION

Gastric cancer patients with severe AG or presence of IM had a 2.0-fold or 7.0-fold higher risk of MGC occurrence after endoscopic resection than those without, respectively. They need more stringent follow-up to monitor MGC occurrences (CRD42023410940).

The optimal interval of surveillance gastroscopy after endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasia: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Due to the possible metachronous recurrence of gastric neoplasia, surveillance gastroscopy is mandatory after endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasia. However, there is no consensus on the surveillance gastroscopy interval. This study aimed to find an optimal interval of surveillance gastroscopy and to investigate the risk factors for metachronous gastric neoplasia.

METHODS

Medical records were reviewed retrospectively in patients who underwent endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasia in 3 teaching hospitals from June 2012 to July 2022. Patients were divided into two groups; annual surveillance vs. biannual surveillance. The incidence of metachronous gastric neoplasia was identified, and the risk factors for metachronous gastric neoplasia were investigated.

RESULTS

Among the 1,533 patients who underwent endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasia, 677 patients were enrolled in this study (annual surveillance 302, biannual surveillance 375). Metachronous gastric neoplasia was observed in 61 patients (annual surveillance 26/302, biannual surveillance 32/375, P = 0.989), and metachronous gastric adenocarcinoma was observed in 26 patients (annual surveillance 13/302, biannual surveillance 13/375, P = 0.582). All the lesions were removed by endoscopic resection successfully. In a multivariate analysis, severe atrophic gastritis on gastroscopy was an independent risk factor for metachronous gastric adenocarcinoma (odds ratio 3.8, 95% confidence interval 1.4‒10.1; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Meticulous observation to detect the metachronous gastric neoplasia is necessary for patients with severe atrophic gastritis during follow-up gastroscopy after endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasia. Annual surveillance gastroscopy might be enough after endoscopic resection for gastric neoplasia.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on endoscopic submucosal dissection for the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers: methodology and review of evidence

This document from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides a full description of the methodology used in the review of the evidence used to inform the final guidance outlined in the accompanying Summary and Recommendations document regarding the role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the management of early esophageal and gastric cancers. This guideline used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and specifically addresses the role of ESD versus EMR and/or surgery, where applicable, for the management of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), and gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and their corresponding precursor lesions. For ESCC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >15 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions ≤15 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for such patients with ESCC, whenever possible. For EAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well-differentiated, nonulcerated cancer >20 mm, whereas in patients with similar lesions measuring ≤20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. For GAC, the ASGE suggests ESD over EMR for patients with early-stage, well or moderately differentiated, nonulcerated intestinal type cancer measuring 20 to 30 mm, whereas for patients with similar lesions <20 mm, the ASGE suggests either ESD or EMR. The ASGE suggests against surgery for patients with such lesions measuring ≤30 mm, whereas for lesions that are poorly differentiated, regardless of size, the ASGE suggests surgical evaluation over endosic approaches.

Endoscopic Resection Versus Surgery in the Treatment of Early Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Aim

Endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred approach to treat early gastric cancer (EGC) in patients without suspected lymph node involvement and that meet the criteria for ER. Surgery is a more aggressive treatment, but it may be associated with less recurrence and the need for reintervention. Previous meta-analyses comparing ER with surgery for EGC did not incorporate the most recent studies, making accurate conclusions not possible.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine complete resection, length of hospital stay (LOHS), adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, recurrence, 5-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with EGC.

Results

A total of 29 cohorts studies involving 20559 patients were included. The ER (n = 7709) group was associated with a lower incidence of AEs (RD = -0.07, 95%CI = -0.1, -0.04, p < 0.0001) and shorter LOHS (95% CI -5.89, -5.32; p < 0,00001) compared to surgery (n = 12850). However, ER was associated with lower complete resection rates (RD = -0.1, 95%CI = -0.15, -0.06; p < 0.00001) and higher rates of recurrence (RD = 0.07, 95%CI = 0.06; p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences between surgery and ER in 5-year OS (RD = -0.01, 95%CI = -0.04, 0.02; p = 0.38), 5-year CSS (RD = 0.01, 95%CI = 0.00, 0.02; p < 0.17), and incidence of serious AEs (RD = -0.03, 95%CI = -0.08, 0.01; p = 0.13).

Conclusions

ER and surgery are safe and effective treatments for EGC. ER provides lower rates of AEs and shorter LOHS compared to surgery. Although ER is associated with lower complete resection rates and a higher risk of recurrence, the OS and CSS were similar between both approaches.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42021255328.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial gastrointestinal lesions: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2022

ESGE recommends that the evaluation of superficial gastrointestinal (GI) lesions should be made by an experienced endoscopist, using high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based).ESGE does not recommend routine performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or positron emission tomography (PET)-CT prior to endoscopic resection.ESGE recommends endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) as the treatment of choice for most superficial esophageal squamous cell and superficial gastric lesions.For Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated lesions, ESGE suggests the use of ESD for lesions suspicious of submucosal invasion (Paris type 0-Is, 0-IIc), for malignant lesions > 20 mm, and for lesions in scarred/fibrotic areas.ESGE does not recommend routine use of ESD for duodenal or small-bowel lesions.ESGE suggests that ESD should be considered for en bloc resection of colorectal (but particularly rectal) lesions with suspicion of limited submucosal invasion (demarcated depressed area with irregular surface pattern or a large protruding or bulky component, particularly if the lesions are larger than 20 mm) or for lesions that otherwise cannot be completely removed by snare-based techniques.ESGE recommends that an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with histology no more advanced than intramucosal cancer (no more than m2 in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma), well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion or ulceration, should be considered a very low risk (curative) resection, and no further staging procedure or treatment is generally recommended.ESGE recommends that the following should be considered to be a low risk (curative) resection and no further treatment is generally recommended: an en bloc R0 resection of a superficial GI lesion with superficial submucosal invasion (sm1), that is well to moderately differentiated, with no lymphovascular invasion, of size ≤ 20 mm for an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma or ≤ 30 mm for a stomach lesion or of any size for a BE-related or colorectal lesion, and with no lymphovascular invasion, and no budding grade 2 or 3 for colorectal lesions.ESGE recommends that, after an endoscopically complete resection, if there is a positive horizontal margin or if resection is piecemeal, but there is no submucosal invasion and no other high risk criteria are met, this should be considered a local-risk resection and endoscopic surveillance or re-treatment is recommended rather than surgery or other additional treatment.ESGE recommends that when there is a diagnosis of lymphovascular invasion, or deeper infiltration than sm1, or positive vertical margins, or undifferentiated tumor, or, for colorectal lesions, budding grade 2 or 3, this should be considered a high risk (noncurative) resection, and complete staging and strong consideration for additional treatments should be considered on an individual basis in a multidisciplinary discussion.ESGE recommends scheduled endoscopic surveillance with high definition white-light and chromoendoscopy (virtual or dye-based) with biopsies of only the suspicious areas after a curative ESD.

Application of Machine Learning Algorithms to Predict Lymph Node Metastasis in Early Gastric Cancer

Objective

This study aimed to establish the best early gastric cancer lymph node metastasis (LNM) prediction model through machine learning (ML) to better guide clinical diagnosis and treatment decisions.

Methods

We screened gastric cancer patients with T1a and T1b stages from 2010 to 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database and collected the clinicopathological data of patients with early gastric cancer who were treated with surgery at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from January 2014 to December 2016. At the same time, we applied 7 ML algorithms—the generalized linear model (GLM), RPART, random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), support vector machine (SVM), regularized dual averaging (RDA), and the neural network (NNET)—and combined them with patient pathological information to develop the best prediction model for early gastric cancer lymph node metastasis. Among the SEER set, 80% were randomly selected to train the models, while the remaining 20% were used for testing. The data from the Second Affiliated Hospital were considered as the external verification set. Finally, we used the AUROC, F1-score value, sensitivity, and specificity to evaluate the performance of the model.

Results

The tumour size, tumour grade, and depth of tumour invasion were independent risk factors for early gastric cancer LNM. Comprehensive comparison of the prediction model performance of the training set and test set showed that the RDA model had the best prediction performance (F1-score = 0.773; AUROC = 0.742). The AUROC of the external validation set was 0.73.

Conclusions

Tumour size, tumour grade, and depth of tumour invasion were independent risk factors for early gastric cancer LNM. ML predicted LNM risk more accurately, and the RDA model had the best predictive performance and could better guide clinical diagnosis and treatment decisions.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric neoplastic lesions in Western countries: systematic review and meta-analysis

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for gastric neoplastic lesions removal is largely performed in Asian countries. Unfortunately, ESD diffusion, particularly for gastric lesion removal, is still limited in Western countries. We performed a systematic review of available data coming from Western centers. The en bloc and the R0 resection rates for all neoplastic lesions, including early gastric cancer (EGC) and dysplasia, were calculated, as well as the curative rate for EGC. Complications and the 1-month mortality rates were computed. A total of 22 studies from Europe (N = 15), Latina America (N = 6), and Canada (N = 1) were retrieved, with 1152 patients and 1210 lesions. The en bloc resection was successful in 96% [95% confidence interval (CI) 93-98] with a significant heterogeneity (I2 = 63.5%; P < 0.0001). The R0 was achieved in 84% (95% CI 79-89; I2 = 79.9%; P < 0.001). The resection rate was curative in 72% out of 340 patients with EGC (95% CI 65-79, I2 = 8%; P = 0.36). Overall, complications occurred in 9.5% of patients, including bleeding (5.8%), perforation (3.4%), and stenosis (0.35%). A total of three (0.26%) patients deceased within 1 month, but none was directly related to the procedure. Lesion recurrence was observed in 38 (3.5%; 95% CI 2.3-4.4) cases, including 21 EGC and 17 dysplasia. In Western countries, the en bloc and the R0 resections were successful in the large majority of cases, whilst the resection was curative in 72% of patients with EGC. The complications rate was acceptably low.

Local Endoscopic Resection is Inferior to Gastrectomy for Early Clinical Stage T1a and T1b Gastric Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

The role of endoscopic resection (ER) in the management of subsets of clinical T1N0 gastric adenocarcinoma remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of ER versus gastrectomy in node-negative cT1a and cT1b gastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Data from the National Cancer Database (2010-2015) were used to identify patients with clinical T1aN0 (n = 2927; ER: n = 1157, gastrectomy: n = 1770) and T1bN0 (n = 2915; ER: n = 474, gastrectomy: n = 2441) gastric adenocarcinoma. Propensity score matching and Cox multivariable analyses were used to account for treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

ER for cT1a and cT1b cancers was performed more frequently over time. The rates of node-positive disease in patients with cT1a and cT1b gastric adenocarcinoma were 5% and 18%, respectively. In the matched cohort, gastrectomy was associated with increased survival compared with ER for cT1a cancers (hazard ratio [HR] 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.95; p = 0.013), and corresponding 5-year survival for gastrectomy and ER was 72% and 66%, respectively (p = 0.013). For cT1b cancers, gastrectomy had a significantly longer survival compared with ER (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.93; p = 0.008), and the corresponding 5-year survival for gastrectomy and ER was 60% and 50%, respectively (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates ER is inferior in terms of long-term survival for clinical T1aN0 and T1bN0 gastric adenocarcinoma, despite current recommendations for ER in cT1 gastric cancers. Future research should seek to identify the subset of T1a and T1b cancers at low risk of nodal metastasis, and would thus maximally benefit from ER.

Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) for cancer is associated with good perioperative outcomes and superior quality of life compared with the open approach, albeit at higher cost. An economic evaluation was conducted to compare the two approaches.

Methods

A cost–effectiveness analysis between LSG and open subtotal gastrectomy (OSG) for gastric cancer was performed using a decision‐tree cohort model with a healthcare system perspective and a 12‐month time horizon. Model inputs were informed by a meta‐analysis of relevant literature, with costs represented in 2016 Canadian dollars (CAD) and outcomes measured in quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs). A secondary analysis was conducted using inputs extracted solely from European and North American studies. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic (PSA) sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

In the base‐case model, costs of LSG were $935 (€565) greater than those of OSG, with an incremental gain of 0·050 QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of $18 846 (€11 398) per additional QALY gained from LSG. In the DSA, results were most sensitive to changes in postoperative utility, operating theatre and equipment costs, as well as duration of surgery and hospital stay. PSA showed that the likelihood of LSG being cost‐effective at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds of $50 000 (€30 240) per QALY and $100 000 (€60 480) per QALY was 64 and 68 per cent respectively. Secondary analysis using European and North American clinical inputs resulted in LSG being dominant (cheaper and more effective) over OSG, largely due to reduced length of stay after LSG.

Conclusion

In this decision analysis model, LSG was cost‐effective compared with OSG for gastric cancer.

Updated evaluation of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus surgery for early gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic resection (ER) has been a standard treatment modality for early gastric cancer with ignorable risks of lymph node metastasis. As for EGCs within expanded indications, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has considerable advantages over endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) regarding higher rate of en bloc resection, complete resection, but lower risk of local recurrence. Previous meta-analyses comparing ESD with surgery for EGC are scarce and not robust to reach definitive conclusions.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Databases and Google Scholar through July 2019 to identify studies evaluating ESD vs surgery for EGC. Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to assess the quality of enrolled studies. Patient baseline characteristics, procedure-related and prognosis outcomes, and adverse event data were extracted and pooled for analyses by the Review Manager 5.3 software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines (GRADE) were used to assess the quality of evidence. Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) was conducted to weaken random error and enhance the reliability of evidence.

RESULTS

Totally 18 retrospective studies, involving 5993 patients, were included. ESD benefits were 128.38 min shorter operation duration [95%CI: (-204.68, -52.09), P = 0.001], 7.13 days shorter hospital stay [95%CI: (-7.98, -6.28), P < 0.00001], lower risk of procedure-related death [OR = 0.21, 95%CI: (0.07, 0.68), P = 0.009], lower risk of overall complication [OR = 0.47, 95%CI: (0.34, 0.63), P < 0.00001]. ESD was also associated with lower costs and better quality of life. However, ESD had lower rate of en bloc resection [OR = 0.07, 95%CI: (0.03, 0.21), P < 0.00001], histologically complete resection [OR = 0.07, 95%CI: (0.03, 0.14), P < 0.00001], curative resection [OR = 0.06, 95%CI: (0.01, 0.27), P = 0.002], and higher rate of local recurrence [OR = 5.42, 95%CI: (2.91, 10.11), P < 0.00001], metachronous cancer [OR = 10.84, 95%CI: (6.43, 18.26), P < 0.00001], synchronous cancer [OR = 6.59, 95%CI: (1.96, 22.1), P = 0.002]. ESD also led to lower disease-free survival [HR = 4.58, 95%CI: (2.79, 7.52), P < 0.00001] and recurrence-free survival [HR = 1.99, 95%CI: (1.38, 2.87), P = 0.0002]. No significant differences in overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) between ESD and surgery were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD offers a method of less expensive, less trauma, faster recovery and better quality of life compared to surgery for EGC. However, ESD is associated with higher risk of recurrence without compromising OS and DSS. Strict and careful surveillance after ESD is needed. Recurrent EGCs following ESD can usually be detected in early stage and successfully managed by repeated ESD. Accordingly, ESD technique provides an alternative to surgical resection for highly selected EGC patients.

Long-Term Outcomes Comparison of Endoscopic Resection With Gastrectomy for Treatment of Early Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Endoscopic resection (ER) and gastrectomy have been both accepted as curative treatments for early gastric cancer. We intended to compare ER with gastrectomy treatments on safety of patients, disease-free survival and overall survival for early gastric cancer through this systematic review. Methods: A literature search was performed in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies that have compared ER with gastrectomy for early gastric cancer were included in this meta-analysis. We searched for clinical studies published before March 2019. Stata 12.0 software was used for systematic analysis. Results: Nine studies were included in this systematic review, ER treatment was associated with a shorter length of stay (WMD = -8.53, 95% CI -11.56 to -5.49), fewer postoperative complications (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.34-0.65). ER can be performed safely with shorter hospital stay and fewer postoperative complications than gastrectomy. Recurrence rate was higher for ER than for gastrectomy treatment (HR = 3.56, 95% CI 1.86-6.84), mainly because metachronous gastric cancers developed only in the ER treatment. However, most of the metachronous gastric cancers could be curatively treated with ER again, and it didn't affect overall survival of patients with early gastric cancer. There was no difference in overall survival rate between ER and gastrectomy (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.63-1.13). Conclusions: ER and gastrectomy are both acceptable for curative treatment of early gastric cancer. However, due to the comparable overall survival and lower postoperative complications and shorter length of stay, ER is better than gastrectomy for early gastric cancer, who met the indication for ER treatment.

Sentinel Lymph Node Sampling for Early Gastric Cancer-Preliminary Results of A North American Prospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Although endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer is well established, anatomical resection with regional lymphadenectomy is recommended for lesions at high risk for occult lymph node metastasis (e.g., lymphovascular invasion, poor grade, and deep submucosal invasion). However, 75-95% high-risk early gastric cancer (HR-EGC) patients ultimately have node-negative disease and could potentially have undergone organ-sparing resection. Due to the inadequacy of standard modalities to reliably rule out nodal metastases in HR-EGC patients, sentinel lymph node (SLN) sampling was developed in Asia with promising results. However, the applicability of this technique in the West has been brought into question due to potential differences in tumor histology and body habitus. This prospective study aimed to test SLN sampling for North American EGC patients.

METHODS

All patients with biopsy-confirmed T0-2 N0-1 M0 gastric adenocarcinoma at the Montreal General Hospital-McGill University Health Centre were eligible for enrollment. Esophageal and GEJ cancers were excluded due to the high rate of intrathoracic lymph node involvement. Peritumoral submucosal injection with T⁹⁹ radiocolloid was performed endoscopically 24-30 h prior to surgery. Methylene blue dye injection was performed after induction of anesthesia. SLN basins were identified as those having > 10% of baseline tumor radiation signal or blue color, or both. After basins were individually removed, standard laparoscopic anatomical resection was then performed with D2 lymphadenectomy. ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03049345). Data are presented as median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

From July 2016-April 2018, 253 patients with esophagogastric adenocarcinoma were evaluated. Of these, 10 met inclusion criteria (90% male, age 66(30) years). Subtotal gastrectomy was performed in nine patients (90%) and length of stay was 4 (2) days. At least one SLN basin was identified in nine cases (90%). The median #SLN basins identified was 2(2) with a median of 5(5) total SLNs retrieved per patient. In the one case for which no SLN basins were identified, only blue dye injection was used, whereas SLNs were identified in all cases using the dual tracer method. Final T-stage was pT1b/T2 in four (40%), pT1a in two (20%), and Tx in four (40%). Two patients (20%) had lymph node metastases on final pathological analysis, both of which were identified by SLN sampling (accuracy 100%; false negative rate 0%). No adverse events related to SLN retrieval were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first prospective feasibility evaluation of sentinel lymph node sampling for early gastric cancer in North America with promising preliminary results. The dual tracer method was superior to single agent blue dye in identifying sentinel nodal basins. Considerable further study is necessary to verify the safety and utility of SLN mapping in North American patients with early gastric adenocarcinoma.

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection with surgical gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are several surgical options for treating early gastric cancers (EGCs), such as endoscopic resection, laparoscopic or open gastrectomy with D1 or D2 lymphadenectomy. Endoscopic resection for EGC with low risk of lymph node metastasis has been widely accepted as a therapeutic alternative. The role of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in treating EGC is not well established, especially when compared with resection surgery cases in a long-term follow-up scope.

AIM

To compare the safety and efficacy of the short- and long-term outcomes between ESD and resection surgery.

METHODS

We searched the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from January 1990 to June 2018, enrolling studies reporting short- or long-term outcomes of ESD in comparison with resection surgery for EGC. The quality of the studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Stata software (version 12.0) was used for the analysis. Pooling analysis was conducted using either fixed- or random-effects models depending on heterogeneity across studies.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies comprising 5112 patients were eligible for analysis (2402 for EGC and 2710 for radical surgery). Our meta-analysis demonstrated that the ESD approach showed advantages through decreased operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD): -140.02 min, 95%CI: -254.23 to -34.82 min, P = 0.009], shorter hospital stay (WMD: -5.41 d, 95% CI: -5.93 to -4.89 d, P < 0.001), and lower postoperative complication rate [Odds ratio (OR) = 0.39, 95%CI: 0.28-0.55, P < 0.001). Meanwhile, EGC patients who underwent ESD had higher recurrence rate (OR = 9.24, 95%CI: 5.94-14.36, P < 0.001) than resection surgery patients. However, the long-term survival including overall survival [Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95%CI: 0.26-1.00, P = 0.05] and event-free survival (HR = 1.59, 95%CI: 0.66-9.81, P = 0.300) showed no significant differences between these two groups.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of EGC, ESD was safe and feasible in comparison with resection surgery, with advantages in several surgical and post-operative recovery parameters. Although the recurrence rate was higher in ESD group, the long-term survival was still comparable in these two groups, suggesting ESD could be recommended as standard treatment for EGC with indications.

The Comparison between Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection and Surgery in Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIMS

There are two treatment modalities for early gastric cancer (EGC)-surgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of ESD with surgery.

METHOD

The article was performed by searching PubMed databases. Data were extracted using predefined form and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated and P value.

RESULTS

13 studies were identified. The incidence of perforation in two groups was different [OR = 6.18 (95% CI: 1.37-27.98), P = 0.02]. The prevalences of synchronous and metachronous cancer in the ESD group were higher than those in the surgery group [OR = 8.52 (95% CI: 1.99-36.56), P = 0.004 and OR = 7.15 (95% CI: 2.95-17.32), P < 0.0001]. The recurrence and complete resection rates were different [OR = 6.93 (95% CI: 2.83-16.96), P < 0.0001 and OR = 0.32 (95% CI: 0.20-0.52), P < 0.00001]. Compared with the surgery group, the hospital stay was shorter [IV = -7.15 (95% CI: -9.08-5.22), P < 0.00001], the adverse event rate was lower, and the quality of life (QOL) was better in the ESD group. The difference of bleeding was not found.

CONCLUSION

ESD appears to be preferable for EGC, due to a lower rate of adverse events, shorter hospital stay, cheaper cost, and higher QOL.

Gastric interventional endoscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review new advances in gastric interventional endoscopy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Implementation of gastric endoscopy as a therapeutic option in obesity, gastric cancer, and gastroparesis.

SUMMARY

Less invasive new gastric endoscopic procedures can potentially replace currently offered laparoscopic approaches in many fields. In this article, we will review the use of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty as a weight loss procedure, endoscopic submucosal dissection in treatment of early gastric cancer, and gastric per-oral endoscopic myotomy in treatment of refractory gastroparesis. These procedures can increase access to bariatric weigh loss procedures, provide an organ-saving curative option for early gastric cancer, and offer a new modality to improve refractory gastroparesis.

Effect of laparoscopic gastrectomy on compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer

This study was designed to investigate the effect of laparoscopic gastrectomy on adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with gastric cancer.Patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy at our institution from January 2008 to January 2015 with R0 resection, as determined by a pathological examination, were included in this study. According to the surgical approach, patients were divided into the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) group and open gastrectomy (OG) group. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between the 2 groups.Of the 206 patients enrolled in the study, 114 patients were included in the LG group and 92 patients were included in the OG group. There was no significant difference in patients' general data, including age, sex, medical comorbidities, and pathological staging, between the 2 groups. However, patients in the LG group had less intraoperative blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and a shorter hospital stay compared with patients in the OG group. There was no significant difference in the start time of adjuvant chemotherapy between the groups. However, compared with OG, LG had the following advantages: patients received more cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy, more patients received a full dose of on-schedule adjuvant chemotherapy, and more patients completed ≥75% of the planned dose. Long-term survival and disease-free survival rates were higher in the LG than in the OG.In summary, LG can improve compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy and long-term outcomes in patients with gastric cancer.