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

A comparison of the short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic distal gastrectomy: A retrospective study using a nationwide inpatient database

BACKGROUND

Although the safety of robotic distal gastrectomy has been studied in several single-center trials, the nationwide outcomes of robotic distal gastrectomy that meet the requirements of Japanese national health insurance, such as facility case volume and skill level of the surgeon, are still not clear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of robotic distal gastrectomy, which was covered by national health insurance, compared to laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

METHODS

We retrieved gastric cancer cases with cStage I to III who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (15,539 patients) and robotic distal gastrectomy (1,312 patients) between April 2018 and March 2020 from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. We compared the frequency of postoperative complications, anesthesia time, and postoperative hospitalization days between laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and robotic distal gastrectomy using propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

The postoperative complication rate were not different between laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and robotic distal gastrectomy (odds ratio = 0.90, 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 1.23, P = .52). The anesthesia time (minutes) was significantly longer (coefficient = 70.2, 95% confidence interval: 63.8 to 76.7, P < .001) and postoperative hospitalization (days) was significantly shorter (coefficient = -0.89, 95% confidence interval: -1.48 to -0.31, P = .003) in robotic distal gastrectomy than laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic distal gastrectomy that met strict national health insurance coverage requirements in Japan was performed as safely as laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with reduced hospitalization days.

Comparison of perioperative outcomes between bipolar sealing, ultrasonic shears and a hybrid device during laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: a prospective, multicenter, randomized study

BACKGROUND

Although EBDs are essential for minimally invasive surgery, well-established prospective randomized studies comparing EBDs are scarce. This study aimed to compare the intraoperative inflammatory response and short-term surgical outcomes among different energy-based devices (EBDs) in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG).

METHODS

Patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer scheduled for LDG at two different medical centers were prospectively randomized into three groups: ultrasonic shears (US), advanced bipolar (BP) and ultrasonic-bipolar hybrid (HB). The C-reactive protein (CRP) level, operation time, intraoperative blood loss (IBL), laboratory tests, cytokines (interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-10), hospital stay, and complication rate were analyzed. A novel semiquantitative measurement method using indocyanine green (ICG) and a near-infrared camera measured the amount of lymphatic leakage.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint, the CRP level, was significantly lower in the BP (n = 60) group than in the US (n = 57) or HB (n = 57) group [9.03 ± 5.55 vs. 11.12 ± 5.02 vs. 12.67 ± 6.14, p = 0.001, on postoperative day (POD) 2 and 7.48 vs. 9.62 vs. 9.48, p = 0.026, on POD 4]. IBL was significantly lower in BP than in US or HB (26.3 ± 25.3 vs. 43.7 ± 42.0 vs. 34.9 ± 37.0, p = 0.032). Jackson-Pratt drainage triglycerides were significantly lower in BP than in US (53.6 ± 33.7 vs. 84.2 ± 59.0, p = 0.11; HB: 71.3 ± 51.4). ICG fluorescence intensity, operation time, laboratory results, cytokines, hospital stay, and complication rate were not significantly different among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSION

BP showed a lower postoperative CRP level and less IBL than US and HB, suggesting less collateral thermal damage and better sealing function. Surgeons may consider this when selecting EBDs for laparoscopic surgery.

State of the art of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in esophagogastric cancer surgery: the Western experience

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs provide a framework to standardize care processes and improve outcomes. The results of this multimodal and multidisciplinary approach based on actions focused on reducing physiological surgical stress in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods are beneficial in reducing morbidity and hospital stay, without increasing readmissions across different surgical settings. The implementation of ERAS in resection procedures of esophageal and gastric cancer has been challenging due to the complexity of these surgical techniques and the high risk of complications. Despite the limited evidence of ERAS in esophagectomy operations, systematic reviews and meta-analysis have confirmed a reduction of pulmonary complications and hospital stay without increasing readmissions. In gastrectomy operations, the implementation of ERAS reduces the use of nasogastric tubes and intraabdominal drains, facilitates early diet, and reduces the length of hospital stay, without increasing complications. There is, however, wide heterogeneity and absence of standardization in the number and definition of the ERAS components. The development of ERAS consensus guidelines including procedure-specific components may reduce this variability. Regardless growing evidence of the effectiveness of ERAS, the adherence rate is still low. The commitment of the multidisciplinary team and leadership is critical in the application and refinement of ERAS protocols in parallel with periodic audits. Pre- and post-habilitation methods are emerging concepts to be incorporated in ERAS protocols.

Clinical outcomes of gastric cancer surgery after liver transplantation

Purpose

De novo malignancy is common after liver transplantation (LT); however, there are limited reports on the clinical outcomes of gastric cancer surgery after LT. Our study aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of gastric cancer surgery after LT.

Methods

Seventeen patients underwent gastric cancer surgery after LT at a single institution between January 2013 and June 2021. We retrospectively collected data on surgical complications, survival, and recurrence status of these cases.

Results

Fifteen patients (88.2%) underwent curative gastrectomy, with 10 open distal (66.7%) and 5 laparoscopic distal (33.3%) gastrectomies. Surgical and severe complication rates were 3 of 15 (20.0%) and 1 of 15 (6.7%), respectively. There were no significant differences between laparoscopic (33.3%) and open surgery (66.7%) in terms of operation time and complication rate. No surgery-related mortalities occurred. Immunosuppressants could be maintained without difficulty, and no suspicious acute rejection was identified during the perioperative period. There was 1 recurrence after curative surgery (recurrence rate, 6.7%), and the 5-year cancer-specific survival rate after curative surgery was 93.3%.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely done even after LT in terms of postoperative complications and graft safety.

Surgery Matters: Progress in Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The surgical treatment of gastric carcinoma has progressed significantly in the past few decades. A major milestone was the establishment of multimodal therapies for locally advanced tumours. Improvements in the technique of endoscopic resection have supplanted surgery in the early stages of many cases of gastric cancer. In cases in which an endoscopic resection is not possible, surgical limited resection procedures for the early stages of carcinoma are an equal alternative to gastrectomy in the field of oncology. Proximal gastrectomy is extensively discussed in this context. Whether proximal gastrectomy leads to a better quality of life and better nutritional well-being than total gastrectomy depends on the reconstruction chosen. The outcome cannot be conclusively assessed at present. For locally advanced stages, total or subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is now the global standard. A subtotal gastrectomy requires sufficiently long tumour-free proximal resection margins. Recent data indicate that proximal margins of at least 3 cm for tumours with an expansive growth pattern and at least 5 cm for those with an infiltrative growth pattern are sufficient. The most frequently performed reconstruction worldwide following gastrectomy is the Roux-en-Y reconstruction. However, there is evidence that pouch reconstruction is superior in terms of quality of life and nutritional well-being. Oncological gastric surgery is increasingly being performed laparoscopically. The safety and oncological equivalency were first demonstrated for early carcinomas and then for locally advanced tumours, by cohort studies and RCTs. Some studies suggest that laparoscopic procedures may be advantageous in early postoperative recovery. Robotic gastrectomy is also increasing in use. Preliminary results suggest that robotic gastrectomy may have added value in lymphadenectomy and in the early postoperative course. However, further studies are needed to substantiate these results. There is an ongoing debate about the best treatment option for gastric cancer with oligometastatic disease. Preliminary results indicate that certain patient groups could benefit from resection of the primary tumour and metastases following chemotherapy. However, the exact conditions in which patients may benefit have yet to be confirmed by ongoing trials.

Consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer in referral centers in Italy

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus pandemic had a major impact in Italy. The Italian health system's re-organization to face the emergency may have led to significant consequences especially in the diagnosis and treatment of malignancies. This study aimed to assess the impact of the pandemic in the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer in nine Gruppo Italiano RIcerca Cancro Gastrico (GIRCG) centers.

METHODS

All patients assessed for gastric adenocarcinoma at nine GIRCG centers between January 2019 and November 2020 were included. Patients were grouped according to the date of "patient 1's" diagnosis in Italy: preCOVID versus COVID. Clinico-pathological and outcome differences between the two groups were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 632 patients were included in the analysis (205 in the COVID group). The cT4 weighted ratios were higher in 2020 from April to September, with the greatest differences in May, August and September. The cM+ weighted ratio was significantly higher in July 2020. The mean number of gastrectomies had the greatest reduction in March and May 2020 compared with 2019. The median times from diagnosis to chemotherapy, to complete diagnostic work-up or to operation were longer in 2019. The median time from the end of chemotherapy to surgery was 17 days longer in the preCOVID group.

CONCLUSIONS

A greater number of advanced or metastatic cases were diagnosed after the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection, especially after the "full lockdown" periods. During the pandemic, once gastric cancer patients were referred to one of the centers, a shorter time to complete the diagnostic work-up or to address them to the best treatment option was required.

Extended Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer in the Neoadjuvant Era: Current Status, Clinical Implications and Contentious Issues

Despite its decreasing incidence, gastric cancer remains an important global healthcare problem due to its overall high prevalence and high mortality rate. Since the MAGIC and FNLCC/FFCD trials, the neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been recommended throughout Europe in gastric cancer. Potential benefits of preoperative treatments include a higher rate of R0 resection achieved by downstaging the primary tumor, a likely effect on micrometastases and isolated tumor cells in the lymph nodes, and, as a result, improved cancer-related survival. Nevertheless, distortion of anatomical planes of dissection, interstitial fibrosis, and sclerotic tissue changes may increase surgical difficulty. The collection of at least twenty-five lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy would seem to ensure removal of undetectable node metastasis and reduce the likelihood of locoregional recurrence. It is not what you take but what you leave behind that defines survival. Therefore, para-aortic lymph node dissection is safe and effective after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in both therapeutic and prophylactic settings. In this review, the efficacy of adequate lymph node dissection, also in a neoadjuvant setting, has been investigated in the key studies conducted to date on the topic.

Double-loop reconstruction after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) constitutes a major health problem. In addition to the popularity of laparoscopic gastrectomy, many reconstructive procedures have been reported in the literature. Surgical resection and lymphatic dissection determine long-term survival; however, the election of a reconstruction procedure determines the postoperative quality of life for patients with GC. At present, no consensus exists regarding the optimal reconstructive procedure. A new reconstructive approach was recently adopted at our center. Laparoscopic distal or total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy and a so called 'double-loop' reconstruction method with intracorporeal mechanical anastomosis was performed in our patients and we describe the technical note and outcome. The intuition in its use comes from the packaging of gastric bypasses in bariatric surgery. The double-loop method is a valid simplification of the traditional technique of construction of the Roux-limb that could increase the feasibility and safety in performing a full laparoscopic intracorporeal reconstruction with greater ergonomics for the surgeon.

Is Total Omentectomy Mandatory in T3 and T4a Gastric Cancer for Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND

Despite the lack of strong evidence, total omentectomy (TO) remains the recommended procedure for gastric cancer (GC) for T3 or deeper tumors. Partial omentectomy (PO) has recently become a preferred procedure owing to its simplicity during laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG); however, the oncological role of PO needs to be elucidated.

METHODS

Overall, 341 patients with T3 or T4a GC who had undergone LDG between 2009 and 2016 were divided into TO (n = 167) and PO (n = 174) groups. Propensity matching was performed with respect to covariance age, sex, T and N stage, tumor size, and degree of tumor differentiation. Clinicopathological characteristics and long-term follow-up data were analyzed for both groups.

RESULTS

After successful propensity matching, both groups included 107 patients. In a matched cohort, no significant difference in clinicopathologic features and short-term surgical outcomes was observed between the two groups. Furthermore, no significant difference in relapse-free survival (RFS; p = 0.201) and peritoneal seeding-free survival (PSFS; p = 0.094) was observed. However, tumor recurrence as peritoneal metastasis occurred in 5 (4.7%) patients in the PO group and 13 (12.1%) patients in the TO group. In Cox proportional hazards analysis, omentectomy was not identified as a significant factor for RFS, PSFS, and overall survival; however, advanced N and T4a stage were considered significant factors for RFS and PSFS, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PO may be adopted during the LDG of T3 or T4a GC without definite gross serosal exposure. More large-scale evidence or prospective study is recommended.

Impact of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications on survival outcomes in patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative intra-abdominal infection is known to adversely affect survival outcomes in patients with gastric cancer; however, previous reports have investigated this complication only in open surgery. This adverse effect is expected to be weakened by less invasive surgery, such as a laparoscopic approach, by way of maintaining immune function.

METHODS

This study included 1223 patients with gastric cancer who underwent open (n = 439) or laparoscopic (n = 784) curative surgery between 2010 and 2015. For each approach, patients were divided into two groups based on presence or absence of postoperative intra-abdominal infection of Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher (C-group and NC-group, respectively). Survival outcomes were compared in propensity-matched cohorts to evaluate the impact of the complication.

RESULTS

The incidences of Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade II postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications were 9.7% (43/439) in open surgery and 9.8% (70/714) in laparoscopic surgery. After propensity score matching, 86 patients in open surgery and 138 in laparoscopic surgery were extracted for analysis. The 5-year overall survival rate in the open C-group (n = 43) was worse than that in the open NC-group (n = 43) but with no significant difference (70.9% vs. 82.8%, log-rank P = 0.18). The 5-year overall survival rates were equivalent between the laparoscopic C-group (n = 69) and the laparoscopic NC-group (n = 69) (90.5% vs. 90.4%, log-rank P = 0.99).

CONCLUSION

In general, postoperative intra-abdominal infection adversely affects survival outcomes; however, its impact may be weakened by less invasive surgery. Further evaluation using larger datasets is necessary before reaching definitive conclusions.

Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

Laparoscopic vs. open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with those of open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) who exclusively underwent distal gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Background

Data in published meta-analyses that included different gastrectomy types and mixed tumor stages prevented an accurate comparison between LDG and ODG. Recently, several RCTs that compared LDG with ODG included AGC patients specifically for distal gastrectomy, with D2 lymphadenectomy being reported and updated with the long-term outcomes.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs for comparing LDG with ODG for advanced distal gastric cancer. Short-term surgical outcomes and mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival were compared. The Cochrane tool and GRADE approach were used for evaluating the quality of evidence (Prospero registration ID: CRD42022301155).

Results

Five RCTs consisting of a total of 2,746 patients were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in terms of intraoperative complications, overall morbidity, severe postoperative complications, R0 resection, D2 lymphadenectomy, recurrence, 3-year disease-free survival, intraoperative blood transfusion, time to first liquid diet, time to first ambulation, distal margin, reoperation, mortality, or readmission between LDG and ODG. Operative times were significantly longer for LDG [weighted mean difference (WMD) 49.2 min, p < 0.05], whereas harvested lymph nodes, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus, and proximal margin were lower for LDG (WMD -1.3, p < 0.05; WMD -33.6 mL, p < 0.05; WMD -0.7 day, p < 0.05; WMD -0.2 day, p < 0.05; WMD -0.4 mm, p < 0.05). Intra-abdominal fluid collection and bleeding were found to be less after LDG. Certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low.

Conclusions

Data from five RCTs suggest that LDG with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC has similar short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival to ODG when performed by experienced surgeons in hospitals contending with high patient volumes. It can be concluded that RCTs should highlight the potential advantages of LDG for AGC.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, registration number CRD42022301155.

Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2021 (6th edition)

The sixth edition of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines was completed in July 2021, incorporating new evidence that emerged after publication of the previous edition. It consists of a text-based "Treatments" part and a "Clinical Questions" part including recommendations and explanations for clinical questions. The treatments parts include a comprehensive description regarding surgery, endoscopic resection and chemotherapy for gastric cancer. The clinical question part is based on the literature search and evaluation by an independent systematic review team. Consequently, not only evidence for each therapeutic recommendation was clearly shown, but it also identified the research fields that require further evaluation to provide appropriate recommendations.

Assessment of Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Hilar Lymphadenectomy for Advanced Proximal Gastric Cancer Without Invasion Into the Greater Curvature: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The survival benefit of laparoscopic total gastrectomy combined with spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy (LSTG) for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (APGC) without invasion into the greater curvature remains uncertain.

Objective

To compare the long-term and short-term efficacy of LSTG (D2 + No. 10 group) and conventional laparoscopic total gastrectomy (D2 group) for patients with APGC that has not invaded the greater curvature.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this open-label, prospective randomized clinical trial, a total of 536 patients with clinical stage cT2 to 4a/N0 to 3/M0 APGC without invasion into the greater curvature were enrolled from January 2015 to October 2018. The final follow-up was on October 31, 2021. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to February 2022.

Interventions

Eligible patients were randomized to the D2 + No. 10 group or the D2 group.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes were 3-year overall survival (OS) and morbidity and mortality within 30 days after surgery.

Results

Of 526 included patients, 392 (74.5%) were men, and the mean (SD) age was 60.6 (9.6) years. A total of 263 patients were included in the D2 + No. 10 group, and 263 were included in the D2 group. The 3-year DFS was 70.3% (95% CI, 64.8-75.8) for the D2 + No. 10 group and 64.3% (95% CI, 58.4-70.2; P = .11) for the D2 group, and the 3-year OS in the D2 + No. 10 group was better than that in the D2 group (75.7% [95% CI, 70.6-80.8] vs 66.5% [95% CI, 60.8-72.2]; P = .02). Multivariate analysis revealed that splenic hilar lymphadenectomy was not an independent protective factor for DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63-1.16) or OS (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.12). Stratification analysis showed that patients with advanced posterior gastric cancer in the D2 + No. 10 group had better 3-year DFS (92.9% vs 39.3%; P < .001) and OS (92.9% vs 42.9%; P < .001) than those in the D2 group. Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients with advanced posterior gastric cancer could have the survival benefit from No. 10 lymph node dissection (DFS: HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02-0.46; OS: HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03-0.52).

Conclusions and Relevance

Although LSTG could not significantly improve the 3-year DFS of patients with APGC without invasion into the greater curvature, patients with APGC located posterior gastric wall may benefit from LSTG.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02333721.

Survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy with nodal dissection for gastric cancer in a high-volume Japanese center: A propensity score-matched analysis

Aim

To compare the survival outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with those of open total gastrectomy (OTG) in gastric cancer.

Methods

Using an in-house database, this single-center study reviewed clinical data for patients who underwent surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma in 2008-2018. The patients were divided into an LTG group and an OTG group.

Results

Data for 638 patients were screened. After exclusions, 580 patients (LTG, n = 212; OTG, n = 368) were enrolled. Noting that the OTG group included more advanced tumors, 1:1 propensity score matching was implemented to reduce any selection bias, leaving 326 patients (LTG, n = 163; OTG, n = 163; pStage I/II/III = 147/87/92) for further analysis. The operation time was longer and blood loss was less in the LTG group. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the LTG group than in the OTG group (9 d vs 10 d；P = .040). There was no significant difference in the incidence of grade III or worse postoperative complications (8.9% vs 11.0%). Five-year overall survival was better in the LTG group (84.9% vs 73.5%; P = .0010, log-rank test), but there was no significant difference in overall survival according to pStage (I, 93.0% vs 89.0%; II, 85.8% vs 77.5%; III, 64.1% vs 52.5%). There was a similar trend in relapse-free survival. Distribution of recurrence sites was comparable.

Conclusion

LTG may provide survival outcomes similar to those of OTG when performed by an experienced surgical team. Further evidence is required for final conclusions, especially regarding its efficacy for stage II/III.

Robotic Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Cohort Study of 5402 Patients in China

OBJECTIVE

A large-scale multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

RG is being increasingly used worldwide, but data from large-scale multicenter studies on the short- and long-term oncologic outcomes of RG versus LG are limited. The potential benefits of RG compared with LG for gastric cancer remain controversial.

METHODS

Data from eligible patients who underwent RG or LG for gastric cancer of 11 experienced surgeons from 7 centers in China between March 2010 and October 2019 were collected. The RG group was matched 1:1 with the LG group by using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was postoperative complications.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, a well-balanced cohort of 3552 patients was included for further analysis. The occurrence of overall complications (12.6% vs 15.2%, P = 0.023) was lower in the RG group than in the LG group. RG was associated with less blood loss (126.8 vs 142.5 mL, P < 0.001) and more retrieved lymph nodes in total (32.5 vs 30.7, P < 0.001) and in suprapancreatic areas (13.3 vs 11.6, P < 0.001).The long-term oncological outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this multicenter study demonstrate that RG is a safe and effective treatment for gastric cancer when performed by experienced surgeons, although longer operation time and higher costs are still concerns about RG. This study provides evidence suggesting that RG may represent an alternative surgical treatment to LG.

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

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

Short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer has rapidly developed and become more popular in recent decades. Additional high-quality randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies comparing LG versus open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer (GC) have been published in recent years. An updated systematic review is warranted. The aim of our meta-analysis was to comprehensively evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of LG versus OG for GC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials databases were comprehensively searched to identify RCTs comparing LG versus OG for GC published between January 1994 and December 7, 2021. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane Collaboration and the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses (QUORUM) guidelines. All RCTs comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of LG with those of OG were included. A random effects model was adopted with significant heterogeneity (I² > 50%), while a fixed effects model was employed in all other cases (I² ≤ 50%).

RESULTS

A total of 26 RCTs with 8301 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that the intraoperative complication rate was comparable between the LG group and the OG group (OR=1.14, 95% CI [0.76, 1.70], I²=0%, p=0.53). The LG group had fewer postoperative complications than the OG group (OR=0.65, 95% CI [0.57, 0.74], I²=26%, p<0.00001). However, the severe postoperative complication rate and perioperative mortality were comparable between the two groups (OR=0.83, 95% CI [0.67, 1.04], I²=10%, p=0.10; OR=1.11, 95% CI [0.59, 2.09], I²=0%, p=0.74, respectively). The number of lymph nodes retrieved by the LG group was less than that of the OG group (MD=-1.51, 95% CI [-2.29, -0.74], I²=0%, p<0.0001). The proximal resection margin distance in the LG group was shorter than that in the OG group (MD=-0.34, 95% CI [-0.57, -0.12], I²=23%, p=0.003), but the distal resection margin distance in the two groups was comparable (MD=-0.21, 95% CI [-0.47, 0.04], I²=0%, p=0.10). The time to first ambulation was shorter in the LG group than in the OG group (MD=-0.14, 95% CI [-.26, -0.01], I²=40%, p=0.03). The time to first flatus was also shorter in the LG group than in the OG group (MD=-0.15, 95% CI [-0.23, -0.07], I²=4%, p=0.0001). However, the first time on a liquid diet was comparable between the two groups (MD=-0.30, 95% CI [-0.64, 0.04], I²=88%, p=0.09). Furthermore, the postoperative length of stay was shorter in the LG group than in the OG group (MD=-1.26, 95% CI [-1.99, -0.53], I²=90%, p=0.0007). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was comparable between the two groups (HR=0.97, 95% CI [0.80, 1.17], I²=0%, p=0.73), and the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was also similar between the LG group and OG group (HR=1.08, 95% CI [0.77, 1.52], I²=0%, p=0.64).

CONCLUSION

LG is a technically safe and feasible alternative to OG with the advantages of a fewer postoperative complication rate, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and greater cosmetic benefit for patients with GC. Meanwhile, LG has comparable long-term outcomes to OG for GC.

Short and Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy Compared with Open Total Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer Patients

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with that of open total gastrectomy (OTG) in terms of postoperative complications and long-term survival. We retrospectively reviewed the clinicopathological data of 560 patients, who underwent total gastrectomy between 2012 and 2016 at the National Cancer Center, Korea. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to correct for discrepancies between the two groups. Matched variables included sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and pathological Tumor-Node-Metastasis stage. After PSM, 238 patients were included in this analysis. The rate of D2 lymph node dissection was significantly higher in the OTG group than in the LTG group. The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the LTG group than in the OTG group. The overall complication rate was not significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the 3-year disease-free and 5-year overall survival rates between the two groups. LTG and OTG had comparable efficacies in gastric cancer patients regarding short- and long-term surgical outcomes. This study suggests that LTG could be an alternative approach to the OTG.

Perioperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies and randomized controlled trials

Background

Da Vinci robotic surgery system, a novel type of surgery, was widespread in surgical field. However, the perioperative outcomes of robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) are still controversy, despite several observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT) had been reported. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched (PSM) and RCT studies to evaluated the perioperative feasibility and safety of RDG.

Methods

Studies were systematically searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase database, and screened according to the defined limitations. The quality of PSM studies and RCT studies were respectively assessed by ROBINS-I and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Extracted data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.4.

Results

7 PSM studies and 1 RCT with a total of 2763 patients were included in this analysis. The longer operative time (MD = 31.42, 95% CI [22.88, 39.96], p < 0.00001), less blood loss (MD = − 25.89, 95% CI [− 36.18, − 15.6], p < 0.00001), more retrieved lymph nodes (MD = 3.46, 95% CI [2.94, 3.98], p < 0.00001), shorter time to first flatus (MD = − 0.08, 95% CI [− 0.13, − 0.02], p = 0.006) and liquid intake (MD = − 0.13, 95% CI [− 0.22, − 0.05], p = 0.002) were observed in RDG group compared with LDG group. There are no statistically significant in time to start soft diet, postoperative hospital stays, overall complications, complications Grade I–II, complications Grade ≥ III, anastomotic leakage, bleeding, intra-abdominal bleeding, intraluminal bleeding, ileus, abdominal infection, delayed gastric emptying and wound complications.

Conclusions

RDG showed less blood loss and more retrieved lymph nodes, revealed less time to first flatus and liquid intake after operation. But the operative time was longer in RDG group than in LDG. The incidence rate of postoperative complications was comparable between RDG and LDG.

Three-year outcomes of robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for the treatment of clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Oncological benefits of robotic gastrectomy (RG) remain unclear. We aimed to determine and compare the 3-year outcomes of RG and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS

This was a multi-institutional retrospective study of patients who prospectively underwent RG in a previous study (UMIN000015388) and historical controls who underwent LG. Operable patients with cStage I/II primary gastric cancer were enrolled. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method based on propensity scores was used to balance patient demographic factors and surgeon volume between the RG and LG groups. The primary outcome measure was the 3-year overall survival rate (3yOS).

RESULTS

Of the 1,127 patients in the previous study, 326 and 752 patients in the RG and LG groups, respectively, completed the study. The standardized difference of all confounding factors was reduced to 0.09 or less after weighting. In the weighted population, 3yOS was 96.3% and 89.6% in the RG and LG groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.34 [0.15, 0.76]; p = 0.009), whereas there was no difference in 3-year recurrence-free survival rate (3yRFS) between the two groups (HR 0.58 [0.32, 1.05]; p = 0.073). Sub-analyses showed that RG improved 3yOS (HR 0.05 [0.01, 0.38]; p = 0.004) and 3yRFS (HR 0.05 [0.01, 0.34]; p = 0.003) in patients with pStage IA disease. Recurrence rates and patterns were similar between the RG and LG groups. RG did not improve the morbidity rate, however, it attenuated some of the adverse events, including anastomotic leakage and intra-abdominal abscess. RG improved estimated blood loss and duration of postoperative hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

This study showed surgical and oncological safety of RG for cStage I/II gastric cancer considering the 3-year outcomes, compared with those of LG.

Comprehensive evaluation of three-dimensional anatomy of perigastric vessels using enhanced multidetector-row computed tomography

BACKGROUND

To perform laparoscopic gastrectomy safely, we aimed to comprehensively re-evaluate perigastric vessel anatomies using a three-dimensional angiography reconstructed from enhanced multidetector-row computed tomography data.

METHODS

Perigastric vessel anatomy was preoperatively analyzed using a multidetector-row computed tomography-based three-dimensional angiography reconstructed in 127 patients undergoing gastric surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 67 left gastric veins that ran along the dorsal side of the arteries, 59 (88.1%) ran along the dorsal side of the common hepatic artery and flowed into the portal vein. In 18 cases, a common trunk of one to three left gastric arteries and the replaced left hepatic artery was observed. The left inferior phrenic artery ramified from the left gastric artery in 5.5% of the cases. The right gastric artery was classified into distal (73.2%), caudal (18.1%), and proximal (8.7%) types. The infra-pyloric artery was also classified into distal (64.6%), caudal (26.0%), and proximal (9.4%) types. The posterior gastric artery branched as a common trunk with the superior polar artery in the proximal (37.9%) and distal (18.4%) regions of the splenic artery. The left gastroepiploic artery ramified from the splenic (18.1%) and inferior terminal arteries (81.9%). No, one, and two gastric branches of the left gastroepiploic artery, which ramified between the roots of the left gastroepiploic artery and its omental branch, were found in 36.5%, 49.2%, and 14.3% of the cases, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative 3D angiography is useful for the precise evaluation of perigastric vessel anatomies, and may help us to perform laparoscopic gastrectomy and robotic surgery safely.

Surgical considerations and outcomes of minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer resection

Despite high mortality rates from gastric cancer, surgical management remains critical for curative potential. Optimal outcomes of gastric cancer resection depend on a multitude of variables, including the extent of resection, scope of lymphadenectomy, method of reconstruction, and potential for a minimally invasive approach. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, compared with open gastrectomy, has been analyzed in numerous randomized control trials. Generally, those trials demonstrated statistically similar postoperative complication rates, mortality, and oncologic outcomes between the two approaches. Although laparoscopic gastrectomy requires longer operative times, significant improvements in estimated blood loss, postoperative length of stay, and return of bowel function have been noted in patients who undergo laparoscopic gastrectomy. These short-term benefits, along with equivalent oncologic results, have influenced national guidelines in both Eastern and Western countries to recommend laparoscopy, especially for early stage disease. Although robotic gastrectomy has not been as widely validated in effective trials, studies have reported equivalent oncologic outcomes and similar or improved postoperative complication and recovery rates after robotic gastrectomy compared with open gastrectomy. Comparing the two minimally invasive gastrectomy approaches, robotic surgery was associated with improved estimated blood loss, incidence of pancreatic sequela, and lymph node harvests in some studies, whereas laparoscopy resulted in lower operative times and hospital costs. Ultimately, when applying outcomes from the literature to clinical patient care decisions, it is imperative to recognize these studies' range of inclusion criteria, delineating between patients originating from Eastern or Western countries, the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the volume of surgeon experience, and the extent of gastrectomy, among others.

The Role of Surgery in the Management of Gastric Cancer: State of the Art

Surgery still represents the mainstay of treatment of all stages of gastric cancer (GC). Surgical resections represent potentially curative options in the case of early GC with a low risk of node metastasis. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and indocyanine green fluorescence are novel techniques which may improve the employment of stomach-sparing procedures, ameliorating quality of life without compromising oncological radicality. Nonetheless, the diffusion of these techniques is limited in Western countries. Conversely, radical gastrectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodal treatment represents a valid option in the case of advanced GC. Differences between Eastern and Western recommendations still exist, and the optimal multimodal strategy is still a matter of investigation. Recent chemotherapy protocols have made surgery available for patients with oligometastatic disease. In this context, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy via HIPEC or PIPAC has emerged as an alternative weapon for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In conclusion, the surgical management of GC is still evolving together with the multimodal strategy. It is mandatory for surgeons to be conscious of the current evolution of the surgical management of GC in the era of multidisciplinary and tailored medicine.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical distal gastrectomy (LDG) has been more frequently performed for locally advanced distal gastric cancer (AGC) than open distal gastrectomy (ODG). However, the benefits of LDG for elderly AGC patients (AGC-lap) remain unclear.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 70 years who underwent D2 distal gastrectomy from July 2014 to July 2021 were enrolled consecutively. Perioperative parameters, pathological features, and oncological outcomes of AGC-lap patients (n = 39) were compared with those of elderly AGC patients receiving ODG (AGC-open; n = 37) and elderly early gastric cancer patients receiving LDG (EGC-lap; n = 41) respectively.

RESULTS

The median age of all AGC patients was 77 years, and 28% of them had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score ≥ 2. Most of the perioperative and pathological features (including the number of lymph nodes harvested) were similar between the AGC-lap and AGC-open groups. AGC-lap patients had longer median operative times (215 min versus 192 min) but significantly less surgical complications (10.3% versus 37.8%) and shorter median hospital stays (11 days versus 13 days) than did AGC-open patients (all p < 0.05). The 3-year recurrence-free and overall survival was 66.2% and 88.8% in the AGC-lap group and 51% and 66.3% in the AGC-open group (both p = 0.1). The perioperative features, including operative time, number of lymph nodes harvested, hospital stay, and complication rates, were similar between the AGC- and EGC-lap groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LDG was safely and effectively performed in elderly AGC patients, resulting in faster recovery and a lower complication rate than ODG, without compromising oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Short and Long-Term Results

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer is widely accepted and routinely performed. However, it is still debated whether the laparoscopic approach is a valid alternative to open gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study is to compare short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic (LG) and open (OG) total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with AGC.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative study was conducted on patients who underwent LG and OG for ACG between January 2015 and December 2021. Primary endpoints were the following: recurrence rate, 3-year disease-free survival, 3-year and 5-year overall survival. Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to compare variables influencing outcomes and survival.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients included: fifty-three OG and thirty-nine LG. No difference in morbidity and mortality. LG was associated with lower recurrence rates (OG 22.6% versus LG 12.8%, p = 0.048). No differences in 3-year and 5-year overall survival; 3-year disease-free survival was improved in the LG group on the univariate analysis but not after the multivariate one. LG was associated with longer operative time, lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. Lymph node yield was higher in LG.

CONCLUSION

LG for AGC seems to provide satisfactory clinical and oncological outcomes in medium volume centers, improved postoperative results and possibly lower recurrence rates.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparison of long-term outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: a propensity score-matching study

OBJECTIVE

There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the long-term outcomes of robotic radical gastrectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the radical results and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

We prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed the general clinicopathological data of gastric cancer patients treated with robotic radical gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy (LG) from July 2016 to July 2018 at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. The RG cohort was matched 1:3 with the LG cohort by using propensity score matching (PSM). The primary endpoints of the study were 3-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

The study included 221 patients treated with RG and 1106 patients treated with LG for gastric cancer. After PSM, 211 patients were included in the RG cohort, and 663 patients were included in the LG cohort. The 3-year OS rate was 81.0% in the robotic cohort and 79.3% in the laparoscopic cohort (log-rank test, P = 0.516). The 3-year RFS rate was 78.7% in the robotic cohort and 75.6% in the laparoscopic cohort (log-rank test, P = 0.600). In the subgroup analyses, no significant differences were noted between the RG and LG cohorts in terms of 3-year OS and 3-year RFS (all P > 0.05). The therapeutic value index of each lymph node station dissection in the robotic cohort was comparable to that in the laparoscopic cohort.

CONCLUSION

Robotic radical gastrectomy can achieve radical results and long-term outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery, and further multicenter prospective studies can be conducted to assess the clinical efficacy of robotic radical gastrectomy.

Perspectives of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer

Gastrectomy is the main treatment option for gastric cancer patients. Laparoscopic approach has become popular as an alternative to open method during the last decades, and clinical trials have revealed safety and feasibility in the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy. The aim of this review is to summarize the results of prospective clinical trials and propose future perspectives for laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Signaling pathways and therapeutic interventions in gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) ranks fifth in global cancer diagnosis and fourth in cancer-related death. Despite tremendous progress in diagnosis and therapeutic strategies and significant improvements in patient survival, the low malignancy stage is relatively asymptomatic and many GC cases are diagnosed at advanced stages, which leads to unsatisfactory prognosis and high recurrence rates. With the recent advances in genome analysis, biomarkers have been identified that have clinical importance for GC diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Modern molecular classifications have uncovered the vital roles that signaling pathways, including EGFR/HER2, p53, PI3K, immune checkpoint pathways, and cell adhesion signaling molecules, play in GC tumorigenesis, progression, metastasis, and therapeutic responsiveness. These biomarkers and molecular classifications open the way for more precise diagnoses and treatments for GC patients. Nevertheless, the relative significance, temporal activation, interaction with GC risk factors, and crosstalk between these signaling pathways in GC are not well understood. Here, we review the regulatory roles of signaling pathways in GC potential biomarkers, and therapeutic targets with an emphasis on recent discoveries. Current therapies, including signaling-based and immunotherapies exploited in the past decade, and the development of treatment for GC, particularly the challenges in developing precision medications, are discussed. These advances provide a direction for the integration of clinical, molecular, and genomic profiles to improve GC diagnosis and treatments.

Protocol digest of a phase III trial to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative chemotherapy with S-1 plus oxaliplatin followed by D2 gastrectomy with postoperative S-1 in locally advanced gastric cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group study JCOG1509 (NAGISA Trial)

In Japan, postoperative chemotherapy is a standard care for stage II/III gastric cancer after curative resection with D2 lymph node dissection, and the clinical outcomes of patients with stage III gastric cancer are unsatisfactory. A combination of oral S-1 and oxaliplatin, that is the standard chemotherapy regimen for unresectable advanced/recurrent gastric cancer associated with a high response rate, was considered the most promising preoperative chemotherapy regimen. This randomized phase III trial was started in September 2016 to confirm the superiority of preoperative chemotherapy with S-1 plus oxaliplatin followed by D2 gastrectomy with postoperative chemotherapy compared with D2 gastrectomy with postoperative chemotherapy for patients with clinical T3–4N1–3 M0 locally advanced gastric cancer in terms of overall survival. A total of 470 patients will be enrolled from 63 hospitals in Japan for 8.5 years. This trial has been registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials as jRCTs031180350 [https://jrct.niph.go.jp/latest-detail/jRCTs031180350].

Fifty years of progress in gastric cancer

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

Comparison of clinical safety and feasibility between reduced-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: A retrospective study

Background

Traditional open gastric cancer surgery has evolved from porous to reduced-hole, single-hole, or even natural cavity surgery to laparoscopic surgery, due to the continuous development of minimally invasive concepts and medical technologies, as well as awareness for the concept of rapid recovery. Conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy is quite mature in age at the moment, but how to progress to minimally invasive surgery without increasing the difficulty of surgery while ensuring clinical safety and feasibility is worth further investigation. Therefore, the clinical safety and feasibility of reduced port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy were assessed in this study.

Methods

Information on the clinical data of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastric cancer surgery in a single centre between May 2020 and May 2022 was collected, and a total of 232 patients were included in this study according to the study protocol design. The clinical data of 232 patients with gastric cancer treated by two different surgical methods, namely, reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) or conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), were retrospectively analysed. The intraoperative indices, postoperative pathological indices, and short-term postoperative complications (within 30 days) of the two different surgical methods were evaluated, as well as the surgical methods’ feasibility and short-term postoperative recovery effect.

Results

There was no significant difference between the general data of patients with RPLS and CLS (P &gt; 0.05). Compared with CLSG, the operation time, digestive tract reconstruction time and lymph node dissection time of RPLSG are shorter. The intraoperative blood loss was less, and the incision was minimally invasive (P &lt; 0.05). In the short-term postoperative effect, the level of white blood cell count on the first day, the time of getting out of bed, the time of removing drainage tube, the time of hospitalization and the VAS of pain on the first, third and fifth days after operation, RPLSG was obviously superior to CLSG (P &lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference between RPLSG and CLSG in terms of pathological indices (P &gt; 0.05).

Conclusions

The treatment of gastric cancer with RPLS has good safety, feasibility and short-term postoperative effects, which is in line with the implementation of the modern concept of rapid rehabilitation surgery.

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer with situs inversus totalis: a case report

Background

Situs inversus totalis (SIT) is a relatively rare condition, in which the thoracic and abdominal organs are reversed or mirrored from their normal positions. Here, we reported a case of a patient with SIT and advanced gastric cancer with lymph node metastasis who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG).

Case presentation

A 67-year-old man with SIT was clinically diagnosed with T3N2M0 advanced gastric cancer located in the middle gastric body. Three-dimensional reconstruction of computed tomography angiogram revealed that the common hepatic artery originated from the superior mesenteric artery. The patient underwent LDG with D2 lymph node dissection and Roux-en-Y reconstruction. The postoperative course was uneventful.

Conclusion

This case report showed that LDG could be safely performed on a patient even under complex conditions, such as advanced gastric cancer with lymph node metastasis with SIT and vascular anomalies.

Laparoscopic single-layer running "trapezoid-shaped" suture versus mechanical stapling for esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: cost-effect analysis of propensity score-matched study cohorts

OBJECTIVES

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy has been developed with difficulty in intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy. Although mechanical stapling has been widely used for intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy, manual suture holds great promise with the emergence of high-resolution 3D vision and robotic surgery. After exploration of how to improve the safety and efficiency of intracorporeal suture for esophagojejunostomy, we recommended the technique of single-layer running "trapezoid-shaped" suture. The cost-effectiveness was analyzed by comparing with conventional mechanical stapling.

METHODS

The study retrospectively reviewed the patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer from January 2010 to December 2021. The patients were divided into two cohorts based on the methods of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy: manual suture versus stapling suture. Propensity score matching was performed to match patients from the two cohorts at a ratio of 1:1. Then group comparison was made to determine whether manual suture was non-inferior to stapling suture in terms of operation time, anastomotic complications, postoperative hospital stay, and surgical cost.

RESULTS

The study included 582 patients with laparoscopic total gastrectomy. The manual and stapling suture for esophagojejunostomy were performed in 50 and 532 patients, respectively. In manual suture cohort, the median time for the whole operation and digestive tract reconstruction were 300 min and 110 min. There was no anastomotic bleeding and stenosis but two cases of anastomotic leak which occurred at 3 days after surgery. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 11 days. After propensity score matching, group comparison yielded two variables with statistical significance: time for digestive tract reconstruction and surgery cost. The manual suture cohort spent less money but more time for esophagojejunostomy. Intriguingly, the learning curve of manual suture revealed that the time for digestive tract reconstruction was declined with accumulated number of operations.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic single-layer running "trapezoid-shaped" suture appears safe and cost-effective for intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy. Although the concern remains about prolonged operation time for beginners of performing the suture method, adequate practice is expected to shorten the operation time based on our learning curve analysis.

Accuracy of preoperative clinical staging for locally advanced gastric cancer in KLASS-02 randomized clinical trial

Purpose

The discrepancy between preoperative and final pathological staging has been a long-standing challenge for the application of clinical trials or appropriate treatment options. This study aimed to demonstrate the accuracy of preoperative staging of locally advanced gastric cancer using data from a large-scale randomized clinical trial.

Materials and methods

Of the 1050 patients enrolled in the clinical trial, 26 were excluded due to withdrawal of consent (n = 20) or non-surgery (n = 6). The clinical and pathological staging was compared. Risk factor analysis for underestimation was performed using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Regarding T staging by computed tomography, accuracy rates were 74.48, 61.62, 58.56, and 85.16% for T1, T2, T3 and T4a, respectively. Multivariate analysis for underestimation of T staging revealed that younger age, ulcerative gross type, circular location, larger tumor size, and undifferentiated histology were independent risk factors. Regarding nodal status estimation, 54.9% of patients with clinical N0 disease were pathologic N0, and 36.4% of patients were revealed to have pathologic N0 among clinical node-positive patients. The percentage of metastasis involvement at the D1, D1+, and D2 lymph node stations significantly increased with the advanced clinical N stage. Among all patients, 29 (2.8%), including 26 with peritoneal seeding, exhibited distant metastases.

Conclusions

Estimating the exact pathologic staging remains challenging. A thorough evaluation is mandatory before treatment selection or trial enrollment. Moreover, we need to set a sufficient case number when we design the clinical trial considering the stage migration.

Clinical impact of laparoscopic surgery and adhesion prevention material for prevention of small bowel obstruction

Aim

Adhesive small bowel obstructions (SBO) are one of the most common complications following abdominal surgery, and they decrease patient quality of life. Since 2000, laparoscopic surgery has been employed with increasing frequency, as has adhesion prevention material (APM). In this study we tried to evaluate whether laparoscopic surgery and APM reduce the incidence of SBO.

Methods

In Cohort 1, we included patients who developed SBO and received inpatient treatment between 2015 and 2018. We evaluated the elapsed time between precedent surgery and the onset of SBO, and what kind of surgery most often causes SBO. In Cohort 2, we included patients who underwent digestive surgery between 2012 and 2014 and evaluated SBO incidence within 5 y after the precedent surgery.

Results

In all, 2058 patients were included in Cohort 1. Of these, 164 had experienced no precedent surgery. Among patients with a history of abdominal surgery, 29.7% experienced SBO within 1 y after the precedent surgery and 48.1% within 3 y. Altogether, 18798 patients were analyzed in Cohort 2. The incidence of SBO after laparoscopic colorectal surgery was lower than that of open colorectal surgery (P < .001), and laparoscopic gastroduodenal surgery was also lower (P = .02). However, there were no differences between laparoscopic and open surgery for other types of surgery. The use of APM had no effect on SBO incidence in any type of abdominal surgery.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery helps to reduce SBO incidence only in colorectal surgery, and possibly in gastroduodenal surgery. APM does not reduce SBO after abdominal surgery.

Should total omentectomy be performed for advanced gastric cancer?: The role of omentectomy during laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

In the era of minimally invasive surgery, laparoscopic partial omentectomy (LPO) has seen widespread use as a curative surgical procedure for early gastric cancer. However, scientific evidence of the extent of omentectomy during laparoscopic gastrectomy remains unclear for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

METHODS

We analyzed 666 eligible patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy for AGC with curative intent between 2014 and 2018. Surgical outcome and postoperative prognosis were compared between LPO and laparoscopic total omentectomy (LTO) groups after 2:1 propensity score matching with age, sex, body mass index, tumor size, pT stage, pN stage, gastrectomy type, and clinical T stage as covariates.

RESULTS

After extensive matching, there was no significant difference in pathologic or clinical stages between the LPO (n = 254) and LTO (n = 177) groups. LPO provided a significantly shorter operation time than LTO (199.2 ± 64.8 vs. 248.1 ± 68.3 min, P < 0.001). Pulmonary complication within postoperative 30 days was significantly lower in the LPO group (4.4 vs. 10.3%, P = 0.018). In multivariate analysis, LTO was the independent risk factor for pulmonary complication (odds ratio [OR] 2.53, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.12-5.73, P = 0.025), which became more obvious in patients with a Charlson's comorbidity index of 4 or higher (OR 27.43, 95% CI 1.35-558.34, P = 0.031). The 5-year overall survival rate (OS) and 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were not significantly different between the two groups, even after stage stratification.

CONCLUSION

LPO provided significantly shorter operation time and less pulmonary complication than LTO without compromising 5-year OS and 3-year RFS for AGC. LTO was the independent risk factor for pulmonary complications, which became more evident in patients with severe comorbidities.

Validity and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy with D1+ lymphadenectomy for very elderly advanced gastric cancer patients; retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether laparoscopic gastrectomy with optimal lymphadenectomy is appropriate for very elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer. This study aimed to assess the validity of laparoscopic gastrectomy with D1+ lymphadenectomy performed for advanced gastric cancer in patients aged 80 years or more.

METHODS

Included in this retrospective study were 122 patients who underwent curative laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer between 2013 and 2018. All patients over 80 years old underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D1+ lymphadenectomy. We divided patients by age between those who were very elderly (age ≥ 80 years; very elderly group [n = 57]) and those who were non-very elderly (age < 80 years; control group [n = 65]), and we compared patient and clinicopathological characteristics, intraoperative outcomes, and short- and long-term outcomes between the two groups. We also performed multivariate analyses to identify predictors of postoperative prognosis.

RESULTS

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of grade 2 or higher and mean Charlson comorbidity index score and body mass index were significantly different between the very elderly group and the control group. Adjuvant chemotherapy was used in relatively few very elderly group patients. Operation time, blood loss volume, and postoperative morbidity and mortality did not differ between the two groups. The overall survival and disease-specific survival rate of very elderly group patients with the Charlson comorbidity index score of <3 was not significantly different from that of the control group patients.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of advanced gastric cancer by laparoscopic gastrectomy with D1+ lymphadenectomy to be both safe and effective in the very elderly group patients with the Charlson comorbidity index score of <3.

A national advanced training program for laparoscopic radical gastrectomy has a positive impact on surgical trainees: A before and after study (ATP-LRG-1)

BACKGROUND

Due to the high technical requirements of laparoscopic radical gastrectomy (LRG), establishing an effective training system to promote clinical technology and operation specifications is necessary. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a national advanced training program for LRG (ATP-LRG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The contents of the training include the following: 1) detailed technique descriptions; 2) prevention and solving of intraoperative complications; 3) live surgery performance; 4) theory and practice of clinical research; 5) comments on trainees' videos; and 6) questions, answers, and discussions. This retrospective before and after study surveyed 875 trainees from January 2015 to October 2020. Endpoints were general surgical skills (GSS), laparoscopic gastrectomy acceptance (LGA), and clinical research possibilities (CRP). The analysis took place in December 2021.

RESULTS

The response rate was 70.5% (617/875). ATP-LRG reportedly had a positive impact on the LRG practice of 99.5% (614/617) of trainees. Their GSS (before vs. after: 16.5 ± 3.7 vs. 20.3 ± 3.1, P < 0.001), LGA (4.2 ± 0.9 vs. 4.6 ± 0.7, P < 0.001), and CRP (2.6 ± 1.2 vs. 3.2 ± 1.1, P < 0.001) significantly improved. The improvement in GSS for those with professional titles of associate chief surgeons and below was significantly higher than that for chief surgeons (4.0 ± 3.0 vs 3.3 ± 2.4, P = 0.017), while those of LGA and CRP were not. The annual number of operations before training was negatively correlated with improvement in GSS (P < 0.001, Pearson's correlation coefficient: 0.14). Multivariate logistic regression showed that those with professional titles of associate chief surgeons and below (odds ratio [OR]: 1.719, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.038-2.846, P = 0.035), and with annual number of operations before training being <60, (OR: 5.257, 95% CI: 2.573-10.742, P < 0.001) were most prone to high-GSS improvement.

CONCLUSION

The nationwide ATP-LRG facilitates the improvement of trainees' GSS, LGA, and CRP levels. Surgeons with lower professional titles and fewer performed operations are most likely to improve their GSS through training.

Laparoscopic vs Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes of the KLASS-02 Randomized Clinical Trial

Question

What is the oncologic safety profile of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for the treatment of clinically advanced gastric cancer in terms of 5-year survival?

Findings

In this randomized clinical trial of 1050 patients, in patients who underwent laparoscopic or open distal gastrectomy, the 5-year overall survival rates (88.9% vs 88.7%) and relapse-free survival rates (79.5% vs 81.1%) did not differ significantly. The late complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (6.5% vs 11.0%).

Meaning

The 5-year follow-up results of the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS)-02 trial support the rationale for laparoscopic surgery in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Importance

The long-term safety of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains uncertain given the lack of 5-year follow-up results.

Objective

To compare the 5-year follow-up results in patients with clinically AGC enrolled in the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS)-02 randomized clinical trial who underwent laparoscopic or open distal gastrectomy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The KLASS-02, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, showed that laparoscopic surgery was noninferior to open surgery for patients with locally AGC. The present study assessed the 5-year follow-up results, including 5-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates and long-term complications, in patients enrolled in KLASS-02. From November 21, 2011, to April 29, 2015, patients aged 20 to 80 years diagnosed preoperatively with locally AGC were enrolled. Final follow-up was on June 15, 2021. Data were analyzed June 24 to September 9, 2021.

Interventions

Patients were treated with R0 resection either by laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy as the full analysis set of the KLASS-02 trial.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Five-year OS and RFS rates, recurrence patterns, and long-term surgical complications were evaluated.

Results

This study enrolled a total of 1050 patients. A total of 974 patients were treated with R0 resection; 492 (50.5%) in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group (mean [SD] age, 59.8 [11.0] years; 351 men [71.3%]) and 482 (49.5%) in the open gastrectomy group (mean [SD] age, 59.4 [11.5] years; 335 men [69.5%]). In patients who underwent laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy, the 5-year OS (88.9% vs 88.7%) and RFS (79.5% vs 81.1%) rates did not differ significantly. The most common types of recurrence were peritoneal carcinomatosis (73 of 173 [42.1%]), hematogenous metastases (36 of 173 [20.8%]), and locoregional recurrence (23 of 173 [13.2%]), with no between-group differences in types of recurrence at each cancer stage. The correlation between 3-year RFS and 5-year OS at the individual level was highest in patients with stage III gastric cancer (ρ = 0.720). The late complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic than in the open surgery group (32 of 492 [6.5%] vs 53 of 482 [11.0%]). The most common type of complication in both groups was intestinal obstruction (13 of 492 [2.6%] vs 24 of 482 [5.0%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The 5-year outcomes of the KLASS-02 trial support the 3-year results, which is the noninferiority of laparoscopic surgery compared with open gastrectomy for locally AGC. The laparoscopic approach can be recommended in patients with locally AGC to achieve the benefit of low incidence of late complications.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01456598

The Impact of Perioperative Events on Cancer Recurrence and Metastasis in Patients after Radical Gastrectomy: A Review

Radical gastrectomy is a mainstay therapy for patients with locally resectable gastric cancer (GC). GC patients who are candidates for radical gastrectomy will experience at least part of the following perioperative events: surgery, anesthesia, pain, intraoperative blood loss, allogeneic blood transfusion, postoperative complications, and their related anxiety, depression and stress response. Considerable clinical studies have shown that these perioperative events can promote recurrence and decrease the long-term survival of GC patients. The mechanisms include activation of neural signaling and the inflammatory response, suppression of antimetastatic immunity, increased release of cancer cells into circulation, and delayed adjuvant therapy, which are involved in every step of the invasion-metastasis cascade. Having appreciated these perioperative events and their influence on the risk of GC recurrence, we can now use this knowledge to find strategies that might substantially prevent the deleterious recurrence-promoting effects of perioperative events, potentially increasing cancer-free survival in GC patients.

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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Clinical advantage of standardized robotic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study using propensity-score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Although recent studies have shown that robotic gastrectomy offers clinical advantages over laparoscopic gastrectomy in decreasing gastric cancer (GC) morbidity, studies focusing on robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) remain limited. The current study aimed to clarify whether the use of a robotic system could clinically improve short-term outcomes.

METHODS

Between January 2009 and June 2021, 371 patients diagnosed with both clinical and pathological Stage III or lower GC and underwent RTG or laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) were enrolled in this study. The primary outcome was the incidence of intra-abdominal infectious complications over Clavien-Dindo classification grade IIIa. Demographic characteristics of those who underwent the RTG and LTG were matched using propensity-score matching (PSM), after which short-term outcomes were compared retrospectively.

RESULTS

After PSM, 100 patients were included in each group. The RTG group had a significantly shorter duration of hospitalization following surgery [RTG 13 (11-16) days vs. LTG 14 (11-19) days; p = 0.032] and a greater number of dissected LNs [RTG 48 (39-59) vs. LTG 43 (35-54) mL; p = 0.025], despite having a greater total operative time [RTG 511 (450-646) min vs. LTG 448 (387-549) min; p < 0.001]. In addition, the RTG group had significantly fewer total complications (3% vs. 13%, p = 0.019) and intra-abdominal infectious complications (1% vs. 9%; p = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed that robotic surgery might improve short-term outcomes following minimally invasive radical total gastrectomy by reducing intra-abdominal infectious complications.

The Use of Indocyanine Green (ICG) and Near-Infrared (NIR) Fluorescence-Guided Imaging in Gastric Cancer Surgery: A Narrative Review

Near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green is an emerging technology gaining clinical relevance in the field of oncosurgery. In recent decades, it has also been applied in gastric cancer surgery, spreading among surgeons thanks to the diffusion of minimally invasive approaches and the related development of new optic tools. Its most relevant uses in gastric cancer surgery are sentinel node navigation surgery, lymph node mapping during lymphadenectomy, assessment of vascular anatomy, and assessment of anastomotic perfusion. There is still debate regarding the most effective application, but with relatively no collateral effects and without compromising the operative time, indocyanine green fluorescence imaging carved out a role for itself in gastric resections. This review aims to summarize the current indications and evidence for the use of this tool, including the relevant practical details such as dosages and times of administration.

Laparoscopic Subtotal Gastrectomy and Sigmoidectomy Combined With Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery (NOSES) for Synchronous Gastric Cancer and Sigmoid Colon Cancer: A Case Report

Background

Gastric cancer and colon cancer are rarely seen in clinic, but there are still related reports. For gastric cancer and simultaneous colon cancer, surgical resection is the main treatment. Traditional surgery requires an incision from xiphoid process to pubic symphysis. With the progress of minimally invasive technology, laparoscopic surgery is also used in the treatment of gastric cancer, but also in the abdominal incision to remove specimens and in vitro anastomosis of digestive tract. Taking specimens through the natural cavity as a new surgical method can not only reduce the abdominal incision, but also reduce the occurrence of wound-related complications. Here, we report a patient with gastric cancer and colon cancer who was treated in our hospital.

Case Summary

We report a series of patients with gastric cancer and colon cancer. upper abdominal pain was treated in our hospital for 6 months. electronic gastroscopy showed large irregular ulcers on the lesser curvature of the gastric antrum and biopsy showed poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the gastric antrum. The enhanced CT of abdomen and pelvis showed irregular thickening of gastric antrum wall, irregular thickening of sigmoid colon wall and no obvious enlarged lymph nodes around. Further electronic enteroscopy showed that the sigmoid colon showed cauliflower protuberance, the intestinal cavity was slightly narrow, the intestinal wall was stiff, and the biopsy pathology showed moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon. No obvious abnormality was found in serological tumor indexes. We diagnosed gastric cancer with sigmoid colon cancer and the patient received Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy and sigmoidectomy combined with natural orifice specimen extraction surgery. At present, 12 months after operation, no clear tumor recurrence was found in the metastasis.

Conclusion

We should improve the understanding of gastric cancer and sigmoid cancer and combine examination with pathology to avoid misdiagnosis as metastatic cancer. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy should be performed for tumors with no serosa invasion, body mass index <30 and tumor diameter <6.5 cm. Sigmoidectomy combined with natural nostril sampling is feasible.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

The Safety and Feasibility of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

Background

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is incrementally applied to remedy locally advanced gastric cancer. However, NACT also enhances the difficulty of laparoscopic lymph node dissection. The objective of our study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Methods

From July 2017 to December 2019, 153 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and underwent the subsequent surgical procedure were retrospectively enrolled and analyzed in the Gastrointestinal Surgery Department of West China Hospital. According to surgical methods, all the patients were sectionalized into two groups: laparoscopic assistant gastrectomy (LAG, 77 patients) and traditional open gastrectomy (OG, 76 patients). The demographic parameters, preoperative, surgical, pathological, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy features were compared between the two groups.

Results

A total of 153 patients accepted neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection in our study. There was no statistically significant difference in demographic parameters and preoperative and neoadjuvant chemotherapy characteristics between the two groups. The LAG group illustrated less intraoperative blood loss (91.1 ± 53.1 ml vs. 125.7 ± 116.9 ml, p=0.010) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (7.9 ± 2.1 days vs. 125.7 ± 116.9 days, p=0.009), when compared to the OG group. Moreover, there was no disparity with respect to operative duration, number of harvested lymph nodes, and postoperative complication rates between the two groups. When considering the Clavien-Dindo classification, no statistically significant difference was indicated in all stratifications with regard to postoperative complications.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is safe and feasible without increasing postoperative adverse events.

Reduced-port robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single-institute experience

Background

Reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy can potentially reduce postoperative pain and improve recovery time. However, the inherent difficulty caused by the narrow manipulation angle makes this operation difficult, especially during lymph node dissection. The intrinsic advantage of the da Vinci^® robotic system might offset this difficulty, maintaining adequate surgical quality with risks of surgical complications equal to those by the conventional four-port robotic approach. The aim of this study was to compare the reduced-port robotic approach and the conventional four-port approach in terms of postoperative pain and short-term surgical outcomes.

Methods

All patients who underwent radical gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection using the da Vinci Xi robotic system, including reduced-port or conventional four-port approach, were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was postoperative pain assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS). The secondary outcomes were the number of harvested lymph nodes, operation time, length of hospital stay, and postoperative 30-day complications.

Results

Forty-eight patients were enrolled in the study, 10 cases in the reduced-port and 38 in the conventional four-port group. Postoperative NRS revealed no significant difference between the reduced-port and conventional four-port groups [postoperative day (POD) 1: 4.5 vs. 3, p = 0.047, POD 3: 4 vs. 3, p = 0.178]. After propensity score matching, there were no significant differences in the median number of harvested lymph nodes, operation time, and length of hospital stay between the groups. The postoperative 30-day complications were more frequent in the conventional four-port group, but there was no significant difference compared with the reduced-port group after propensity score matching.

Conclusions

Reduced-port robotic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection might be comparable to the conventional four-port robotic operation in terms of postoperative pain, surgical quality, and short-term outcomes. However, further studies are required to confirm our results and clarify the advantages of the robotic reduced-port approach.