The impact of preoperative waiting time in Stage II-III gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: A population-based cohort study

Non-inferiority of additional gastrectomy after endoscopic submucosal dissection compared with surgery alone on long-term prognosis: A propensity score-matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients in whom endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has resulted in non-curative resection need further surgical treatment. However, the oncological outcome of additional gastrectomy after ESD compared with surgery alone remains unclear.

METHODS

The clinical data of 778 patients who underwent gastrectomy for early gastric cancer from January 2008 to December 2019 in Ishikawa Prefectural Central Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. Of these 778 patients, 187 underwent additional gastrectomy after ESD (ESD (+) group) and 591 underwent surgery alone (ESD (-) group). We compared the overall survival and disease-free survival between the ESD (+) and ESD (-) groups, using propensity score matching to adjust for baseline characteristics. We also assessed early postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching based on sex, age, tumor diameter, tumor gross type, and operative procedure, each group comprised 144 patients with no significant differences in clinical background characteristics. After matching, the 5-year overall survival rate in the ESD (+) and ESD (-) group was 90.9% and 87.8%, respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.470). In addition, there was no significant difference in the disease-free survival rate (97.6% vs. 95.8%, respectively; P = 0.504). The postoperative complication rate was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Additional gastrectomy for patients in whom ESD resulted in non-curative resection did not adversely affect the long-term prognosis. Additional gastrectomy after ESD is oncologically acceptable for early gastric cancer.

Prehabilitation in Adults Undergoing Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Review on Rationale, Methodology, and Measures of Effectiveness

Cancer surgery places a significant burden on a patients' functional status and quality of life. In addition, cancer surgery is fraught with postoperative complications, themselves influenced by a patient's functional status. Prehabilitation is a unimodal or multimodal strategy that aims to increase a patient's functional capacity to reduce postoperative complications and improve postoperative recovery and quality of life. In most cases, it involves exercise, nutrition, and anxiety-reducing interventions. The impact of prehabilitation has been explored in several types of cancer surgery, most commonly colorectal and thoracic. Overall, the existing evidence suggests prehabilitation improves physiological outcomes (e.g., lean body mass, maximal oxygen consumption) as well as clinical outcomes (e.g., postoperative complications, quality of life). Notably, the benefit of prehabilitation is additional to that of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. While safe, prehabilitation programs require multidisciplinary coordination preoperatively. Despite the existence of numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the certainty of evidence demonstrating the efficacy and safety of prehabilitation is low to moderate, principally due to significant methodological heterogeneity and small sample sizes. There is a need for more large-scale multicenter randomized controlled trials to draw strong clinical recommendations.

Assessing the Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Gastric Cancer Mortality Risk

BACKGROUND

The global impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on public health has been significant. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for screening and diagnosis decreased along with new gastric cancer (GC) diagnoses.

METHODS

This study assesses how the pandemic affected GC mortality using data from Hiroshima Prefecture, comparing mortality rates between patients diagnosed during the pandemic (2020 and 2021) and pre-pandemic (2018 and 2019) periods. The crude hazard ratios (HRs) and HRs adjusted for age, sex, clinical stage, treatment status, and travel distance to the nearest GC screening facility were estimated using Cox regression models. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 9571 patients were diagnosed, with 4877 eligible for follow-up. The median age was 74 years, and 69% were male. The median follow-up period was 157 days, with events per 1000 person-years at 278 and 374 in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, respectively (crude HR, 1.37; adjusted HR, 1.17). The sensitivity and subgroup analyses yielded consistent results.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic increased mortality risk in patients with GC. Further studies are required to observe long-term outcomes and identify the disparities contributing to the increased mortality risk.