Ultrasonically Activated Shears in Gastrectomy for Large Gastric Cancers

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for predicting post-operative pulmonary infection in gastric cancer patients following radical gastrectomy

The aim of this retrospective study was to develop and validate a nomogram for predicting the risk of post-operative pulmonary infection (POI) in gastric cancer (GC) patients following radical gastrectomy. 2469 GC patients who underwent radical gastrectomy were enrolled, and randomly divided into the development and validation groups. The nomogram was constructed based on prognostic factors using logistic regression analysis, and was internally and crossly validated by bootstrap resampling and the validation dataset, respectively. Concordance index (C-index) value and calibration curve were used for estimating the predictive accuracy and discriminatory capability. Sixty-five (2.63%) patients developed POI within 30 days following surgery, with higher rates of requiring intensive care and longer post-operative hospital stays. The nomogram showed that open operation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), intra-operative blood transfusion, tumor located at upper and/or middle third and longer operation time (≥4 h) in a descending order were significant contributors to POI risk. The C-index value for the model was 0.756 (95% CI: 0.675−0.837), and calibration curves showed good agreement between nomogram predictions and actual observations. In conclusion, a nomogram based on these factors could accurately and simply provide a picture tool to predict the incidence of POI in GC patients undergoing radical gastrectomy.

Incidence, Causes and Risk Factors for 30-Day Unplanned Reoperation After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Experience of a High-Volume Center

Background

To investigate the incidence, causes and risk factors for unplanned reoperation because of early complications within 30 days of radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods

The study cohort comprised 1,948 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer between November 2010 and April 2017. The incidence, causes and outcomes of unplanned reoperation were examined and the risk factors were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

In total, 24 patients (1.2%) underwent unplanned reoperations because of early complications after radical gastrectomy. The main causes more frequently requiring reoperation were adhesive intestinal obstruction (eight cases, 33.3%), intra-abdominal bleeding (five cases, 20.8%), wound dehiscence (five cases, 20.8%), anastomotic leakage and intra-abdominal infection (five cases, 20.8%), and iatrogenic common bile duct injury (one case). Multivariate analysis identified that only combined multi-organ resection (odds ratio (OR) = 4.060, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.645 - 10.023, P = 0.002) was an independent risk factor. Two patients (8.3%) who underwent reoperation died from disseminated intravascular coagulation or sepsis, respectively, which was significantly higher than the remaining 1,924 patients who did not require reoperation (six cases, 0.3%, P < 0.001). Moreover, patients who underwent reoperation experienced higher morbidity rates (37.5% vs. 6.8%, P < 0.001), requiring intensive care (20.8% vs. 2.4%, P < 0.001) and longer postoperative hospital stays (33.6 days vs. 11.0 days, P < 0.001) compared with patients required no reoperation.

Conclusions

Combined multi-organ resection was an independent risk factor for unplanned reoperation following radical gastrectomy. Avoiding multi-organ resection as possible will decrease the likelihood of patients requiring reoperation.

Intra-abdominal infection after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Incidence, pathogens, risk factors and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infection, particularly intra-abdominal infection (IAI), remains a clinically important event after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. The aim of this retrospective study was to clarify the incidence, pathogens, risk factors and outcomes of IAI following gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

The study cohort was 1835 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer from January 2011 through December 2016. The incidence, pathogens, and treatment outcomes of IAI were examined, and the risk factors were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 73 patients (4.0%) developed IAI after radical gastrectomy. Bacterial culture in these patients showed that Gram-negative bacilli, such as Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumonia were the most common pathogens. Multivariate analysis identified that combined multi-organ resection (Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.262, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.114-4.596, P = 0.024), and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m² (OR = 1.968, 95% CI: 1.107-3.500, P = 0.021) were independent risk factors. Three patients (4.1%) developed IAI who died from sepsis and/or multiple-organ failure, which was significantly higher than in the remaining 1762 patients without IAI (5 cases, 0.3%, P = 0.003). Moreover, IAI required more re-operations (5.5% vs 0.8%, P = 0.005) and longer post-operative hospital stays (23.3 days vs 11.2 days, P < 0.001) compared without IAI.

CONCLUSIONS

IAI is a major complication after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, and associated with combined multi-organ resection and a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m²; thus, meticulous surgical procedures need to be performed in patients with these specific risk factors.

Ultrasonically activated shears versus electrocautery in open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Use of ultrasonically activated shears (UAS) is gaining popularity in open surgery but without concrete evidence. We conducted a prospectively randomized study to assess the efficacy of ultrasonic dissection in open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with gastric cancer who were to undergo gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were enrolled and assigned to either the conventional surgery group (n = 125) or the UAS group (n = 128).

RESULTS

The mean operating time was significantly reduced in the UAS group (89.3 ± 15.6 min) when compared to the conventional group (97.8 ± 17.2 min; p < 0.001). However, we did not find any significant difference in operative blood loss, the amount of postoperative abdominal drainage, or the rate of postoperative complications between the groups. A multivariate analysis for operating time revealed that the use of UAS, female gender and BMI less than 25 were significantly associated with reduced operating time. The operating time was significantly longer in the conventional group than in the UAS group (B 7.786; 95 % CI 4.103-11.468; p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, the use of UAS significantly reduced the operating time, especially in male patients, regardless of the BMI status.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of UAS in gastrectomy for gastric cancer was a safe and efficient method, especially in terms of reducing operating time for male patients.

Ultrasonic dissection versus conventional electrocautery during gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Use of ultrasonic surgical instrument is gaining popularity for dissection and coagulation in open surgery. However, there is still no consensus on the efficacy and safety of its use compared with conventional surgical technique in open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the role and surgical outcomes of ultrasonic dissection (UD) compared with conventional electrocautery (EC).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify all studies comparing UD and EC in gastric cancer surgery. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were compared using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

Five studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 489 patients. Meta-analysis results showed that compared with EC, UD was associated with significantly shorter operation time (P = 0.03), less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.002), lower morbidity (P = 0.02), and reduced postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.03). However, there was no significant difference between the two surgical techniques with regards to postoperative abdominal drainage (P = 0.17), and total cost in hospital (P = 0.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to EC, the use of UD during open gastrectomy can provide several improved outcomes for operation time, intraoperative blood loss, overall morbidity, and postoperative hospital stay. It appears that UD can be used instead of conventional EC in open gastric cancer surgery, although more larger trials with long follow-up should be performed.

Comparison of ultrasonic scalpel versus conventional techniques in open gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery of ultrasonic scalpel (USS) with conventional techniques for the resection of gastric carcinoma.

METHODS

A systematic search of major medical databases (PubMed, Embase, CCRT and CNKI) was conducted. Both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs and nRCTs) were considered eligible. Operation time (OT), intraoperative blood loss (BL) and postoperative complications (POC) rates as well as postoperative hospitalization days, number of dissected lymph nodes, abdominal drainage volume and time for recovery of gastrointestinal functions were synthesized and compared.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included (7 RCTs and 12 nRCTs), in which 1930 patients were enrolled totally (946 in the USS group and 984 in the conventional group). Monopolar electrocautery and ligation were used as the conventional methods. Comparative meta-analysis showed perioperative outcomes were significantly improved using USS compared with conventional surgical instrumentation. OT was reduced from a weighted mean of 185.3 min in the conventional group to 151.0 min in the USS group (MD = -33.30, 95% CI [-41.75, -24.86], p<0.001) and intraoperative BL was decreased from a weighted mean of 217.9 ml in the conventional group to 111.6 ml in the USS group (MD = -113.42, 95% CI [-142.05, -84.79], p<0.001). Results from RCTs subgroup were consistent with those from nRCTs subgroup. The weighted cumulative risk of POC accounted for 8.9% (0%-25%) and 12.9% (5.5%-45%) in the USS and conventional groups, respectively. Pooled estimated results from nRCTs (OR = 0.54, 95% CI [0.27, 1.06], p = 0.07) and RCTs (RR = 0.75, 95% CI [0.44, 1.26], p = 0.27) showed no significant difference between the USS and control groups. Analysis of secondary outcomes showed the improvements of the USS group over control group regarding the number of dissected lymph nodes, postoperative hospitalization days, abdominal drainage volume and time for recovery of gastrointestinal functions.

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional electrosurgery, the USS is a safe and effective technique with more short-term advantages in open surgery for gastric cancer.

Risk factors for surgical site infections after elective gastrectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for surgical site infections (SSIs) after elective gastrectomy.

METHODS

This study reviewed the medical records of 842 patients who underwent elective gastrectomy. Multivariate analyses were performed to determine the risk factors for SSIs.

RESULTS

Superficial incisional, deep incisional, and organ/space SSIs were detected in 50 (5.9%) patients, 2 (0.2%) patients, and 90 (10.7%) patients, respectively. A multivariate analysis demonstrated that female gender (p = 0.0332) and allogenic blood transfusion (p = 0.0266) were independent predictors for superficial incisional SSIs, while a male gender (p = 0.0355), corticosteroid therapy (p = 0.037), total gastrectomy (p < 0.0001), and a duration of operation ≥300 min (p = 0.0062) were independent predictors for organ/space SSIs. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in patients with organ/space SSIs in comparison to those without SSIs (p < 0.0001) and with superficial incisional SSIs (p < 0.0001). The patients with organ/space SSIs had a significantly higher re-operation rate in comparison to those without SSIs (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk factors both for incisional SSIs and for organ/space SSIs are strongly associated with surgical results. Meticulous surgical techniques are therefore required to prevent SSIs.

Randomized controlled trial of ultrasonic dissection versus standard surgical technique in open left hemicolectomy or total gastrectomy

Background

Ultrasonic dissection devices have been designed for use in open surgery but it is not certain how they compare with standard surgical techniques.

Methods

This was a multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing ultrasonic dissection with the traditional surgical technique for haemostasis and dissection during left hemicolectomy and total gastrectomy. The primary endpoint was duration of operation; secondary endpoints were blood loss and other intraoperative parameters, and patient outcomes. Performance of the two techniques was rated by surgeons and assistants on a ten-point Likert scale.

Results

The analysis included 100 patients in the ultrasonic and 101 in the conventional dissection group. Patient demographics, and clinical and tumour-related parameters were similar in the two groups. There was no significant difference in duration of operation (mean 170 and 178 min in ultrasonic and conventional groups respectively; P = 0·405). Nor were there significant differences in intraoperative blood loss (median 350 and 400 ml respectively; P = 0·882), other intraoperative parameters, oncological or functional outcome. The ultrasonic dissector device was rated one point higher than conventional techniques by the surgeons.

Conclusion

Use of the ultrasonic dissector in open total gastrectomy and hemicolectomy had no impact on the overall operating time or other endpoints studied. Surgeons preferred the ultrasonic device for dissection. Registration number: ISRCTN97779420 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).