Influence of endoscopic resection on additional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: a propensity score-matching analysis

Short-term efficacy of additional laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate short-term efficacy of direct laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy (LAG) versus non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) plus additional LAG for early gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

286 patients were retrospectively assigned into two groups: direct LAG group (n = 255) and additional LAG (ESD plus LAG, n = 31) group. A 1:2 propensity score matching was performed to equalize relevant confounding factors between two groups for analysis.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients were successfully matched, including 62 in the direct LAG group and 31 in the additional LAG group. A significant (P = 0.013) difference existed in the drainage removal time between the additional LAG and direct LAG group (7 d vs. 6 d). Age, sex, tumor location and surgical approach were significantly (P < 0.05) associated with complications, with age ≥ 60 years (P = 0.002) and total gastrectomy (P = 0.011) as significant independent risk factors. A significant (P = 0.023) difference existed in the surgical time between the early and late groups (193.3 ± 37.6 min vs. 165.5 ± 25.1 min).

CONCLUSION

Additional LAG (D1 + lymphadenectomy) after ESD may be safe and effective even though non-curative ESD may prolong the drainage removal time and increase the difficulty of surgery.

Impact of preceding noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection on patients with early gastric cancer who undergo subsequent surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The influence of preceding noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) on the efficacy of subsequent surgery is still controversial among early gastric cancer (EGC), especially for laparoscopic gastrectomy. The present meta-analysis was conducted to compare clinical outcomes between patients with EGC who underwent noncurative ESD before surgery (ESD group) and those who underwent direct surgery (non-ESD group).

METHODS

Related databases were searched, and articles comparing differences between ESD and non-ESD groups were included for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Ten retrospective studies with 3465 participants were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the non-ESD group, the ESD group was older and had more males, smaller tumors, more differentiated tumors and a higher proportion of pT1b, a shorter operation time, fewer dissected lymph nodes, a lower rate of positive lymph nodes and a lower rate of D2 dissection. There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complication rate, postoperative hospital stay or long-term prognosis, etc.

CONCLUSION

Preceding noncurative ESD has no negative impact on the short- and long-term results of additional gastrectomy (open surgery or laparoscopic surgery).

Impact of non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection on short- and long-term outcome of subsequent laparoscopic gastrectomy for pT1 gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and oncological safety of non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) prior to additional gastrectomy for early gastric cancer (EGC) are still unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of non-curative ESD on short- and long-term outcomes of subsequent laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for pathological T1 (pT1) EGC.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 422 patients who underwent LG for pT1 EGC between January 2007 and December 2017 at our center. Eighty-five of these patients underwent ESD with curative intent before surgery. Using propensity-score matching for sex, age, body mass index, American society of anesthesiologists score, history of previous abdominal surgery, tumor location, mucosal/submucosal infiltration, histology, lymph node metastasis, extent of lymph node dissection, operative method, lymphatic invasion, and venous invasion, the clinicopathologic and survival data of these patients were compared.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 60 (range 2-168) months. Using propensity-score matching from a total of 422 patients, 75 patients were selected in the Non-ESD and the ESD cohorts each. There were no significant differences in terms of characteristics and clinicopathological findings between the two groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in postoperative morbidity (13.3% vs. 17.3%; P = 0.497) and mortality (1.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.316). Both the 5-year overall survival ratio (88.8% vs. 86.9%; P = 0.757) and 5-year disease-specific survival ratio (97.1% vs. 98.4%; P = 0.333) were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Short- and long-term outcomes of LG in patients with pT1 EGC are not related to preoperative ESD history. Even for non-curative resections, ESD prior to surgery is feasible in terms of oncological and surgical outcomes in pT1 EGC.

Effect of endoscopic resection on short-term surgical outcomes of subsequent laparoscopic gastrectomy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) might affect subsequent laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) because of the electrical coagulation, but the effect remains controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to analyze the effect of ER on the short-term surgical outcomes of subsequent LG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to find eligible studies published from inception to March 21, 2021. Short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the ER-LG group and the LG-only group. The registration ID of this current meta-analysis on PROSPERO is CRD42021238031.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 3611 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The LG-only group had a higher T stage (T1-T2: OR=2.42, 95% CI=1.09 to 5.34, P=0.03; T3-T4: OR=0.41, 95% CI=0.19 to 0.91, P=0.03) than the ER-LG group. The ER-LG group showed a shorter operation time than the LG-only group (MD=-5.98, 95% CI=-10.99 to -0.97, P=0.02). However, no difference was found in operation time after subgroup analysis of propensity score matching studies. No significant difference was found in intraoperative blood loss, time to first oral feeding, or postoperative hospital stay between the ER-LG group and the LG-only group. And no significance was found in overall complications (OR=1.16, 95% CI=0.89 to 1.50, P=0.27), complications of grade ≥ II (OR=1.11, 95% CI=0.71 to 1.73, P=0.64), complications of grade ≥ III b (OR=1.47, 95% CI=0.49 to 4.43, P=0.49) between the ER-LG group and the LG-only group.

CONCLUSIONS

ER did not affect subsequent LG in terms of short-term outcomes, and the ER-LG group might have a shorter operation time than the LG-only group.