Subtotal gastrectomy with limited lymph node dissection is a feasible treatment option for patients with early gastric stump cancer

The safety, feasibility, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic completion total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: a prospective study with 3-year follow-up (FUGES-004 study)

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of laparoscopic completion total gastrectomy (LCTG) for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains controversial.

METHODS

The primary outcome was postoperative morbidity within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 3-year overall survival (OS), and recurrence. Inverse probability treatment weighted (IPTW) was used to balance the baseline between LCTG and OCTG.

RESULTS

Final analysis included 46 patients with RGC who underwent LCTG at the FJMUUH between June 2016 and June 2020. The historical control group comprised of 160 patients who underwent open completion total gastrectomy (OCTG) in the six tertiary teaching hospitals from CRGC-01 study. After IPTW, no significant difference was observed between the LCTG and OCTG groups in terms of incidence (LCTG vs. OCTG: 28.0 vs. 35.0%, P =0.379) or severity of complications within 30 days after surgery. Compared with OCTG, LCTG resulted in better short-term outcomes and faster postoperative recovery. However, the textbook outcome rate was comparable between the two groups (45.9 vs. 32.8%, P =0.107). Additionally, the 3-year DFS and 3-year OS of LCTG were comparable to those of OCTG (DFS: log-rank P =0.173; OS: log-rank P =0.319). No significant differences in recurrence type, mean recurrence time, or 3-year cumulative hazard of recurrence were observed between the two groups (all P >0.05). Subgroup analyses and concurrent comparisons demonstrated similar trends.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study suggested that LCTG was noninferior to OCTG in both short-term and long-term outcomes. In experienced centers, LCTG may be considered as a viable treatment option for RGC.

The value of lymph nodes ratios in the prognosis of resectable remnant gastric cancer through the retrospective propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

Currently, the characteristics and prognosis of remnant gastric cancer (RGC) are not fully understood yet. The present study aimed to describe the details of clinicopathological features of resectable RGC and investigated the factors affecting survival after the curative operation.

METHODS

From Jan. 2006 to Dec. 2015, a total of 118 resectable RGC patients (the RGC group) and 236 age-, sex- and TNM stages-matched resectable gastric cancer (GC) patients (the control group) were recruited retrospectively. Clinicopathological characteristics and overall survival were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The overall survival rate was 46.61% for RGC patients compared to 55.08% for control groups (P < 0.01), and the mean overall survival time of RGC patients was 40.23 ± 32.27 months, compared to 55.06 ± 34.29 months in the control group (P = 0.023 after matching). The overall survival (OS) of RGC patients with stage IIb was much worse than IIa (P < 0.001) and similar to IIIa (P = 0.463) and IIIb (P = 0.014). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis revealed that TNM stage (HR: 3.899, P < 0.001) and lymph nodes ratio (LNR) (HR: 2.405, P = 0.028) were independent prognostic significance to OS.

CONCLUSIONS

The OS of RGC was much worse than GC with similar TNM stages, and LNR might consider a highly reliable indicator to evaluate the prognostic in RGC.

Mixed neuroendocrine carcinoma of the gastric stump: A case report

BACKGROUND

Gastric stump cancer, also known as gastric remnant cancer (GRC), is one of the main complications of postgastrectomy syndrome, which usually occurs following Billroth II reconstruction. The predominant histological subtype of GRC is adenocarcinoma, whereas neuroendocrine carcinoma is relatively rare. In particular, there are few recently reported cases of mixed neuroendocrine carcinoma (MNEC) in the English literature. Here, we present an extremely rare case of MNEC of the gastric stump.

CASE SUMMARY

A 59-year-old patient presented to our department owing to chronic constipation. He had undergone subtotal gastric resection 35 years prior to admission because of benign peptic ulcer. After admission, the patient underwent several tests, and gastroendoscopy showed evidence of Billroth II gastrectomy and local thickening of the gastric stump mucosa at the gastrojejunostomy site, with bile reflux; pathological biopsy revealed adenocarcinoma. He was then diagnosed with GRC and underwent total gastrectomy, D2 Lymphadenectomy, and esophagojejunal Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Histopathological examination of the specimen identified MNEC comprising MNEC (60%), adenocarcinoma (30%), and squamous cell carcinoma (10%). Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated on September 17, 2020. Taxol plus cisplatin was administered for only one cycle because of severe liver function damage, and the regimen was changed to etoposide plus cisplatin on October 10, 2020 for five cycles. The patient recovered, with no recurrence after 6 mo of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Gastric MNECs (GMNECs) is a rare type of GRC. This study presented the unusual occurrence of GMNEC in the gastric stump. This case will contribute to improvements in our understanding of the carcinogenesis, biology, pathology, and behavior of GMNEC and GRC.

Subtotal versus total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

PURPOSE

Subtotal gastrectomy (SG) has become a general option for distal gastric cancer. However, the availability of an organ-preserving approach for the treatment of remnant gastric cancer (RGC) is still controversial. Thus, the objective of the present study was to assess the safety and efficacy of SG for RGC by integrating data from published articles.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for studies that compared SG versus total gastrectomy (TG) for RGC published from the inception of the databases until May 2020. A meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager Version 5.0 software program from the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Three retrospective cohort studies with 144 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that the operative time of the SG group was significantly shorter than that in the TG group (MD: -34.84. 95% CI: -59.97- -9.71, P = 0.007). There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss (MD: -109.19. 95% CI: -240.37-21.99, P =0.10), length of postoperative hospital stay (MD: 0.40. 95% CI: -3.03-3.83, P = 0.82), postoperative complications (RR: 1.41. 95% CI: 0.76-2.63, P = 0.28), or recurrence (RR: 2.33, 95% CI: 0.48-11.44, P = 0.30). SG for RGC tended to be correlated with favorable 5-year overall survival; however, the association was not statistically significant (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.63-1.26, P = 0.51).

CONCLUSION

Organ-preserving approaches such as SG may be a safe and feasible treatment option for early-stage RGC.

Prevalence and characteristics of gastric remnant cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The incidence and outcomes of GRC remain variable. Minority published researches have paid attention to the characteristics of GRC. This study aimed to make a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of GRC, with a focus on characteristics and survival rates of GRC. PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched for related clinical studies. Data were pooled using Stata 11.0, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed if necessary and feasible. Moreover, SPSS (version 19.0) was used for comparing the clinical characteristics of GRC. Twenty studies were selected in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that the pooled prevalence of GRC was 2.6% (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.2-3.0%, p = 0.000). European population and American populations have a higher rate of prevalence of GRC than Chinese populations and Japan. There is no significant difference in histology and the TNM stage between the benign group and the malignant group. The five-year survival rate for GRC cases with benign primary gastric diseases is poorer than the primary gastric diseases malignant. Gastric remnant cancer is not a very rare clinical problem, especially for European and American patients. Active treatment and regular follow-up are conductive to increase 5-years survival rate.

Is subtotal gastrectomy feasible for the treatment of gastric stump cancer located at the anastomotic site after distal gastrectomy for benign lesions?

Background

Total gastrectomy (TG) is a widely accepted procedure for treating gastric stump cancer (GSC). However, subtotal gastrectomy (SG) would benefit elective patients with GSC. The aim of this study was to clarify the safety and long-term prognosis of SG in treating GSC after distal gastrectomy for benign lesions.

Methods

A total of 53 patients with GSC located at the anastomotic site or gastric body between May 1999 and December 2018 at our hospital were included. In total, 21 patients underwent SG, and the remaining 24 patients underwent TG. Clinicopathological data, operative data, and overall survival (OS) were compared.

Results

The operative duration, estimated blood loss volume, and length of hospital stay were similar between the SG and TG groups. The postoperative complications were similar between the two groups, but no cases of anastomotic leakage were noted in the SG group. TG was associated with significantly more retrieved lymph nodes than SG (18.5 ± 11.5 vs. 10.7 ± 9.2; p = 0.017), while the number of metastatic lymph nodes did not differ between the groups (2.9 ± 3.5 vs. 1.9 ± 3.6; p = 0.329). The median survival time in the SG group was 81.0 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 68.906 to 93.094 months), which was similar to the 45.0 months (95% CI, 15.920 to 74.080 months) observed in the TG group (p = 0.236). Both univariate and multivariate analyses showed that tumor location and histological type were prognostic factors, while surgery type was not a prognostic factor. Further stratified analyses according to tumor location revealed that OS was not significantly different between the two groups among patients with tumors located at the anastomotic site, while OS in the TG group was significantly better than that in the SG group among patients with tumors located in the gastric body (p = 0.046).

Conclusions

The results of the current study indicate that SG is a suitable alternative surgical procedure for GSC located at the anastomotic site after distal gastrectomy for benign lesions. The short-term outcomes and long-term prognoses of SG are comparable with those of TG.

Current controversies in treating remnant gastric cancer: Are minimally invasive approaches feasible?

The incidence of remnant gastric cancer (RGC) is still increasing. Minimally invasive approaches including endoscopic resection, laparoscopic and robotic approaches, and function-preserving gastrectomy have been utilized as curative treatment methods for primary gastric cancer. However, adhesions and anatomical alterations due to previous gastrectomy make the use of minimally invasive approaches complicated and difficult for RGC. Application of these approaches for the treatment of RGC is still controversial. Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a favorable alternative therapy for the resection of early gastric cancer that occurs in the remnant stomach and can prevent unnecessary complications. The majority of retrospective studies have shown that endoscopic submucosal dissection is an effective and oncologically safe treatment modality for RGC. Subtotal gastrectomy could serve as a function-preserving gastrectomy for patients with early RGC and improve postoperative late-phase function. However, there are only two studies that demonstrate the feasibility and oncological efficacy of subtotal gastrectomy for RGC. The non-randomized controlled trials showed that compared to open gastrectomy, laparoscopic gastrectomy for RGC led to better short-term outcomes and similar oncologic results. Because of the rarity of RGC, future multicenter studies are required to determine the indications of minimally invasive treatment for RGC.

Efficacy of Endoscopic Management for Early Remnant Gastric Cancer: Is Completion Gastrectomy Truly Necessary in Cases with Marginally Noncurative Histopathologic Features?

BACKGROUND

For patients with early primary gastric cancer, endoscopic management has become a standard of care. However, its efficacy for early remnant gastric cancer (ERGC) remains controversial and an invasive surgical procedure remains the primary choice of treatment.

METHODS

A multi-institutional database of ERGC cases was retrospectively reviewed. Efficacy of endoscopic resection was analyzed by reviewing the clinicopathologic features of patients who underwent endoscopic resection and comparing the long-term outcomes with those of surgical resection.

RESULTS

Of the 121 patients who were histopathologically diagnosed with ERGC after distal gastrectomy, 80 underwent endoscopic resection and 41 underwent completion gastrectomy (Group S). According to the histopathological criteria, 55 of the 80 endoscopic resection cases were classified as "curative resection" (Group E1) and the remaining 25 were classified as "noncurative resection" (Group E2). Tumor recurrence was observed only in three patients (12%) in Group E2, and no tumor recurrence was confirmed in Group S and Group E1. Multivariate analyses confirmed that completion gastrectomy [hazard ratio (HR), 6.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.5-26.3] was associated with poor survival compared with endoscopic resection, and lymphovascular infiltration (HR 9.5; 95% CI 2.5-36.7) was correlated with tumor recurrence. Histopathological positive resection margin, tumor size, or deeper tumor invasion were not correlated with tumor recurrence after endoscopic resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic management might be an effective treatment option for ERGC with potential long-term survival advantage over the completion gastrectomy even in cases with histopathological features, suggesting noncurative resection.

Clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic factors of remnant gastric cancer: A single-center retrospective analysis of 90 patients

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of remnant gastric cancer (RGC) is significantly poor. However, the mechanism and some clinical features of RGC have not been fully understood and are still under debate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2000 to January 2014, 90 RGC patients were enrolled in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups according to primary disease. Clinicopathological features and survival outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 34 (37.8%) patients were diagnosed with remnant gastric cancer following benign disease (RGCB) and 56 (62.2%) were diagnosed with remnant gastric cancer following malignant disease (RGCM). The mean time interval from the primary operation to the development of RGC was 12.5 ± 13.3 years in all RGC patients. The mean time interval in RGCB was significantly longer than that in RGCM (P < 0.01). The 1-, 2-, and 3- year overall survival rates of all patients were 56.1%, 38.2% and 33.2%, respectively. Univariate analysis indicated that tumor size, curability, histology type, serosa invasion, nodal involvement and distant metastasis were prognostic factors for RGC. The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that distant metastasis was an independent prognostic factor for RGC.

CONCLUSION

RGC occurred earlier in patients with gastrectomy for primary malignant disease than for primary benign disease, even though the primary disease made no difference to the survival of RGC. Nonetheless, RGC patients experienced dismal overall survival. Therefore, early diagnosis plays a significant role in successfully carrying out curative resection and improving the prognosis for RGC.

Does remnant gastric cancer really differ from primary gastric cancer? A systematic review of the literature by the Task Force of Japanese Gastric Cancer Association

Remnant gastric cancer, most frequently defined as cancer detected in the remnant stomach after distal gastrectomy for benign disease and those cases after surgery of gastric cancer at least 5 years after the primary surgery, is often reported as a tumor with poor prognosis. The Task Force of Japanese Gastric Cancer Association for Research Promotion evaluated the clinical impact of remnant gastric cancer by systematically reviewing publications focusing on molecular carcinogenesis, lymph node status, patient survival, and surgical complications. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE with the keywords "remnant," "stomach," and "cancer," revealing 1154 relevant reports published up to the end of December 2014. The mean interval between the initial surgery and the diagnosis of remnant gastric cancer ranged from 10 to 30 years. The incidence of lymph node metastases at the splenic hilum for remnant gastric cancer is not significantly higher than that for primary proximal gastric cancer. Lymph node involvement in the jejunal mesentery is a phenomenon peculiar to remnant gastric cancer after Billroth II reconstruction. Prognosis and postoperative morbidity and mortality rates seem to be comparable to those for primary proximal gastric cancer. The crude 5-year mortality for remnant gastric cancer was 1.08 times higher than that for primary proximal gastric cancer, but this difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, although no prospective cohort study has yet evaluated the clinical significance of remnant gastric cancer, our literature review suggests that remnant gastric cancer does not adversely affect patient prognosis and postoperative course.

Clinicopathologic features of remnant gastric cancer over time following distal gastrectomy

AIM: To investigate remnant gastric cancer (RGC) at various times after gastrectomy, and lay a foundation for the management of RGC.

METHODS: Sixty-five patients with RGC > 2 years and < 10 years after gastrectomy (RGC I) and forty-nine with RGC > 10 years after gastrectomy (RGC II) who underwent curative surgery were enrolled in the study. The clinicopathologic factors, surgical outcomes, and prognosis were compared between RGC I and RGC II.

RESULTS: There was no significant difference in surgical outcomes between RGC I and RGC II. For patients reconstructed with Billroth II, significantly more patients were RGC II compared with RGC (71.9% vs 21.2%, P < 0.001), and more RGC II patients had anastomotic site locations compared to RGC I (31.0% vs 56.3%, P = 0.038). The five-year survival rates for the patients with RGC I and RGC II were 37.6% and 47.9%, respectively, but no significant difference was observed. Borrmann type and tumor stage were confirmed to be independent prognostic factors in both groups.

CONCLUSION: RGC II is located on the anastomotic site in higher frequency and more cases develop after Billroth II reconstruction than RGC I.