Fundoplication with 180-Degree Wrap During Esophagogastrostomy After Robotic Proximal Gastrectomy for Early Gastric Cancer

Short-term Outcomes of Robotic Gastrectomy vs Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Patients With Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer may be associated with decreased incidence of intra-abdominal infectious complications, including pancreatic fistula, leakage, and abscess. Prospective randomized clinical trials comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and RG are thus required.

Objective

To compare the short-term surgical outcomes of RG with those of LG for patients with gastric cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this phase 3, prospective superiority randomized clinical trial of RG vs LG regarding reduction of complications, 241 patients with resectable gastric cancer (clinical stages I-III) were enrolled between April 1, 2018, and October 31, 2020.

Interventions

LG vs RG.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications. Secondary end points were incidence of any complications, surgical results, postoperative courses, and oncologic outcomes. The modified intention-to-treat population excluded patients who had been randomized and met the postrandomization exclusion criteria. There was also a per-protocol population for analysis of postoperative complications.

Results

This study enrolled 241 patients, with 236 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (150 men [63.6%]; mean [SD] age, 70.8 [10.7] years). There was no significant difference in the incidence of intra-abdominal infectious complications (per-protocol population: 10 of 117 [8.5%] in the LG group vs 7 of 113 [6.2%] in the RG group). Of 241 patients, 122 were randomly assigned to the LG group, and 119 patients were randomly assigned to the RG group. Two of the 122 patients (1.6%) in the LG group converted from LG to open surgery, and 4 of 119 patients (3.4%) in the RG group converted from RG to open or laparoscopic surgery, with no significant difference. Finally, 117 patients in the LG group completed the procedure, and 113 in the RG group completed the procedure; these populations were defined as the per-protocol population. The overall incidence of postoperative complications of grade II or higher was significantly higher in the LG group (23 [19.7%]) than in the RG group (10 [8.8%]) (P = .02). Even in analysis limited to grade IIIa or higher, the complication rate was still significantly higher in the LG group (19 [16.2%]) than in the RG group (6 [5.3%]) (P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found no reduction of intra-abdominal infectious complications with RG compared with LG for gastric cancer.

Trial Registration

umin.ac.jp/ctr Identifier: UMIN000031536.

Esophagogastrostomy With Fundoplication Versus Double-tract Reconstruction After Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE

We investigated that double-tract reconstruction (DTR) may be more beneficial than esophagogastrostomy (EG) with fundoplication in terms of nutritional outcomes, focusing on loss of body weight.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 56 consecutive patients with early gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach who received laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy, 39 underwent EG. In the 17 patients requiring resection of the abdominal esophagus or where the size of the remnant stomach was 50% or less, we performed DTR.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the rate of body weight change at 6 or 12 months, or in biochemical markers (hemoglobin, total protein, and albumin) at 12 months. However, 8 patients in the EG group had extreme body weight loss (≥20%) within 12 months. Conversely, in the DTR group, no patients had any extreme body weight loss.

CONCLUSION

DTR is useful after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy, especially in terms of preventing extreme body weight loss.

Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for submucosal tumors on the esophagogastric junction: a retrospective single-center analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) technique for gastric submucosal tumor (SMT) has developed, but treatment of SMT on the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) remains technically difficult because excessive resection may result in postoperative transformation of the EGJ and cause stenosis, and intervention to lower esophageal sphincter may result in gastroesophageal reflux. The study aim was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LECS for SMT on the EGJ.

METHODS

Between September 2012 and December 2018, LECS was performed for 21 patients with SMTs on the EGJ. Fundoplication was performed after LECS according to the intraoperative findings for each case. The patients' backgrounds, operative outcomes, and follow-up data, including endoscopic findings of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and proton pomp inhibitor (PPI) use, were reviewed.

RESULTS

In all 21 cases, LECS was completed with a mean operation time of 225 min, and a mean blood loss of 8.8 mL. All patients were alive without recurrence within the mean follow-up period of 30.5 months. Both GERD and PPI use tended to be less frequent when fundoplication was performed, although these differences were not statistically significant. (7.7% vs. 37.5%; P = 0.091, 23.1% vs. 50.0%; P = 0.204, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the feasibility and safety of LECS for SMTs even on the EGJ. Fundoplication after LECS may be an approach for the prevention of postoperative reflux esophagitis. Future research is warranted to validate the efficacy of the addition of fundoplication.

Non-flap hand-sewn esophagogastrostomy as a simple anti-reflux procedure in laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIMS

No ideal and generally accepted method of reconstruction for laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) has been established because of a high incidence of postoperative reflux and anastomotic stenosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of LPG with a non-flap hand-sewn technique as a simple anti-reflux procedure for the upper part of clinical Stage I gastric cancer.

METHODS

Between November 2016 and June 2019, 23 consecutive gastric cancer patients, who underwent curative LPG with lymphadenectomy, were enrolled in the study. In this study, we devised a simple hand-sewn technique for esophagogastrostomy, which comprises a 5-cm pseudo-fornix as a fundoplication, the posterior pressure mechanism by the remnant stomach and bilateral crus, and a flat-shaped anastomotic hole as a valvuloplasty.

RESULTS

The median operation time and hospital stay was 325 min and 10 days, respectively. There was no patient with anastomotic leakage and delayed gastric empting. No patient had symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux, but two patients (8.6% (2/23): Grade M and Grade A) had endoscopic findings during a follow-up period of more than 6 months. There was no patient with Grade B or more severe reflux esophagitis. One patient (4.3%, 1/23) developed anastomotic stenosis, which was resolved with endoscopic dilatation. The mean body weight loss at 6 months after surgery was 7.5% in comparison with the preoperative body weight.

CONCLUSION

Our non-flap hand-sewn technique for esophagogastrostomy had favorable outcomes and might be one of reliable techniques as an anti-reflux procedure in LPG for gastric cancer.