Laparoscopy-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection with basin lymphadenectomy based on sentinel lymph nodes for early gastric cancer

Present situation of minimally invasive surgical treatment for early gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery is a kind of surgical operation, which is performed by using professional surgical instruments and equipment to inactivate, resect, repair or reconstruct the pathological changes, deformities and wounds in human body through micro-trauma or micro-approach, in order to achieve the goal of treatment, its surgical effect is equivalent to the traditional open surgery, while avoiding the morbidity of conventional surgical wounds. In addition, it also has the advantages of less trauma, less blood loss during operation, less psychological burden and quick recovery on patients, and these minimally invasive techniques provide unique value for the examination and treatment of gastric cancer patients. Surgical minimally invasive surgical techniques have developed rapidly and offer numerous options for the treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC): endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), underwater EMR (UEMR), endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR), endoscopic submucosal excavation (ESE), submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection), laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS); Among them, EMR, EFTR and LECS technologies have a wide range of applications and different modifications have been derived from their respective surgical operations, such as band-assisted EMR (BA-EMR), conventional EMR (CEMR), over-the-scope clip-assisted EFTR, no-touch EFTR, the inverted LECS, closed LECS, and so on. These new and improved minimally invasive surgeries are more precise, specific and effective in treating different types of EGC.

Cardia function-preserving surgery and anti-reflux anastomotic method after proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current status and future perspectives

The incidence and mortality of gastric cancer ranked 5th and 3rd worldwide, respectively, in 2018, and the incidence of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma increased over the past 40 years. Radical resection and lymph node dissection is the preferred treatment for gastric cancer. Proximal gastrectomy or total gastrectomy is usually performed for gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and upper gastric cancer. Owing to the resection of the cardia structures, the incidence of reflux esophagitis increases significantly after proximal gastrectomy and total gastrectomy, resulting in poor postoperative quality of life. To reduce the incidence of reflux esophagitis and improve patients' postoperative quality of life, various methods to preserve the function of the cardia or to perform anti-reflux reconstruction have emerged. In this manuscript, we systematically introduced the advantages and problems of various anti-reflux anastomotic method after proximal gastrectomy, and cardia-preserving gastrectomy including endoscopic resection (ER), local gastrectomy by gastroscopy combined with laparoscopy, segmental gastrectomy, subtotal gastrectomy, and cardia-preserving radical gastrectomy. Cardia-preserving radical gastrectomy has the advantage of more thorough lymph node dissection and wider indications than those for subtotal gastrectomy. However, the clinical efficacy of cardia-preserving radical gastrectomy requires verification in prospective and controlled clinical trials. Cardia-preserving radical gastrectomy is a promising approach as one of the more reasonable anti-reflux surgeries.

Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for early gastric cancer: Perspective for actual practice

Early gastric cancer (EGC) has a desirable prognosis compared with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The surgical concept of EGC has altered from simply emphasizing radical resection to both radical resection and functional preservation. As the mainstream surgical methods for EGC, both endoscopic resection and laparoscopic resection have certain inherent limitations, while the advent of laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) has overcome these limitations to a considerable extent. LECS not only expands the surgical indications for endoscopic resection, but greatly improves the quality of life (QOL) in EGC patients. This minireview elaborates on the research status of LECS for EGC, from the conception and development of LECS, to the tentative application of LECS in animal experiments, then to case reports and retrospective clinical studies. Finally, the challenges and prospects of LECS in the field of EGC are prospected and expounded, hoping to provide some references for relevant researchers. With the in-depth understanding of minimally invasive technology, LECS remains a promising option in the management of EGC. Carrying out more related multicenter prospective clinical researches is the top priority of promoting the development of this field in the future.

Non-exposure Simple Suturing Endoscopic Full-thickness Resection with Sentinel Basin Dissection in Patients with Early Gastric Cancer: the SENORITA 3 Pilot Study

Purpose

Recently, non-exposure simple suturing endoscopic full-thickness resection (NESS-EFTR) was developed to prevent tumor exposure to the peritoneal cavity. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of NESS-EFTR with sentinel basin dissection for early gastric cancer (EGC).

Materials and Methods

This was the prospective SENORITA 3 pilot. From July 2017 to January 2018, 20 patients with EGC smaller than 3 cm without an absolute indication for endoscopic submucosal dissection were enrolled. The sentinel basin was detected using Tc^99m-phytate and indocyanine green, and the NESS-EFTR procedure was performed when all sentinel basin nodes were tumor-free on frozen pathologic examination. We evaluated the complete resection and intraoperative perforation rates as well as the incidence of postoperative complications.

Results

Among the 20 enrolled patients, one dropped out due to large tumor size, while another underwent conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy due to metastatic sentinel lymph nodes. All NESS-EFTR procedures were performed in 17 of the 18 other patients (94.4%) without conversion, and the complete resection rate was 83.3% (15/18). The intraoperative perforation rate was 27.8% (5/18), and endoscopic clipping or laparoscopic suturing or stapling was performed at the perforation site. There was one case of postoperative complications treated with endoscopic clipping; the others were discharged without any event.

Conclusions

NESS-EFTR with sentinel basin dissection is a technically challenging procedure that obtains safe margins, prevents intraoperative perforation, and may be a treatment option for EGC after additional experience.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03216174

Effect of Tailored Perigastric Lymph Node Dissection on Gastric Motility in a Canine Model

BACKGROUND

Combination laparoscopic lymph node (LN) dissection and endoscopic resection is a promising treatment for early gastric cancer. However, LN dissection could cause nerve injury and deterioration of motility in the preserved stomach. This experimental study aims to evaluate changes in gastric motility after tailored perigastric regional lymph node dissection without gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified four most frequently involved LN combinations considering tumor location from retrospective reviews of 4697 gastrectomy patients. We randomly assigned 55 dogs to five groups: control (laparotomy only) and four experimental groups with LN dissection without gastrectomy: group 1 (LNs 3, 7, and 8), group 2 (LNs 3, 4, and 6), group 3 (LNs 1, 3, and 7), and group 4 (LNs 3, 4, and 11). Gastric emptying time (GET) was measured using barium-impregnated polyethylene spheres. GET₅₀ and GET₇₅ were the time points when 50% and 75% of the markers, respectively, had emptied from the stomach.

RESULTS

On postoperative days (PODs) 2 and 3, GET_50, GET_75, and proportion of GET₅₀ <4 h in groups 1 and 2 were comparable with controls. However, group 3 showed delayed GET₅₀ and GET₇₅, and groups 3 and 4 demonstrated significantly smaller proportions of GET₅₀ <4 h compared with controls on PODs 2 and 3. This effect resolved by POD 6 and there were no significant differences in GET_50, GET_75, or proportion of GET₅₀ <4 h between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tailored perigastric LN resection without gastrectomy was feasible and acceptable in terms of postoperative motility in the preserved stomach.

Preoperative gastric lavage in gastric cancer patients undergoing surgical, endoscopic or minimally invasive treatment: An oncological measure preventing peritoneal spillage of intragastric cancer cells and development of related metastases

In addition to classical metastatic pathways, recently gastric cancer was described having an alternative route called "endoluminal exfoliation". Provisional analyses demonstrated, in fact, this kind of shedding is associated with several clinico-pathological features indicative of aggressive behavior and resulted to be an independent prognostic factor entailing poor prognosis. Compared with non-sowing counterparts, in fact, patients affected with exfoliating early and advanced gastric carcinomas met with shorter overall survival, disease free survival, progression free survival and time to tumor progression. In spite of these interesting results, however, the clinico-pathological and oncological significance of this unconventional metastatic route is still to be clarified. Such an investigation is further urged by the increasing widespread employment of minimally invasive treatments for gastric cancer which include a wide spectrum of intragastric interventions and maneuvers. Indeed, endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, endoscopic full-thickness resection, intragastric laparoscopic surgery and hybrid procedures all take place inside of the stomach. However, iatrogenic perforations can occur during execution of these treatments leading to spillage of malignant cells from gastric to the peritoneal cavity or trocar insertion sites. Furthermore, many other gastric conditions and interventions can collide with endogastric presence of floating cancer cells: spontaneous ulceration or perforation, laparotomy surgery, gastrointestinal occlusion, diverticula. Viability, migration and intraluminal transportability of the intragastric floating cancer cells represents another original and intriguing topic. All these considerations led us to entertain the hypothesis that removing the exfoliated cancer cells from the gastric lumen could save patients from the dreaded potential risk of spillage. Performing gastric lavage before starting any kind of tumor intervention could be the most appropriate procedure to adopt with prophylactic intent. Should our speculation prove to be clinically significant, preoperative gastric lavage should be pointed out as a simple but cogent method useful for preventing oncological mishaps such as spillage of gastric cancer cells and development of related recurrences or metastases.

Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection Combined with Laparoscopic Surgery

Endoscopic full-thickness resection combined with laparoscopic surgery was recently developed. These procedures could be categorized as "Cut first and then suture" and "Suture first and then cut". "Cut first and then suture" includes laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) and laparoscopy-assisted endoscopic full-thickness resection (LAEFR). Recent studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of LECS and LAEFR. However, these techniques are limited by the related exposure of the tumor and gastric mucosa to the peritoneal cavity and manipulation of these organs, which could lead to viable cancer cell seeding and the spillage of gastric juice into the peritoneal cavity. In the "Suture first and then cut" technique, the serosal side of the stomach is sutured to invert the stomach and subsequently endoscopic resection is performed. In this article, details of these techniques, including their advantages and limitations, are described.

Current status and challenges in sentinel node navigation surgery for early gastric cancer

Although a number of feasibility studies for sentinel node (SN) concepts in gastric cancer have been conducted since 2000, there remains a debate regarding detailed detection techniques and oncological safety. Two important multicenter phase II clinical trials were performed in Japan that used different methods and reached different conclusions; one confirmed acceptable results with a false-negative rate of 7%, and the other showed an unacceptably high false-negative rate of 46.4%. The Sentinel Node Oriented Tailored Approach (SENORITA) trial is a multicenter randomized controlled phase III trial being performed in Korea. Patient enrollment is now complete and the long-term results are currently awaited. Recently, an image-guided SN mapping technique using infrared ray/fluorescence was introduced. This method might be a promising technology because it allows the clear visualization of SNs. With regard to the primary tumor, the non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery technique and non-exposure endolaparoscopic full-thickness resection with simple suturing technique have been reported. These methods prevent abdominal infection and tumor seeding and can be good alternatives to conventional laparoscopic gastric wedge resection. For indications, SN navigation surgery can be extended to patients who underwent non-curative endoscopic resection. Although a few studies have been performed on these patients, sentinel concepts may be beneficial to patients as they omit the need for additional gastrectomy. SN navigation surgery can lead to actual organ-preserving surgery and plays a key role in improving the quality of life of patients with early gastric cancer in the future.

Assessment of laparoscopic stomach preserving surgery with sentinel basin dissection versus standard gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy in early gastric cancer-A multicenter randomized phase III clinical trial (SENORITA trial) protocol

Background

Along with the marked increase in early gastric cancer (EGC) in the Eastern countries, there has been an effort to adopt the sentinel node concept in EGC to preserve gastric function and reduce the occurrence of postoperative complications. Based on promising results from a previous quality control study, this prospective multicenter randomized controlled phase III clinical trial aims to elucidate the oncologic safety of laparoscopic stomach-preserving surgery with sentinel basin dissection (SBD) compared to a standard laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Methods/Design

This trial is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter randomized controlled phase III trial with a non-inferiority design. Patients diagnosed with a single lesion of clinical stage T1N0M0 gastric adenocarcinoma, with a diameter of 3 cm or less are eligible for the present study. A total of 580 patients (290 per group) will be randomized to either laparoscopic stomach-preserving surgery with SBD or standard surgery. The primary end-point is 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and the secondary endpoints include postoperative morbidity and mortality, quality of life, 5-year DFS, and overall survival. Qualified investigators who completed the prior quality control study are exclusively allowed to participate in this phase III clinical trial.

Discussion

The proposed trial is expected to verify whether laparoscopic stomach-preserving surgery with SBD achieves similar oncologic outcomes and improved quality of life compared to a standard gastrectomy in EGC patients.

Trial registration

This study was registered at the NIH ClinicalTrial.gov database (NCT01804998) on March 4th, 2013.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Currently there are two surgical options for potentially curable patients (i.e. people with non-metastatic gastric cancer), laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. However, it is not clear whether one of these options is superior.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic gastrectomy or laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for people with gastric cancer. In particular, we planned to investigate the effects by patient groups, such as cancer stage, anaesthetic risk, and body mass index (BMI), and by intervention methods, such as method of anastomosis, type of gastrectomy and laparoscopic or laparoscopically-assisted gastrectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) until September 2015. We also screened reference lists from included trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently selected references for further assessment by going through all titles and abstracts. Further selection was based on review of full text articles for selected references.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted study data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes, the mean difference (MD) or the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. We performed meta-analyses where it was meaningful.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, 2794 participants were randomised in 13 trials included in this review. All the trials were at unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (which included 53 participants) did not contribute any data to this review. A total of 213 participants were excluded in the remaining trials after randomisation, leaving a total of 2528 randomised participants for analysis, with 1288 undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy and 1240 undergoing open gastrectomy. All the participants were suitable for major surgery.There was no difference in the proportion of participants who died within thirty days of treatment between laparoscopic gastrectomy (7/1188: adjusted proportion = 0.6% (based on meta-analysis)) and open gastrectomy (4/1447: 0.3%) (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.10; risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; participants = 2335; studies = 11; I(2) = 0%; low quality evidence). There were no events in either group for short-term recurrence (participants = 103; studies = 3), proportion requiring blood transfusion (participants = 66; studies = 2), and proportion with positive margins at histopathology (participants = 28; studies = 1). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life, time to return to normal activity or time to return to work. The differences in long-term mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25; participants = 195; studies = 3; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), serious adverse events within three months (laparoscopic gastrectomy (7/216: adjusted proportion = 3.6%) versus open gastrectomy (13/216: 6%) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34; participants = 432; studies = 8; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), long-term recurrence (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; participants = 162; studies = 4; very low quality evidence), adverse events within three months (laparoscopic gastrectomy (204/268: adjusted proportion = 16.1%) versus open gastrectomy (253/1222: 20.7%) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.01; participants = 2490; studies = 11; I(2) = 38%; very low quality evidence), quantity of perioperative blood transfused (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.38; participants = 143; studies = 2; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), length of hospital stay (MD -1.82 days, 95% CI -3.72 to 0.07; participants = 319; studies = 6; I(2) = 83%; very low quality evidence), and number of lymph nodes harvested (MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.51 to 0.25; participants = 472; studies = 9; I(2) = 40%; very low quality evidence) were imprecise. There was no alteration in the interpretation of the results in any of the subgroups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low quality evidence, there is no difference in short-term mortality between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. Based on very low quality evidence, there is no evidence for any differences in short-term or long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. However, the data are sparse, and the confidence intervals were wide, suggesting that significant benefits or harms of laparoscopic gastrectomy cannot be ruled out. Several trials are currently being conducted and interim results of these trials have been included in this review. These trials need to perform intention-to-treat analysis to ensure that the results are reliable and report the results according to the CONSORT Statement.

Cooperative laparoscopic endoscopic and hybrid laparoscopic surgery for upper gastrointestinal tumors: Current status

AIM: To investigate the cooperative laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques used for the resection of upper gastrointestinal tumors.

METHODS: A systematic research of the literature was performed in PubMed for English and French language articles about laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative, combined, hybrid and rendezvous techniques. Only original studies using these techniques for the resection of early gastric cancer, benign tumors and gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the stomach and the duodenum were included. By excluding case series of less than 10 patients, 25 studies were identified. The study design, number of cases, tumor pathology size and location, the operative technique name, the endoscopy team and surgical team role, operative time, type of closure of visceral wall defect, blood loss, complications and length of hospital stay of these studies were evaluated. Additionally all cooperative techniques found were classified and are presented in a systematic approach.

RESULTS: The studies identified were case series and retrospective cohort studies. A total of 706 patients were operated on with a cooperative technique. The tumors resected were only gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) in 4 studies, GIST and various benign submucosal tumors in 22 studies, early gastric cancer (pT1a and pT1b) in 6 studies and early duodenal cancer in 1 study. There was important heterogeneity between the studies. The operative techniques identified were: laparoscopic assisted endoscopic resection, endoscopic assisted wedge resection, endoscopic assisted transgastric and intragastric surgery, laparoscopic endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS), laparoscopic assisted endoscopic full thickness resection (LAEFR), clean non exposure technique and non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery (NEWS). Each technique is illustrated with the roles of the endoscopic and laparoscopic teams; the indications, characteristics and short term results are described.

CONCLUSION: Along with the traditional cooperative techniques, new procedures like LECS, LAEFR and NEWS hold great promise for the future of minimally invasive oncologic procedures.

Cutting edge of endoscopic full-thickness resection for gastric tumor

Recently, several studies have reported local full-thickness resection techniques using flexible endoscopy for gastric tumors, such as gastrointestinal stromal tumors, gastric carcinoid tumors, and early gastric cancer (EGC). These techniques have the advantage of allowing precise resection lines to be determined using intraluminal endoscopy. Thus, it is possible to minimize the resection area and subsequent deformity. Some of these methods include: (1) classical laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS); (2) inverted LECS; (3) combination of laparoscopic and endoscopic approaches to neoplasia with non-exposure technique; and (4) non-exposed endoscopic wall-inversion surgery. Furthermore, a recent prospective multicenter trial of the sentinel node navigation surgery (SNNS) for EGC has shown acceptable results in terms of sentinel node detection rate and the accuracy of nodal metastasis. Endoscopic full-thickness resection with SNNS is expected to become a treatment option that bridges the gap between endoscopic submucosal dissection and standard surgery for EGC. In the future, the indications for these procedures for gastric tumors could be expanded.

Prospective Multicenter Feasibility Study of Laparoscopic Sentinel Basin Dissection for Organ Preserving Surgery in Gastric Cancer: Quality Control Study for Surgical Standardization Prior to Phase III Trial

The clinical application of sentinel node biopsies in early gastric cancer is still controversial even though it appears promising. This study was conducted as a prerequisite quality control for surgical standardization of laparoscopic sentinel basin dissection (SBD) prior to the initiation of a phase III trial.Laparoscopic SBD was performed in patients with preoperative stage T1-2N0 and tumor size <4 cm in diameter. Intraoperative endoscopic submucosal injection of a standardized dual tracer was administered. All retrieved sentinel basin nodes (SBN) were investigated with intraoperative frozen hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. A strict checklist consisting of 7 essential steps was followed during laparoscopic SBD as the quality control study for a phase III trial. Completion of all essential steps in the checklist for 10 cases was used to define a qualified institution.Seven institutions participated and 112 patients were enrolled in this study. However, 4 patients were excluded owing to screening failure. The mean number of cases required for institutional qualification was 15 cases (range, 13-20 cases). Sentinel basins (SB) were detected and dissected in 100 of the 108 patients (92.6%); the median number of SB and SBN was 2 and 7, respectively. Lymph node metastases were detected in 10 patients by postoperative permanent H&E staining and they were detected by SBD in all 10 patients. Frozen results of SBN were compatible with permanent staining reports.Laparoscopic SBD is feasible and demonstrated improved sensitivity in detecting metastatic lymph nodes compared to the previous study. A future phase III randomized trial comparing laparoscopic SBD with organ-preserving gastrectomy and laparoscopic standard gastrectomy seems promising for qualified institutions.

A multicenter study of using carbon nanoparticles to show sentinel lymph nodes in early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Lymph node metastasis occurs in approximately 10% of early gastric cancer. Preoperative or intra-operative identification of lymph node metastasis in early gastric cancer is crucial for surgical planning. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using carbon nanoparticles to show sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in early gastric cancer.

METHODS

A multicenter study was performed between July 2012 and November 2014. Ninety-one patients with early gastric cancer identified by preoperative endoscopic ultrasonography were recruited. One milliliter carbon nanoparticles suspension, which is approved by Chinese Food and Drug Administration, was endoscopically injected into the submucosal layer at four points around the site of the primary tumor 6-12 h before surgery. Laparoscopic radical resection with D2 lymphadenectomy was performed. SLNs were defined as nodes that were black-dyed by carbon nanoparticles in greater omentum and lesser omentum near gastric cancer. Lymph node status and SLNs accuracy were confirmed by pathological analysis.

RESULTS

All patients had black-dyed SLNs lying in greater omentum and/or lesser omentum. SLNs were easily found under laparoscopy. The mean number of SLNs was 4 (range 1-9). Carbon nanoparticles were around cancer in specimen. After pathological analysis, 10 patients (10.99%) had lymph node metastasis in 91 patients with early gastric cancer. SLNs were positive in 9 cases and negative in 82 cases. In pathology, carbon nanoparticles were seen in lymphatic vessels, lymphoid sinus, and macrophages in SLNs. When SLNs were positive, cancer cells were seen in lymph nodes. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of black-dyed SLNs in early gastric cancers were 90, 100, and 98.9 %, respectively. No patient had any side effects of carbon nanoparticles in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to use carbon nanoparticles to show SLNs in early gastric cancer. Carbon nanoparticles suspension is safe for submucosal injection.