The optimal timing of additional surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection to treat early gastric cancer: long-term follow-up study

Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in the digestive system in China. Few comprehensive practice guidelines for early gastric cancer in China are currently available. Therefore, we created the Chinese national clinical practice guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of early gastric cancer.

METHODS

This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed in accordance with the World Health Organization's recommended process and with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) in assessing evidence quality. We used the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate clinical recommendations to minimize bias and increase transparency in the CPG development process. We used the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) as reporting and conduct guidelines to ensure completeness and transparency of the CPG.

RESULTS

This CPG contains 40 recommendations regarding the prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of early gastric cancer based on available clinical studies and guidelines. We provide recommendations for the timing of Helicobacter pylori eradication, screening populations for early gastric cancer, indications for endoscopic resection and surgical gastrectomy, follow-up interval after treatment, and other recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

This CPG can lead to optimum care for patients and populations by providing up-to-date medical information. We intend this CPG for widespread adoption to increase the standard of prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of early gastric cancer; thereby, contributing to improving national health care and patient quality of life.

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.

Oesophagectomy following noncurative endoscopic resection for oesophageal carcinoma: does interval matter?

OBJECTIVES

Oesophagectomy was always recommended after noncurative endoscopic resection (ER). And the optimal time interval from ER to oesophagectomy remains unclear. This study was to explore the effect of interval on pathologic stage and prognosis.

METHODS

We included 155 patients who underwent ER for cT1N0M0 oesophageal cancer and then received subsequent oesophagectomy from 2009 to 2019. Overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) were analysed to find an optimal cut-off of interval from ER to oesophagectomy. In addition, pathologic stage after ER was compared to that of oesophagectomy. Logistic regression model was built to identify risk factors for pathological upstage.

RESULTS

The greatest difference of DFS was found in the groups who underwent oesophagectomy before and after 30 days (P = 0.016). Among total 155 patients, 106 (68.39%) received oesophagectomy within 30 days, while 49 (31.61%) had interval over 30 days. Comparing the pathologic stage between ER and oesophagectomy, 26 patients had upstage and thus had worse DFS (hazard ratio = 3.780, P = 0.042). T1b invasion, lymphovascular invasion and interval >30-day group had a higher upstage rate (P = 0.014, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). And they were independent risk factors for pathologic upstage (odds ratio = 3.782, 4.522 and 2.844, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

It was the first study exploring the relationship between time interval and prognosis in oesophageal cancer. The longer interval between noncurative ER and additional oesophagectomy was associated with a worse DFS, so oesophagectomy was recommended performed within 1 month after ER. Older age, T1b stage, lymphovascular invasion and interval >30 days were significantly associated with pathologic upstage, which is related to the worse outcome too.

Risk Factors and Timing of Additional Surgery after Noncurative ESD for Early Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with early gastric cancer undergoing noncurative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have a risk of tumor recurrence and metastasis, and some patients need additional surgery. The purpose of this study was to explore the risk factors of cancer residue and lymph node (LN) metastasis after noncurative ESD for early gastric cancer and to compare the short outcome of early and delayed additional surgery.

METHODS

The clinicopathological characteristics of 30 early gastric cancer patients who received noncurative ESD and additional surgery were studied retrospectively. Multivariable regression was utilized to examine the independent risk factors for residual cancer and LN metastasis. Receiver operating characteristic curve was used to analyze the multivariable model's predictive performance. Furthermore, the perioperative safety and radical tumor performance of early surgery (≤30 days, n = 11), delayed surgery (>30 days, n = 11) after ESD, and upfront surgery (n = 59) were compared.

RESULTS

Multivariable regression showed that diffuse type of Lauren classification, submucosal invasion, and positive human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER-2) were risk factors for residual cancer. Undifferentiated carcinoma, vascular invasion, and positive vertical margin were risk factors for LN metastasis. The area under the curve (AUC) of the multifactor model predicting cancer residue and LN metastasis was 0.761 and 0.792, respectively. The early surgery group experienced higher intraoperative blood loss and a longer operation time than the delayed surgery and upfront surgery groups. There was no significant difference in the number of LN dissections, LN metastasis rate, and postoperative complications among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

Diffuse type of Lauren classification, submucosal invasion, and positive HER-2 are risk factors for residual cancer, while undifferentiated carcinoma, vascular invasion, and positive vertical margin are risk factors for LN metastasis. Delayed additional surgery after ESD (>30 days) has higher intraoperative safety, without affecting the radical resection in early gastric cancer patients.

The Effect of Delayed Oncology Surgery on Survival Outcomes for Patients With Gastric Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence-Based Strategies

Objective

To evaluate the impact of delay in gastrectomy on gastric cancer patients’ survival outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Databases including PubMed, MEDLINE (using the Ovid platform), Embase, the Cochrane Library, COVID-19 Open Research Dataset Challenge, COVID-19 Research Database (WHO), ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for studies of any design and in any setting that included patients with gastric cancer from their inception to July 31, 2021. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of research endpoints in each study were calculated. Statistical analyses were performed with Stata 12.0.

Results

A total of 8 studies involving 4,052 gastric cancer patients were eligible and included in the present meta-analysis. The result of the meta-analysis was shown that delaying surgery for less than 8 weeks may not decrease OS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.80~1.04, p = 0.167) and DFS (HR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.62~1.50, p = 0.872) in gastric cancer. Our meta-analysis also illustrated that delay in surgery for more than 4 weeks (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.56~1.27, p = 0.421), 6 weeks (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.61~1.27, p = 0.490), and 8 weeks (HR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.80~1.07, p = 0.314) was also not associated with a decreased OS.

Conclusion

A delay in surgery of less than 8 weeks is not associated with worse overall survival for patients with gastric cancer.

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.

Gastrointestinal Malignancies and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence-Based Triage to Surgery

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to widespread cancelation of electively scheduled surgeries, including for colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer. The American College of Surgeons and the Society of Surgical Oncology have released guidelines for triage of these procedures. We seek to synthesize available evidence on delayed resection and oncologic outcomes, while also providing a critical assessment of the released guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify literature between 2005 and 2020 investigating the impact of time to surgery on oncologic outcomes in colorectal, pancreatic, and gastric cancer.

RESULTS

For colorectal cancer, 1066 abstracts were screened and 43 papers were included. In primarily resected colon cancer, delay over 30 to 40 days is associated with lower survival. In rectal cancer, time to surgery over 7 to 8 weeks following neoadjuvant therapy is associated with decreased survival. Three hundred ninety-four abstracts were screened for pancreatic cancer and nine studies were included. Two studies demonstrate increased unexpected progression with delayed surgery over 30 days. Out of 633 abstracts screened for gastric cancer, six studies were included. No identified study demonstrated worse survival with increased time to surgery.

CONCLUSION

Moderate evidence suggests that delayed resection of colorectal cancer worsens survival; the impact of time to surgery on gastric and pancreatic cancer outcomes is uncertain. Early resection of gastrointestinal malignancies provides the best chance for curative therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritization of procedures should account for available evidence on time to surgery and oncologic outcomes.