Application of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy in Obese Patients (BMI≥30 kg/m2) with Gastric Cancer: A Comparison With Open Gastrectomy Regarding Short-term Outcomes

Clinical comparison of total gastrectomy with single-vessel transection Roux-en-Y reconstruction vs total gastrectomy with conventional Roux-en-Y reconstruction for proximal gastric cancer

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the clinical benefits of single-vessel transection Roux-en-Y (SR-Y) reconstruction after total gastrectomy.

METHODS

A total of 194 patients with proximal gastric cancer were prospectively recruited at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center between January 2021 and September 2022. This study included 97 patients who underwent conventional Roux-en-Y reconstruction and 97 patients who underwent SR-Y reconstruction. Clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications were compared between the conventional and single-vessel transection groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups in terms of age (P = .882), gender (P = .595), body mass index (P = .683), tumor location (P = .568), TNM stage (P = .122), tumor size (P = .927), anemia (P = .756), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = .730), and surgical approach (P = .592). However, compared with the conventional group, the single-vessel transection group had a shorter operation time (162.5 ± 37.6 vs 178.5 ± 48.3 min, respectively; P = .011) and less intraoperative bleeding (167.2 ± 91.8 vs 207.8 ± 167.5 mL, respectively; P = .037) after complete reservation of the terminal jejunal vascular arches. Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in tensions in the jejunal mesentery, durations of peritoneal drainage, postoperative hospital stay durations, the number of lymph node dissections, and early complications between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

SR-Y reconstruction can simplify surgical procedures, reduce operating time, and minimize intraoperative bleeding without increasing tensions in the jejunal mesentery or short-term complications. It is feasible and safe and worth further promotion in clinical practice.

Comparison of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction and laparoscopic total gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer with stage cT1-2

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and nutritional benefits of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with double-tract reconstruction (DTR) in comparison with laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG).The demographic, clinical, and pathological data and postoperative nutritional status of patients undergoing LPG with DTR (n = 21) or LTG (n = 26) at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital between January 2016 and January 2019 were retrospectively reviewed and compared.The operative time in the LPG group was slightly longer than that in the LTG group; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Blood loss was not significantly different between groups. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was higher in the LTG group than in the LPG group (P = .02). The time to first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were comparable between the groups. During the 3-year postoperative follow-up, a statistically significant decrease in hemoglobin level was observed in the LTG group. There were no differences between the two groups of patients before and after the operation regarding albumin levels. The mean vitamin B12 level was higher in the LPG group than in the LTG group from 12 to 18 months postoperatively.LPG with DTR is an acceptable procedure for patients with upper gastric cancer. LPG with DTR has numerous potential advantages in preserving the physiological and nutritional functions of the remnant stomach and the conservation of the gastric reservoir.

Feasibility of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy in obese patients with gastric cancer

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes in obese patients with gastric cancer undergoing totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) to clarify its feasibility in this population.

METHODS

We examined 136 consecutive patients who underwent TLTG for gastric cancer (GC) between 2013 and 2018. A total of 45 patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m² were defined as the obese group (obese and overweight patients by the WHO classification), and 91 patients with a BMI < 25 kg/m² were defined as the non-obese group. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared, and the correlation between obesity and postoperative complications was examined in patients who underwent TLTG.

RESULTS

Although the operation time (min) was significantly longer in the obese group than in the non-obese group (329 vs 307, p = 0.002), there were no significant differences in the total volume of blood loss (mL) (118 vs 60, p = 0.059) or the rate of conversion to laparotomy between the two groups (2 vs 2, p = 0.466). Moreover, there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups (16% vs 19%, p = 0.653). In the multivariate analysis, obesity was not identified as a risk factor for postoperative complications among patients who underwent TLTG. The rate of overall survival was not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.512).

CONCLUSION

TLTG is feasible for obese Japanese patients with GC. To validate the results of the present study, it is necessary to conduct a prospective study of a large population of patients with GC.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for high-risk patients with gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is still remains unclear whether high-risk patients with gastric cancer can benefit from the application of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the surgical and long-term outcomes after LG and open gastrectomy (OG) for high-risk patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in various databases from January 1994 to June 2018. Patients who had≥1 of the following conditions were defined as high-risk patients: (1) age≥70 years; (2) BMI≥30 kg/m²; (3) ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) grade≥3; or (4) clinical T4 stage (cT4). The results were analyzed according to predefined criteria.

RESULTS

In the present meta-analysis, the outcomes of 12 non-randomized controlled studies enrolling 1651 patients (873 in the LG group and 778 in the OG group) were pooled. The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the LG group than those in the OG group (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between two groups in operative time (P = 0.17) and number of harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.21). In the LG group, the time to flatus (P < 0.01), time to food intake (P < 0.01), and postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.01) were significantly shorter than those in the OG group. A lower overall postoperative complication rate was observed in the LG group (P < 0.01). The incidence of surgical (P < 0.01) and non-surgical (P < 0.01) complication was significantly lower in the LG group than that in the OG group. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between LG and OG groups (P = 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

LG can be a safe and feasible procedure for high-risk patients with gastric cancer.