Low accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography for detailed T staging in gastric cancer

Linear EUS Accuracy in Preoperative Staging of Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative gastric cancer (GC) staging is the most reliable prognostic factor that affects therapeutic strategies. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and radial endoscopic ultrasound (R-EUS) scans are the most commonly used staging tools for GC. The accuracy of linear EUS (L-EUS) in this setting is still controversial. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to evaluate the accuracy of L-EUS and CECT in preoperative GC staging, with regards to depth of tumor invasion (T staging) and nodal involvement (N staging).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

191 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection for GC were retrospectively enrolled. Preoperative staging had been performed using both L-EUS and CECT, and the results were compared to postoperative staging by histopathologic analysis of surgical specimens.

RESULTS

L-EUS diagnostic accuracy for depth of invasion of the GC was 100%, 60%, 74%, and 80% for T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively. CECT accuracy for T staging was 78%, 55%, 45%, and 10% for T1, T2, T3, and T4, respectively. L-EUS diagnostic accuracy for N staging of GC was 85%, significantly higher than CECT accuracy (61%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that L-EUS has a higher accuracy than CECT in preoperative T and N staging of GC.

Tumor Depth Prediction of Gastric Cancer With a T4 Score

BACKGROUND/AIM

Peritoneal metastases are often found at surgery of pT4 gastric cancers, preventing R0 resection. In the event of successful R0 resection, distant metastases still occur in a sizeable proportion of patients. Estimation of the depth of invasion has a relatively low accuracy (57%-86%) compared with pathological findings. This study sought to develop a clinical score to distinguish between pathological stage T4 (pT4) and pT1-3 gastric cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Reviewing the data of 2,771 patients who had undergone gastrectomy at our hospital from January 1996-December 2016, we assessed demographic factors plus tumor markers, diameter, location, histology, and macroscopic type according to the fifth edition (2019) of the WHO classification. Significant factors on multivariate analysis were used to develop a pT4 gastric cancer depth prediction score (T4 score).

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed that the clinical factors associated with pT4 disease were CA19-9 elevation, tumor diameter ≥50 mm, poorly cohesive type adenocarcinoma, mucinous adenocarcinoma, and WHO macroscopic types 2-4. The T4 score was obtained by weighing these factors according to the β-coefficient. The optimum cutoff value of the T4 score was 4 points. A total of 79.4% of cases with a T4 score ≥4 points were stage pT4. A total of 93.9% of cases with a T4 score <4 points were stage pT1-3, with 91.1% sensitivity, 85.3% specificity, 79.4% positive predictive value, and 93.9% negative predictive value.

CONCLUSION

T4 scoring can differentiate pT4 gastric cancer from pT1-3 gastric cancer.

A potential decision-making algorithm based on endoscopic ultrasound for staging early gastric cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Clinical staging of gastric cancer (GC) before treatment is essential. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a recommended staging tool, but its efficacy remains controversial. Our previous prospective study evaluated the potential value of EUS for T staging and presented discrepancies. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of EUS in T staging by comparing it with pathological staging. We analyze the factors that can potentially affect accuracy to identify suitable subgroups for EUS staging.

METHODS

Data from a total of 1763 consecutive patients with GC from January 2015 to December 2017 were analyzed. Results from EUS and pathological T staging were compared. The factors that might affect EUS's accuracy were analyzed.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of EUS in patients with early GC were 62.08%, 96.13%, 90.94%, and 80.21%, respectively. The accuracy rates of uT1, uT2-uT4, and uT3-uT4 were 90.94%, 79.02%, and 78.39%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, underestimation was more likely to be observed in patients with tumors located in the middle or upper third of the stomach. Overestimation was more likely to be observed in patients with tumors located in the lower third or those without ulcer. Other factors affecting accuracy included ulcer, differentiation, larger size and undergoing surgery.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the role of EUS in determining the T staging of GC. Overestimation and underestimation in T-staging were significantly associated with the tumor location in early GC, and a decision-making algorithm was proposed for clinical practice in early cancers based on these findings.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy between linear EUS and miniprobe EUS for submucosal invasion in suspected early gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in diagnosing submucosal (SM) invasion and compared linear EUS with mini-probe EUS in suspected early gastric cancer (EGC) patients.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with biopsy-verified suspected EGC were analysed retrospectively. They were all examined by linear EUS or miniprobe EUS for preoperative diagnosis of invasion depth and underwent endoscopic or surgical treatment for radical resection. The invasion depth evaluated by EUS and pathology were categorized into no invasion of SM and invasion of SM or deeper. We compared the diagnosis of EUS with postoperative pathology results.

RESULTS

A total of 105 patients were included in the final analysis. We found that the overall prediction accuracy of linear EUS (n = 57) for SM invasion in suspected EGC was higher than that of mini-probe EUS (n = 48), but no statistically significant differences were noted (82.5% vs 72.9%, p = 0.344). The negative predictive value (NPV) of linear EUS was significantly higher than that of mini-probe EUS (100% vs 82.8%, p = 0.037). The binary logistic regression analysis identified that tumor size (p = 0.036), the presence of ulceration (p < 0.001) and the EUS type (p = 0.027) were independent risk factors for the diagnosis of SM invasion by EUS. The area under the receiver operating curve (ROC) was 0.889 and 0.719 for linear and mini-probe EUS, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Linear EUS diagnosed suspected EGC for SM invasion with higher accuracy than mini-probe EUS. Additionally, large and ulcerative lesions may lead to overestimation.

Clinical TNM staging for esophageal, gastric, and colorectal cancers in the era of neoadjuvant therapy: A systematic review of the literature

AIM

Clinical staging is vital for selecting appropriate candidates and designing neoadjuvant treatment strategies for advanced tumors. The aim of this review was to evaluate diagnostic abilities of clinical TNM staging for gastrointestinal, gastrointestinal cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of recent publications to evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic modalities on gastrointestinal cancers. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE using the keywords "TNM staging," "T4 staging," "distant metastases," "esophageal cancer," "gastric cancer," and "colorectal cancer," and the search terms used in Cochrane Reviews between January 2005 to July 2020. Articles focusing on preoperative diagnosis of: (a) depth of invasion; (b) lymph node metastases; and (c) distant metastases were selected.

RESULTS

After a full-text search, a final set of 55 studies (17 esophageal cancer studies, 26 gastric cancer studies, and 12 colorectal cancer studies) were used to evaluate the accuracy of clinical TNM staging. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were the best modalities to assess distant metastases. Fat and fiber mode of CT may be useful for T4 staging of esophageal cancer, CT was a partially reliable modality for lymph node staging in gastric cancer, and CT combined with MRI was the most reliable modality for liver metastases from colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSION

The most reliable diagnostic modality differed among gastrointestinal cancers depending on the type of cancer. Therefore, we propose diagnostic algorithms for clinical staging for each type of cancer.

Clinical significance of endoscopic ultrasonography in diagnosing invasion depth of early gastric cancer prior to endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasonography is a reliable diagnostic modality for determining indications of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer. We aimed to clarify the clinical significance of endoscopic ultrasonography in the invasion depth diagnosis of early gastric cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed 1598 consecutive patients with 2001 early gastric cancers who underwent EUS before ESD or surgery between October 2010 and April 2019 at our institution. Lesions were classified according to endoscopic ultrasonography-determined invasion depth as EUS-M/SM1 (lesions confined to sonographic layers 1 and 2 or lesions with changes in sonographic layer 3; depth, < 1 mm) and EUS-SM2 (lesions with changes in sonographic layer 3; depth, ≥ 1 mm). We evaluated the invasion depth determination accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography and analyzed the clinicopathological features of misdiagnosed early gastric cancer cases.

RESULTS

The invasion depth determination accuracy was as follows: EUS-M/SM1: pathological T1a/T1b1 early gastric cancer, 97%; EUS-SM2: pathological T1b2 early gastric cancer, 79%. The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 95%, 98%, 69%, 97%, and 79%, respectively. In EUS-M/SM1 early gastric cancer, tumor size of ≥ 15 mm, presence of ulceration, and undifferentiated histological type were significantly associated with endoscopic ultrasonography accuracy. In EUS-SM2 early gastric cancer, tumor size of ≥ 30 mm was significantly associated with endoscopic ultrasonography accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasonography is a useful modality in accurately determining the invasion depth of early gastric cancer before endoscopic submucosal dissection.

Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?

This is the fifth in a series of papers entitled "Controversies in EUS." In the current paper, we deal with high-resolution catheter probes, otherwise known as EUS miniprobes (EUS-MPs). The application of miniprobes for early carcinomas in the entire intestinal tract, for subepithelial lesions, and for findings in the bile duct and pancreatic duct as well as endobronchial use is critically discussed. Submucous lesions, especially in the colon, but also early carcinomas in special cases are considered the most important indications. The argument is illustrated by numerous examples.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography Miniature Probe Performance for Depth Diagnosis of Early Gastric Cancer with Suspected Submucosal Invasion

Background/Aims

The accurate assessment of the depth of invasion of early gastric cancer (EGC) is critical to determine the most appropriate treatment option. However, it is difficult to distinguish shallow submucosal (SM1) invasion from deeper submucosal (SM2) invasion. We investigated the diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) using a miniature probe for EGC with suspected SM invasion.

Methods

From April 2008 to June 2018, EGCs with suspected SM invasion were analyzed retrospectively. The EGCs examined by a 20 MHz high-frequency miniature probe was included in our study. Esophago-gastric junction cancers and patients treated by chemotherapy before resection were excluded. The sensitivity and specificity for the detection of SM2 invasion by EUS were compared with those of white light imaging (WLI). Additionally, factors related to depth underestimation or overestimation were investigated using multivariate analysis.

Results

A total of 278 EGCs in 259 patients were included in the final analysis. The sensitivity and specificity for SM2 or deeper by EUS were 73.7% (87/118) and 74.4% (119/160), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity by WLI were 47.5% (56/118) and 68.1% (109/160), respectively. The sensitivity of EUS was significantly superior to that of conventional endoscopy (p<0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that an anterior location of the EGC was an independent risk factor for underestimation by EUS (odds ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 9.8; p=0.03).

Conclusions

The depth diagnostic performance for EGCs with suspected SM invasion using EUS was satisfactory and superior to that of conventional endoscopy. Additionally, it is important to recognize factors that may lead to misdiagnosis in those lesions.

Diagnostic accuracy of the gastric cancer T-category with respect to tumor localization

Purpose

Diagnosing early gastric cancer (EGC) or advanced gastric cancer (AGC) according to T-category is important for optimal GC treatment; however, the clinical and pathological diagnosis of tumor depths can sometimes vary. This study investigated the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of the tumor depth from the viewpoint of tumor localization and prognosis of patients with GC with discordance between clinical and pathological findings.

Methods

This study enrolled 741 patients with primary GC who underwent curative gastrectomy. Based on the clinical and pathological diagnosis of T-category, the patients were classified into four groups: Early-look EGC, Early-look AGC, Advanced-look EGC, and Advanced-look AGC. Tumor localization was classified longitudinally (the upper [U], middle [M], and lower [L] parts and cross-sectionally (the anterior [Ant] and posterior [Post] walls, and the lesser [Less] and greater [Gre] curvatures).

Results

Of the 462 clinical EGC cases, 52 were Early-look AGC cases that exhibited a significant association of tumor localization with the Post and Less in the U and M locations (UM-PL; p = 0.037). An Advanced-look EGC (p = 0.031) and Advanced-look AGC (p = 0.025) were independent prognostic factors for relapse-free survival each in pathological EGC and AGC, respectively.

Conclusions

Patients with clinically diagnosed EGC but with pathologically diagnosed AGC more frequently presented tumor in the UM-PL than in any other location. Selection of therapeutic strategy according to the clinical diagnosis might be critical; however, it should be also considered that the accuracy of preoperative assessments varies with tumor localization.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00423-020-01971-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Operative safety of curative gastrectomy after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for early gastric cancer - 1:2 propensity score matching analysis: A retrospective single-center study (cohort study)

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the operative safety and long-term outcomes of additional curative gastrectomy (ACG) after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), as compared with standard gastrectomy (SG) without ESD in patients with early gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 101 patients receiving ACG after non-curative ESD (Post-ESD group) and 1080 patients after SG without ESD (Surgery-only group), between 2009 and 2016, were reviewed retrospectively. Clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and relapse-free survival (RFS) were compared between groups, using propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, a total of 101 patients in the post-ESD group and 202 patients in the surgery-only group were analyzed. The post-ESD group had shorter operation times than did the surgery-only group (p = 0.005). Estimated blood loss and the incidence of postoperative morbidity did not differ between the two groups, and no differences were observed in pathologic outcomes, including N stage (p = 0.268). In addition, 5-year OS, DSS, and RFS rates were not significantly different between groups (OS; 95.1% vs. 98.2%, p = 0.535, DSS; 98.2% vs. 98.7%, p = 0.956, and RFS; 98.6% vs. 98.9%, p = 0.757, respectively).

CONCLUSION

ACG can be performed safely after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection, with good operative outcomes.

Reliability of Endoscopic Ultrasound Using Miniprobes and Grayscale Histogram Analysis in Diagnosing Upper Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions

Background

To assess the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions (SELs) and to investigate EUS combined with a grayscale histogram analysis for the differentiation of leiomyomas and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs).

Methods

A retrospective study of 709 patients with upper gastrointestinal SELs was conducted by EUS before endoscopic resection. The EUS findings of SELs and pathological results after endoscopic resection were compared. The EUS images of SELs, particularly, leiomyoma and GIST, were further analyzed via a grayscale histogram to differentiate between the two tumors.

Results

Of the 709 patients, 47 cases were pathologically undetermined. The diagnostic consistency of EUS with endoscopic resection was 88.2% (584/662), including 185 muscularis mucosa, 61 submucosa, and 338 muscularis propria, respectively. The diagnostic consistency of EUS with pathology was 80.1% (530/662). The gray value of GISTs was significantly higher than that of leiomyomas (58.9 ± 8.3 vs. 39.5 ± 5.9, t = 57.0, P < 0.0001). The standard deviation of leiomyomas was significantly lower than that of GISTs (20.6 ± 7.0 vs. 39.8 ± 9.3, t = 23.7, P < 0.0001). The grayscale histogram analysis of GISTs showed higher echo ultrasound, and the echo of leiomyoma was more uniform.

Conclusion

EUS is the preferred procedure for the evaluation of upper gastrointestinal SELs. EUS combined with a grayscale histogram analysis is an effective method for the differentiation of leiomyomas and GISTs.

Nomogram using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for preoperative prediction of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Lymph node (LN) metastasis is an important prognostic factor in patients with gastric cancer (GC). However, the evaluation of LN metastasis status in the preoperative setting is not accurate. Therefore, precise preoperative prediction of LN metastasis status is crucial for optimal treatment in patients with GC.

AIM

To develop a preoperative nomogram for LN metastasis using F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18 FDG) positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and preoperative laboratory test findings in GC.

METHODS

In this study, the data of 566 GC patients who underwent preoperative F-18 FDG PET/CT and subsequent surgical resection were analyzed. The LN metastasis prediction model was developed in the training cohort and validated in the internal validation cohort. Routine preoperative laboratory tests, including albumin and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 were performed in all patients. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression was performed to validate the preoperative predictive indicators for LN metastasis.

RESULTS

Of the 566 patients, 232 (41%) had confirmed histopathologic LN metastasis. Univariate logistic regression revealed that the tumor location, blood hemoglobin, serum albumin levels, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, platelet to lymphocyte ratio, CA 19-9, maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the primary tumor (T_SUVmax), and SUVmax of LN (N_SUVmax) were significantly associated with LN metastasis. In multivariate analysis, T_SUVmax (OR = 1.08; 95%CI: 1.02–1.15; P = 0.011) and N_SUVmax (OR = 1.49; 95%CI: 1.19–1.97; P = 0.002) were found to be significant predictive factors for LN metastasis. The LN metastasis prediction model using T_SUVmax, N_SUVmax, serum albumin, and CA 19-9 yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.733 (95%CI: 0.683–0.784, P = 0.025) in the training cohort and AUC of 0.756 (95%CI: 0.678–0.833, P < 0.001) in the test cohort.

CONCLUSION

T_SUVmax and N_SUVmax measured by preoperative F-18 FDG PET/CT are independent predictive factors for LN metastasis in GC.

Endoscopic ultrasonography for pretreatment T-staging of gastric cancer: An in vitro accuracy and discrepancy analysis

In the current era of multi-disciplinary treatment, precise and detailed diagnosis prior to treatment is crucial for clinical practice. For different lesions that fit different indications, the optimum approach for treatment differs significantly. Thus, the recent 8th American Joint Committee on Cancer classification system has introduced 'clinical stage' as a criterion. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been the first-line choice for pretreatment staging; however, there is no standardization of the depth classification nor a standard EUS method. Additionally, the accuracy for this diagnostic test has ranged between <40 and 90% in previous studies. The aim of the present study was to determine the accuracy of EUS, identify the discrepancies between EUS and histological results, and analyze the underlying causes. Between June 2014 and February 2016, EUS was performed on gastric carcinoma specimens from 60 consecutive patients. EUS was performed on the resected specimens following surgery, but prior to fixation in formalin, invasion of the gastric wall was determined and the deepest location was marked with sutures. The ultrasound images were independently interpreted, and the quality of the images was scored by two endoscopists. Subsequently, the ultrasound images were compared with the pathological results of the same section. The overall accuracy of EUS was 75%. For locally advanced gastric cancers, EUS had a relatively high accuracy (33/43, 86%). The EUS results corresponded well with the pathological hematoxylin and eosin staining results, and the deepest points determined by EUS were confirmed by pathology in the majority of cases (85%). In total, 50 and 10 cases were scored as having high/moderate and low quality, associated with accuracies of 86% (43/50) and 20% (2/10), respectively. EUS is valuable for pretreatment T-staging, particularly for advanced cases. Proximal stomach cancer exhibited a tendency for improved accuracy. Overall, the results of the present study suggest that standardized scanning processes, particularly including all-encompassing scanning, proper probe-placement and high image quality, lead to improved accuracy of EUS.

Prognostic significance of the fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio in gallbladder cancer patients

AIM

To investigate the prognostic role of fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) on patients with gallbladder cancer (GBC) in this study.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-four GBC patients were retrospectively analyzed, who received potentially curative cholecystectomy in our institute from March 2005 to December 2017. Receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve) was used to determine the optimal cut-offs for these biomarkers. In addition, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis as well as multivariate analysis were applied for prognostic analyses.

RESULTS

ROC curve revealed that the optimal cut-off value for FAR was 0.08. FAR was significantly correlated with age (P = 0.045), jaundice (P < 0.001), differentiation (P = 0.002), resection margin status (P < 0.001), T stage (P < 0.001), TNM stage (P < 0.001), and CA199 (P < 0.001) as well as albumin levels (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that the resection margin status [hazard ratio (HR): 2.343, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.532-3.581, P < 0.001], TNM stage (P = 0.035), albumin level (HR = 0.595, 95%CI: 0.385-0.921, P = 0.020) and FAR (HR: 2.813, 95%CI: 1.765-4.484, P < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors in GBC patients.

CONCLUSION

An elevated preoperative FAR was significantly correlated with unfavorable overall survival in GBC patients, while an elevated preoperative albumin level was a protective prognostic factor for patients with GBC. The preoperative FAR could be used to predict the prognosis of GBC patients, which was easily accessible, cost-effective and noninvasive.

CT volumetry for gastric adenocarcinoma: association with lymphovascular invasion and T-stages

Purpose

To determine whether gross tumor volume of resectable gastric adenocarcinoma on multidetector computed tomography could predict presence of lymphovascular invasion and T-stages.

Results

Gross tumor volume increased with the lymphovascular invasion (r = 0.426, P < 0.0001) and T stage (r = 0.656, P < 0.0001). Univariate analysis showed gross tumor volume could predict lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.0001). Multivariate analyses indicated gross tumor volume as an independent risk factor of lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.026, odds ratio = 2.284). The Mann-Whitney U test showed gross tumor volume could distinguish T2 from T3, T1 from T2–T4a, T1–T2 from T3–T4a and T1–T3 from T4a (P = 0.000). In the development cohort, gross tumor volume could predict lymphovascular invasion (cutoff, 15.92 cm³; AUC, 0.760), and distinguish T2 from T3 (cutoff, 10.09 cm³; AUC, 0.828), T1 from T2-T4a (cutoff, 8.20 cm³; AUC, 0.860), T1-T2 from T3-T4a (cutoff, 15.88 cm³; AUC, 0.883), and T1-T3 from T4a (cutoff, 21.53 cm³; AUC, 0.834). In validation cohort, gross tumor volume could predict presence of lymphovascular invasion (AUC, 0.742), and distinguish T2 from T3 (AUC, 0.861), T1 from T2-T4a (AUC, 0.859), T1–T2 from T3–T4a (AUC, 0.875), and T1–T3 from T4a (AUC, 0.773).

Materials and Methods

360 consecutive patients with gastric adenocarcinoma were retrospectively identified. Gross tumor volume was evaluated on multidetector computed tomography images. Statistical analysis was performed to determine whether gross tumor volume could predict presence of lymphovascular invasion and T-stages. Cutoffs of gross tumor volume were first investigated in 212 patients and then validated in an independent 148 patients using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for predicting lymphovascular invasion and T-stages.

Conclusions

Gross tumor volume of resectable gastric adenocarcinoma at multidetector computed tomography demonstrated capability in predicting lymphovascular invasion and distinguishing T-stages.

Nomogram analysis and external validation to predict the risk of lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer

Aim

To identify risk factors for lymph node metastasis using a nomogram for gastric cancer patients to predict lymph node metastasis.

Results

The Chi-square test and the logistic regression showed that the Boarrmann type, preoperative CA199 level, T stage and N stage by CT scan were independent risk factors. The concordance index (C-index) was 0.786 in the internal validation of the Nomogram model. In the external validation, the C-index was 0.809, and the AUC was 0.894. The total accuracy of the prediction was 82.2%, and the false-negative rate was 5.4% with a cut-off value set at 0.109.

Materials and Methods

The study consisted of 451 patients with a histological diagnosis of gastric cancer with 0 or 1 lymph node metastasis from the Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center as the development set, and the validation set consisted of 186 gastric cancer patients from the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University. A Chi-square test and a logistic regression analysis were used to compare the clinicopathological variables and lymph node metastasis. The C-index and ROC curve were computed for comparisons of the nomogram's predictive ability.

Conclusions

We developed and validated a nomogram to predict lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer before surgery. This nomogram can be broadly applied, even in general hospitals, and is useful for decisions regarding treatment programs for patients.

Transabdominal Ultrasonography for Assessing the Depth of Tumor Invasion in Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography are generally used to diagnose the depth of gastric tumor invasion, endoscopy is invasive and frequently results in patient discomfort. Transabdominal ultrasonography (TUS) is noninvasive and may be useful in determining this depth. We investigated the usefulness of TUS in determining the depth of tumor invasion in patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 190 patients with gastric cancer and 200 lesions who underwent curative resection at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of Tottori University Hospital from July 2007 to July 2015. The results of conventional diagnostic imaging and TUS were compared with those of pathological analysis obtained after surgery. Furthermore, the ruptured form of the third layer on TUS imaging was reviewed and investigated to differentiate between the SM2 and MP lesions.

RESULTS

The accuracy of TUS was similar to that of conventional diagnostic imaging for all depths of tumor invasion. Eight lesions could not be assessed by TUS, including four that could not be identified and four in which TUS was unable to diagnose the depth. In cases where the ruptured form of the third layer could be determined in MP lesions, the forms were observed toward the inside of the gastric lumen.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggested that the accuracy of TUS was equivalent to that of conventional diagnostic imaging in determining the depth of tumor invasion. TUS assessment criteria may be useful to classify this depth. Furthermore, the ruptured form of the third layer is believed to be important in distinguishing between early and advanced gastric cancer.

Potential diagnostic and prognostic significance of plasma prolidase activity in gastric cancer

Aim: Plasma prolidase activities (PPAs) in cases of gastric cancer. Methodology/results: This study was based on a prospective design. 60 patients with gastric cancer (operable cases: 48; inoperable: 12) and 60 healthy controls were included in the study. Prolidase activity was analyzed. The mean PPA levels in the operable, inoperable and control groups were 45.60 ± 4.20, 54.35 ± 4. 9 and 10.92 ± 0.79 U/l, respectively (p < 0.001). PPA decreased significantly after tumor resection. PPA level was significant in differentiating operable cases from inoperable (sensitivity: 91.7%; specificity: 85.2%). Discussion/conclusion: PPA was significantly higher in patients with inoperable gastric cancer than in operable cases and the control group. A strong correlation was found between tumor volume and PPA.

The Effect of Endoscopic Resection on Short-Term Surgical Outcomes in Patients with Additional Laparoscopic Gastrectomy after Non-Curative Resection for Gastric Cancer

Purpose

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in early gastric cancer causes an artificial gastric ulcer and local inflammation that has a negative intraprocedural impact on additional laparoscopic gastrectomy in patients with noncurative ESD. In this study, we analyzed the effect of ESD on short-term surgical outcomes and evaluated the risk factors.

Materials and Methods

From January 2003 to January 2013, 1,704 patients of the National Cancer Center underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy with lymph node dissection because of preoperative stage Ia or Ib gastric cancer. They were divided into 2 groups: (1) with preoperative ESD or (2) without preoperative ESD. Clinicopathologic factors and short-term surgical outcomes were retrospectively evaluated along with risk factors such as preoperative ESD.

Results

Several characteristics differed between patients who underwent ESD-surgery (n=199) or surgery alone (n=1,505). The mean interval from the ESD procedure to the operation was 43.03 days. Estimated blood loss, open conversion rate, mean operation time, and length of hospital stay were not different between the 2 groups. Postoperative complications occurred in 23 patients (11.56%) in the ESD-surgery group and in 189 patients (12.56%) in the surgery-only group, and 3 deaths occurred among patients with complications (1 patient [ESD-surgery group] vs. 2 patients [surgery-only group]; P=0.688). A history of ESD was not significantly associated with postoperative complications (P=0.688). Multivariate analysis showed that male sex (P=0.008) and laparoscopic total or proximal gastrectomy (P=0.000) were independently associated with postoperative complications.

Conclusions

ESD did not affect short-term surgical outcomes during and after an additional laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Past and current trends in endoscopic diagnosis for early stage gastric cancer in Japan

Methodology for the diagnosis and staging of early gastric cancer (EGC) has improved in Japan since the development of the gastro-camera and determination of a definition of EGC. Imaging technology has been steadily evolving in the endoscopy field. Improvements in the resolution of standard endoscopy images used in screening and surveillance provide greater opportunities to find gastric cancer earlier. Image enhancement endoscopy (IEE), such as narrow band imaging (NBI), highlights mucosal structures and vascularity. In particular, when NBI is used with magnifying endoscopy, it reveals fine details of subtle superficial abnormalities of EGC that are difficult to recognize using standard white light endoscopy. IEE-assisted magnifying endoscopy has improved the accuracy of the differentiation of superficial gastric cancer as well as delineation of the diseased mucosa. The advanced imaging technology enables precise assessment of the risk of lymph node metastasis of EGC and is widely used to determine indications for endoscopic treatment. It is not an overstatement to say that this has become the basis for the current development and dissemination of endoscopic treatments. Moreover, the resolution of endoscopic imaging has been upgraded to the microscopy level by the development of endomicroscopy, including endocytoscopy and confocal laser endomicroscopy. Endomicroscopy allows real-time histological analysis of living tissue during routine endoscopy and may reduce the number of biopsies needed to reach the correct diagnosis, minimizing the risk of sampling errors.

Impact of the Cross-Sectional Location of Multidetector Computed Tomography Scans on Prediction of Serosal Exposure in Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

The extent of serosal exposure varies depending on the cross-section of the stomach that is viewed, affected by the visceral peritoneum of the omentum. Although multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) is the most useful method to predict serosal exposure, the MDCT criteria for such exposure by cross-sectional location remain to be established.

METHODS

The MDCT of gastric cancer patients who underwent surgery, and for whom pathological reports were available, were reviewed by radiologists. The MDCT criteria for invasion depth were divided into five grades: (1) smooth margin; (2) undulating margin; (3) streaky margin within vessels; (4) nodular margin within perigastric vessels; and (5) streaky or nodular margin over the perigastric vessels. The five grades were compared in terms of pathological tumor depth by curvature and wall group.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients of stage ≥ T2 were enrolled. The five MDCT grades correlated with tumor depth (P < 0.001). Exposed serosal lesions of grade 3 (P = 0.031) and 5 (P = 0.030) constituted significantly the largest proportion of wall and curvature cancers, respectively. The accuracy of MDCT in terms of T staging using the five grades was calculated by cross-sectional location. The highest accuracies were associated with curvature- and wall-located tumors (55.1 and 64.3%, respectively) when serosal exposure was graded 5 and 3, respectively. The highest overall accuracy for T staging was 59.2% when the various MDCT criteria were applied by reference to the cross-sectional location.

CONCLUSIONS

The MDCT criteria for serosal exposure vary by the cross-sectional location of the gastric cancer.

Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in TNM staging of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is a common malignancy that has a poor prognosis and high mortality. Cancer staging is the optimal method for evaluating prognosis. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been considered the first-choice imaging modality for regional staging of gastric cancer because different structural layers of the gastric wall show remarkable differences in their echogenic appearance. However, the results of recent studies about the accuracy of EUS for staging of gastric cancer are contradictory. The aim of this article is to review the role of EUS in preoperative TNM staging of gastric cancer.

The role of endoscopic ultrasound on the preoperative T staging of gastric cancer: A retrospective study

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is used for preoperative assessment of gastric cancer. However, recent studies suggested that EUS staging accuracy is lower than previously thought. We aimed to assess EUS efficacy and image characteristics in preoperative gastric cancer T staging.A retrospective review of clinical and imaging features of 232 gastric carcinoma patients who underwent preoperative EUS assessment of T stage was performed. Only cases with tumor-free resection margin status and no metastases were enrolled. Comparisons of preoperative EUS and postoperative histopathological stagings were also performed to identify vital EUS image features for evaluating gastric carcinoma.EUS accuracy for T staging was 64.2% (149/232) with the highest accuracy for T3 (75.0%). Enlarged lymph nodes, well differentiated histological type and Borrmann IV type were associated with diagnostic accuracy in predicting tumor invasion. Although no factors were associated with overstaging, circumferential lesions ≥1/2, signet ring cell adenocarcinoma, and Borrmann IV type had significantly higher risks of understaging. Gastric wall outer edge irregularity was also an indicator of serosal involvement with a sensitivity of 82.0%. The pancreas and colon were more frequent disease extension sites than previously predicted.Although EUS is likely the best and most accurate option that we have used to stage gastric cancer, the finding that factors including circumferential lesions, signet ring cell adenocarcinoma, and Borrmann IV type carcinoma were more frequently related to incorrect staging warrants attention.

Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography for determination of tumor invasion depth in gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is one the common lethal cancers in Iran. Detection of GC in the early stages would assesses to improve the survival of patients. In this study, we attempt to evaluate the accuracy of EUS in detection depth of invasion of GC among Iranian Patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a retrospective study of patients with pathologically confirmed GC. They underwent EUS before initiating the treatment. The accuracy of EUS and agreement between the two methods was evaluated by comparing pre treatment EUS finding with post operative histopathological results.

RESULTS

The overall accuracy of EUS for T and N staging was 67.9% and 75.47, respectively. Underestimation and overestimation was seen in 22 (14.2%) and 40 (25.6%) respectively. The EUS was more accurate in large tumors and the tumors located in the middle and lower parts of the stomach. The EUS was more sensitive in T3 staging. The values of weighted Kappa from the T and N staging were 0.53 and 0.66, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is a useful modality for evaluating the depth of invasion of GC. The accuracy of EUS was higher if the tumor was located in the lower parts of the stomach and the size of the tumor was more than 3 cm. Therefore, judgments made upon other criteria evaluated in this study need to be reconsidered.

National Trends in Utilization of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Gastric Cancer: a SEER-Medicare Study

INTRODUCTION

Accurate preoperative staging is important for patients with gastric cancer. This study identifies the rate of utilization of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and its associated factors in Medicare patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

The linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare claims database was queried from 1996 to 2009 for patients with gastric cancer who underwent gastric resection. Analysis with univariate, multivariate, and Cochran-Armitage trend tests were performed.

RESULTS

In 5826 patients with gastric cancer with an average age of 76.9 ± 6.62 years, 59.1% had regionalized spread of cancer. EUS utilization increased significantly during the study period from 2.6% to 22% (p < 0.0001). EUS patients were more likely to be male, white, married, have higher education and income quartiles, and live in large metropolitan areas compared to non-EUS patients (p < 0.0001). Even after controlling for confounding factors, patients who underwent EUS were more likely to have >15 lymph nodes examined (odds ratio (OR) 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04-1.53) and have the administration of both pre- and postoperative chemotherapy (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.03-1.57).

CONCLUSION

EUS is currently under-utilized but increasing. Patients who underwent EUS (12.9%) were more likely to receive other NCCN-recommended care, including perioperative chemotherapy and adequate nodal retrieval.

A specific role of endoscopic ultrasonography for therapeutic decision-making in patients with gastric cardia cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in gastric cardia cancer should be further evaluated because the accuracy of EUS depends on tumor location. We aimed to identify a specific role of EUS for therapeutic decision-making in patients with gastric cardia cancer.

METHODS

Initial EUS examinations for treatment-naïve gastric cancer that were followed by endoscopic resection or surgery were included in the study. Lesions were classified as cardiac and non-cardiac cancer according to tumor location. The diagnostic performance of EUS in predicting invasion depth was compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The overall accuracy of EUS in predicting invasion depth did not differ between the cardiac and non-cardiac cancer groups (44.4 vs. 52.3 %, P = 0.259). The underestimation rate was higher in the cardiac cancer group than in the non-cardiac cancer group (37.0 vs. 18.5 %, P = 0.001). When the depth of invasion was predicted to be deeper than the mucosa (submucosal or deeper) by EUS, the positive predictive value was 82.1 [95 % confidence interval (CI), 66.5-92.5 %] and 62.9 % (95 % CI, 60.5-66.9 %) in the cardiac and non-cardiac cancer groups, respectively (P = 0.015). In multivariable analysis, tumor location in the cardia was found to be an independent factor for the underestimation of invasion depth [odds ratio (95 % CI) = 2.242 (1.156-4.349)].

CONCLUSIONS

The underestimation rate in predicting invasion depth was significantly higher for cardiac cancers than for non-cardiac cancers. Therefore, selection of the treatment method for gastric cardia cancer via EUS should be done carefully.

Clinicopathological characteristics of clinical early gastric cancer in the upper-third stomach

AIM: To elucidate the clinicopathological characteristics of clinically early gastric cancer in the upper-third stomach and to clarify treatment precautions.

METHODS: A total of 683 patients with clinical early gastric cancer were enrolled in this retrospective study, 128 of whom had gastric cancer in the upper-third stomach (U group). All patients underwent a double contrast barium examination, endoscopy, and computed tomography (CT), and were diagnosed preoperatively based on the findings obtained. The clinicopathological features of these patients were compared with those of patients with gastric cancer in the middle- and lower-third stomach (ML group). We also compared clinicopathological factors between accurate-diagnosis and under-diagnosis groups in order to identify factors affecting the accuracy of a preoperative diagnosis of tumor depth.

RESULTS: Patients in the U group were older (P = 0.029), had a higher ratio of males to females (P = 0.015), and had more histologically differentiated tumors (P = 0.007) than patients in the ML group. A clinical under-diagnosis occurred in 57 out of 683 patients (8.3%), and was more frequent in the U group than in the ML group (16.4% vs 6.3%, P < 0.0001). Therefore, the rates of lymph node metastasis and lymphatic invasion were slightly higher in the U group than in the ML group (P = 0.071 and 0.082, respectively). An under-diagnosis was more frequent in histologically undifferentiated tumors (P = 0.094) and in those larger than 4 cm (P = 0.024). The median follow-up period after surgery was 56 mo (range, 1-186 mo). Overall, survival and disease-specific survival rates were significantly lower in the U group than in the ML group (P = 0.016 and 0.020, respectively). However, limited operation-related cancer recurrence was not detected in the U group in the present study.

CONCLUSION: Clinical early gastric cancer in the upper-third stomach has distinguishable characteristics that increase the risk of a clinical under-diagnosis, especially in patients with larger or undifferentiated tumors.

Accuracy of EUS and CT imaging in preoperative gastric cancer staging

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is recommended for locally advanced gastric cancer patients (stage IB-IIIC). The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) in identifying patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent gastrectomy at our institution were reviewed. Preoperative EUS and CT staging were compared with pathologic staging to determine accuracy.

RESULTS

Between 2001 and 2013, 280 patients were identified. Forty-nine patients (18%) who underwent preoperative staging by EUS were analyzed. The accuracy of EUS in identifying individual T stage and N stage was 41.0% and 42.9%, respectively. EUS had moderate accuracy in differentiating locally advanced from early (stage 0-IA) disease (75.5%, area under curve (AUC) 0.772). For individual T stage and N stage, the accuracy of CT was 4.0% and 56%, respectively. CT had relatively poor accuracy in differentiating locally advanced from early disease (60.0%, AUC 0.649).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS and CT had poor performance in identifying individual T and N stage although EUS demonstrated moderate accuracy in identifying patients with locally advanced disease. A combined staging approach, in addition to further optimization of staging modalities, is required for accurate staging for patients with gastric cancer.

Current status of endoscopic ultrasound for the upper gastrointestinal tract in Asia

We summarize the current status of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract solely in Asia, focusing on the staging of superficial cancers and the diagnosis of submucosal tumors (SMT), by analysis of questionnaire responses and a literature review. EUS for assessing the depth of superficial cancers of the upper GI tract is useful; however, evidence is lacking to support that EUS is superior to other modalities. The current status of EUS varies across different Asian countries, and standardization of the methods used both during the procedure and for depth subclassification is necessary to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy. Although EUS alone is limited in the diagnosis of SMT, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration is an effective and safe diagnostic tool. Although there is a role for EUS, there are still many limitations both technically and in terms of accessibility.

Use of endoscopic ultrasound in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer: a multi-institutional study of the US gastric cancer collaborative

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can be used to guide the therapeutic plan for patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC), but data on its use and accuracy remain poorly defined. We sought to define the use of EUS, as well as characterize the diagnostic accuracy of EUS among patients with GAC.

STUDY DESIGN

We identified 960 patients who underwent resection of GAC between 2000 and 2012 from 7 major academic institutions participating in the US Gastric Cancer Collaborative. Clinicopathologic and EUS data were collected and analyzed using chi and kappa statistics.

RESULTS

Of 960 patients, 223 (23.2%) underwent evaluation with preoperative EUS. Among patients who underwent EUS, 74 (33.2%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy; 149 (66.8%) proceeded directly to resection. Among patients who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy and received curative intent gastric resection, the EUS T classifications were T1 (33.3%), T2 (35.6%), T3 (18.9%), T4 (12.1%) and the N classifications were N0 (68.1%) and N ≥ 1 (31.9%). In contrast, when tumor stage was based on the final surgical specimen, there was a higher proportion of cases with more advanced T stage (T1, 36.4%; T2, 14.4%; T3, 23.5%; T4, 25.7%) and N stage (N0, 51.3%; N ≥ 1, 48.7%). The agreement of preoperative EUS compared with surgical staging for T (kappa = 0.28, p < 0.001) and N (kappa = 0.33, p < 0.001) classification was only fair.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than one-quarter of patients with GAC underwent preoperative EUS staging. In patients who did not receive preoperative chemotherapy, tumor stage on EUS often did not correlate with T stage and N stage on final pathologic analysis. Endoscopic ultrasound should be combined with other staging modalities to optimize staging of patients with GAC.

Cumulative prognostic scores based on plasma fibrinogen and serum albumin levels in esophageal cancer patients treated with transthoracic esophagectomy: comparison with the Glasgow prognostic score

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to establish a prognostic indicator based on preoperative plasma fibrinogen and serum albumin levels (FA score) in esophageal cancer patients and to compare the correlation with survival to that of the Glasgow prognostic score.

METHODS

Patient characteristics, clinicopathological factors, and preoperative biochemical markers (fibrinogen, albumin, and C-reactive protein) were investigated in esophageal cancer patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy. Pretreatment fibrinogen and albumin levels were reviewed in patients who received neoadjuvant treatment. Patients with elevated fibrinogen and decreased albumin levels were allocated a score of 2, those with only one of these abnormalities were allocated a score of 1, and those with neither of these abnormalities were allocated a score of 0. The fibrinogen cut-off value was defined as 350 mg/dL according to our previous report, and the albumin cut-off value was defined as the lower quartile.

RESULTS

Among 199 consecutive patients, the interquartile range of preoperative albumin was 3.8-4.3 g/dL and the cut-off value was 3.8 g/dL. Thus, 108 (54 %), 68 (34 %), and 23 (12 %) patients had an FA score of 0, 1, and 2. The patients with a high preoperative FA score showed considerably shorter disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Multivariate analysis showed that pretreatment stage and preoperative FA score were independently associated with postoperative DFS and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative FA score was significantly associated with postoperative survival in esophageal cancer patients, and the prognostic value is currently being validated in a prospective multicenter cohort study.

Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Robotic systems recently have been introduced to overcome technical limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, especially for complex procedures. Laparoscopic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node (LN) dissection (LTGD2) is one of the most complicated procedures. We hypothesized that robotic LN dissection would be more thorough and accurate. We compared robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy with D2 LN dissection (RTGD2) with LTGD2 to investigate the impact of robotics.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes of RTGD2 (n = 51) versus LTGD2 (n = 58) in gastric adenocarcinoma patients were extracted from a prospectively designed database and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

There was no difference of patients' characteristics between groups. Mean operation time of RTGD2 was longer than LTGD2 (p < 0.001), and no differences in tumor histology, size, location, and TNM stage were seen. Total retrieved LNs from RTGD2 was similar to LTGD2 (mean 47.2 vs. 42.8, respectively), as were retrieved LNs at splenic hilum (1.3 vs. 0.8). However, mean numbers of retrieved LNs along the splenic artery from RTGD2 was higher than LTGD2 (2.3 vs. 1.0, respectively; p = 0.013), as was also the case at the splenic hilum and artery (3.6 vs. 1.9, p = 0.014). Postoperative complication (16 vs. 22 %, p = 0.374) and overall and disease-free survival between the two groups were not significantly different (p = 0.767 and p = 0.666, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy with D2 LN dissection is feasible. Operation time and retrieved total LNs and splenic hilar LNs in the robotic procedure are acceptable.

Preoperative N staging of gastric cancer by stomach protocol computed tomography

Purpose

Clinical stage of gastric cancer is currently assessed by computed tomography. Accurate clinical staging is important for the tailoring of therapy. This study evaluated the accuracy of clinical N staging using stomach protocol computed tomography.

Materials and Methods

Between March 2004 and November 2012, 171 patients with gastric cancer underwent preoperative stomach protocol computed tomography (Jeju National University Hospital; Jeju, Korea). Their demographic and clinical characteristics were reviewed retrospectively. Two radiologists evaluated cN staging using axial and coronal computed tomography images, and cN stage was matched with pathologic results. The diagnostic accuracy of stomach protocol computed tomography for clinical N staging and clinical characteristics associated with diagnostic accuracy were evaluated.

Results

The overall accuracy of stomach protocol computed tomography for cN staging was 63.2%. Computed tomography images of slice thickness 3.0 mm had a sensitivity of 60.0%; a specificity of 89.6%; an accuracy of 78.4%; and a positive predictive value of 78.0% in detecting lymph node metastases. Underestimation of cN stage was associated with larger tumor size (P<0.001), undifferentiated type (P=0.003), diffuse type (P=0.020), more advanced pathologic stage (P<0.001), and larger numbers of harvested and metastatic lymph nodes (P<0.001 each). Tumor differentiation was an independent factor affecting underestimation by computed tomography (P=0.045).

Conclusions

Computed tomography with a size criterion of 8 mm is highly specific but relatively insensitive in detecting nodal metastases. Physicians should keep in mind that computed tomography may not be an appropriate tool to detect nodal metastases for choosing appropriate treatment.

Risk of limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically early gastric cancer: indications of extended lymph node dissection for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is usually indicated in T1 N0-1 early gastric cancer (EGC). Limited lymph node dissection, such as D1+, is applied in these cases. However, preoperative staging is not always correct, and the risk of undertreatment thus exists.

METHODS

Patients with clinically early gastric cancer (cEGC) who underwent gastrectomy with lymph node dissection of D2 and over were selected from 4,021 patients with gastric cancer. The station numbers of all metastatic lymph nodes (MLNs) were identified, and MLNs were classified into groups 1 and 2 (including lymph nodes of second tier and over) on the basis of the system of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, irrespective of the number of MLNs. Clinicopathological data were compared according to the existence of lymph node metastasis and the classification of MLNs.

RESULTS

Of 1,308 patients with cEGC who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 1,184 (90.5 %) were diagnosed pathologically with EGC. Among 126 patients with cEGC who were diagnosed with lymph node metastasis, 93 patients had only group 1 MLNs and 33 patients had group 2 MLNs. Tumor location in the proximal third of the stomach (odds ratio 5.450) and ulceration (odds ratio 11.928) were significant factors for group 2 metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended lymph node dissection is recommended in cEGC with ulceration or disease located in the proximal third of the stomach.