Safety and feasibility of minimally invasive gastrectomy following preoperative chemotherapy for highly advanced gastric cancer

Minimally invasive lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer: Could the robotic approach provide any benefits than laparoscopy?

Gastrectomy is the cornerstone of treatment for gastric cancer. Since the introduction of minimally invasive techniques, the main challenge for surgeons has been to achieve the same surgical radicality, adequate lymphadenectomy, and negative resection margins as with the open approach. Previous Eastern trials showed non-inferiority of laparoscopic gastrectomy, whereas Western trials reported a higher number of complications. This may depend on the different eligibility criteria to select patients and surgeons. Currently, the increased availability of robotic systems has led to renewed enthusiasm. We present a critical review of published randomized control trials (up to October 2024) to investigate the real benefits of robotic compared to open and laparoscopic approaches. Robotic gastrectomy has shown similar oncological outcomes in survival and lymph node retrieval, particularly in suprapancreatic stations, with the advantage of a more acceptable rate of pancreatic fistula and feasible anastomotic reconstruction. Some clinical situations, such as postchemotherapy interstitial fibrosis and distortion of anatomical planes, may increase the technical difficulty. Only four published trials assessed the implications of a pre-operative therapy, with no robotic surgery cases. Robotic systems may reduce intraoperative blood loss, the risk of conversion and allow more extensive lymphadenectomies in cancers with a high risk of extraperigastric metastases, or with clinically proven para-aortic node metastases, although clinical trials evaluating robotic gastrectomy after neoadjuvant therapy have not yet been published.

Laparoscopic vs robot-assisted gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients with prior abdominal surgery: a propensity-matched analysis

No studies have compared the efficacy of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and robot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) patients with a history of abdominal surgery (HAS). This is the first study in this field to identify complication-related factors and compare survival outcomes using propensity score matching (PSM) and a competing risk model (CRM). A retrospective cohort study was conducted on GC patients with HAS who underwent radical LG or RG. PSM was applied to achieve baseline balance. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with complications. CRM adjusted by inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) was used to analyze overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) across different TNM stages. PSM with a 3:1 ratio ensured baseline balance while minimizing sample loss (LG n = 87, RG n = 29). RG was associated with a significantly longer surgery duration but a lower incidence of overall and Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥ 2 complications. Multivariate analysis identified RG (OR, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.01-0.15), surgery duration (OR, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.00-1.01), and lymphadenectomy extent (OR, 95% CI: 2.81, 1.16-7.25) as independent factors associated with overall complications. Likewise, RG (OR, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.01-0.38), surgery duration (OR, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.00-1.02), and tumor size (OR, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.00-1.04) were independently associated with CD grade ≥ 2 complications. Kaplan-Meier analyses based on IPCW-adjusted CRM showed no significant differences in OS, CSS, and DFS between RG and LG across TNM stages. RG may efficiently reduce complications compared to LG but offers no survival benefit, suggesting a potential advantage in perioperative safety for GC patients with HAS.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic stomach-partitioning gastrojejunostomy combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by minimally invasive gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer with gastric outlet obstruction

BACKGROUND

Advanced gastric cancer with gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) causes malnutrition and medication adherence issues, leading to a poor prognosis. We developed a novel multimodal, less invasive treatment approach for gastric cancer patients with symptomatic GOO: laparoscopic stomach-partitioning gastrojejunostomy (LSPGJ) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), followed by minimally invasive gastrectomy with reuse of gastrojejunostomy. This study is a retrospective analysis of the safety and feasibility of our treatment strategy.

METHODS

In this single-institution retrospective study, we enrolled 54 patients (NAC group, n = 26; upfront gastrectomy group, n = 28) who achieved R0 resection through a minimally invasive approach between 2007 and 2020 and evaluated their short- and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

After LSPGJ, the Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System score significantly improved (p < 0.001). The median relative dose intensity of NAC was 88.2%. Regarding short-term outcomes, there were no differences in postoperative complications, length of postsurgical hospital stay, and adjuvant chemotherapy administration. Although overall survival and relapse-free survival showed trends toward improvement in the NAC group, these differences were not statistically significant. The cumulative incidence curve for recurrence in the NAC group was significantly lower than that of the upfront gastrectomy group (p = 0.041). Recurrence and hematogenous metastasis were significantly lower in the NAC group (p = 0.031 and 0.041, respectively) than in the upfront gastrectomy group. A forest plot revealed that NAC yielded favorable outcomes, particularly for patients with a body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m2, cT4, or cN1.

CONCLUSIONS

LSPGJ combined with NAC followed by minimally invasive gastrectomy was a safe and feasible treatment strategy for patients with advanced gastric cancer with symptomatic GOO. This procedure may contribute to the early recovery of oral intake and help maintain NAC dose intensity, potentially improving prognosis, particularly for patients with low BMI and advanced-stage disease.

Predictive model for pancreatic fistula in minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the potentially serious complications after gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC). Drain amylase level is a predictor of POPF in open and laparoscopic gastrectomy, but no study has focused on minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including robotic gastrectomy (RG). This study assesses the effect of drain amylase levels for POPF in MIS and develop a prediction model in the MIS era.

METHODS

This single-institutional retrospective study, conducted from January 2011 to December 2021, included 1,353 who underwent standard MIS for GC. We placed a drain in all patients undergoing MIS gastrectomy and measured the drain amylase level on the first postoperative day (D1Amy). The predictive accuracy of D1Amy for POPF was assessed. Additionally, the entire cohort was randomly categorized into the training (1,048 patients) and validation sets (305 patients) to establish the nomogram.

RESULTS

Of the 1353 patients, 530 underwent a robotic approach. POPF and intraabdominal infectious complications of Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ II were observed in 80 (5.9%) and 145 (10.7%) patients, respectively. Median D1Amy was 812 U/L. The receiver operating characteristic analysis of D1Amy for POPF revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.888. Multivariate analysis revealed age, tumor location, splenectomy, and D1Amy as significant risk factors for POPF. The AUC of the nomogram was 0.8960, validated with AUC of 0.9259.

CONCLUSIONS

We revealed the utility of D1Amy in predicting POPF in MIS gastrectomy. Furthermore, the nomogram, incorporating D1Amy and other clinical factors, was additionally used as a predictive model for POPF.

Conversion Therapy for Stage IV Gastric Cancer: Report From the Expert Consensus Meeting at KINGCA WEEK 2024

Conversion therapy is a treatment strategy that shifts from palliative systemic therapy to curative surgical treatment for primary and/or metastatic stage IV gastric cancer (GC). To address its clinical statements, the Korean Gastric Cancer Association aims to present a consensus on conversion therapy among experts attending KINGCA WEEK 2024. The KINGCA Scientific Committee and Development Working Group for Korean Practice Guidelines prepared preformulated topics and 9 clinical statements for conversion therapy. The Delphi method was applied to a panel of 17 experts for consensus and opinions. The final comments were announced after the statement presentation and discussed during the consensus meeting session of KINGCA WEEK 2024. Most experts agreed that conversion therapy provides a survival benefit for selected patients who respond to systemic therapy and undergo R0 resection (88.3%). Patients with limited metastases were considered good candidates (94.2%). The optimal timing was based on the response to systemic therapy (70.6%). The regimen was recommended to be individualized (100%) and the duration to be at least 6 months (88.3%). A minimally invasive approach (82.3%) and D2 lymph node dissection (82.4%) were considered for surgery. However, resection for metastases with a complete clinical response after systemic therapy was not advocated (41.2%). All experts agreed on the need for large-scale randomized-controlled trials for further evidence (100%). Recent advancements in treatment may facilitate radical surgery for patients with stage IV GC. Further evidence is warranted to establish the safety and efficacy of conversion therapy.

Impact of the endoscopic surgical skill qualification system on the oncological safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) performance of non-Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (ESSQS)-qualified surgeons under the ESSQS-qualified surgeon guidance and compare oncological outcomes of gastric cancer to LG performed by the ESSQS-qualified surgeons.

METHODS

This study enrolled 1,030 patients diagnosed with both clinical and pathological stage ≤ III gastric cancer and undergoing LG from January 2009 to June 2019. ESSQS-qualified surgeons served as the operator or the instructive assistant in all LG procedures involving them. A propensity score-matched analysis was used to retrospectively compare the long-term outcomes between the ESSQS-qualified and non-ESSQS-qualified surgeons.

RESULTS

Each group included 315 pairs after propensity score matching. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were 84.4% and 81.7% in the non-ESSQS and ESSQS groups, respectively. The difference was 2.7% (95% confidence interval: - 3.20%-8.44%, P < 0.001), and the non-ESSQS group statistically demonstrated noninferiority as the lower 95% confidence limit was greater than the prespecified margin of -10%, indicating the achieved primary endpoint. No significant differences in 5-year recurrence-free survival (non-ESSQS: 78.5% vs. ESSQS: 77.4%, P = 0.627) and 5-year overall survival (non-ESSQS: 80.9% vs. ESSQS: 79.3%, P = 0.475) were found between the two groups. The oncological outcomes stratified according to the presence of pathological stage I, II, and III disease did not significantly differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LG performed by non-ESSQS-qualified surgeons achieved comparable oncological outcomes to the ESSQS-qualified surgeons, as long as ESSQS-qualified surgeons provided intraoperative instructions, in a high-volume center.