Efficacy of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: the protocol of the KLASS-02 multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial

Predictive Value of KLASS-02-QC Assessment Score on KLASS-02 Surgical Outcomes: Validation of Surgeon Quality Control and Standardization for D2 Lymphadenectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to audit the 22 items and assessed each item's predictive value on surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND

The KLASS-02 trial revealed that the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy are not inferior to open distal gastrectomy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The surgeons participating in this trial were chosen based on the assessment scores from the KLASS-02-QC trial, which used 22 items for standardization of D2 lymphadenectomy and quality control.

METHODS

We reviewed proficiency scores (PSs) for 22 items for 20 surgeons who participated in KLASS-02. The surgeons were divided into 2 groups according to PS, and the perioperative outcomes of 924 patients enrolled in KLASS-02 were compared between groups. Each item's predictive value for perioperative outcome was then assessed using multivariable regression models.

RESULTS

Of the total 924 patients, 529 were operated on by high-score surgeons (high PS) and 395 were operated on by low-score surgeons (low-PS). High-PS group had less intraoperative blood loss, longer operation times, and fewer complications, major complications, reoperations, and shorter first flatus and hospital stay than low-PS group ( P =0.006, P <0.001, P <0.001, P <0.001, P =0.042, P =0.013, and P <0.001, respectively). Some items used in KLASS-02-QC predicted perioperative outcomes, such as intraoperative blood loss, major complications, reoperation, and hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Although this study only analyzed data associated with qualified surgeons, the 22 items effectively assessed the surgeons based on PS. A high score was associated with longer operation times, but better perioperative outcomes.

The short- and long-term effect of membrane anatomy-guided laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus regional complete mesogastrium excision for locally advanced gastric cancer

OBJECTIVE

Retrospectively analyzed the short- and long-term efficacy between laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus regional complete mesogastrium excision (D2 + rCME) and traditional laparoscopic D2 in the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC), in order to obtain more evidence for D2 + rCME gastrectomy.

METHODS

A total of 599 LAGC patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted radical gastrectomy from January 2014 to December 2019, including 367 cases in the D2 + rCME group and 232 cases in the D2 group. Intraoperative and postoperative clinicopathological parameters, postoperative complications and long-term survival in the two groups were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

No significant differences in the positive rate of mesogastric tumor deposits, the number of positive lymph nodes and postoperative length of stay were found between the two groups (P > 0.05). In the D2 + rCME group, intraoperative blood loss was significantly reduced (84.20 ± 57.64 ml vs. 148.47 ± 76.97 ml, P < 0.001), the time to first postoperative flatus and first liquid diet intake were significantly shortened (3[2-3] days vs. 3[3-3] days, P < 0.001; 7[7-8] days vs. 8[7-8] days, P < 0.001), and the number of lymph nodes dissected was greater (43.57 ± 16.52 pieces vs. 36.72 ± 13.83 pieces, P < 0.001). The incidence of complications did not significantly differ between the D2 + rCME group (20.7%) and D2 group (19.4%) (P > 0.05). Although there was no statistically difference in 3-year OS and DFS between the two groups. However, the trend was better in D2 + rCME group. In subgroup analysis, patients with positive tumor deposits (TDs) in the D2 + rCME group had significantly better 3-year DFS compared With D2 group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic D2 + rCME is safe and feasible for the treatment of LAGC and is characterized by less bleeding, greater lymph node dissection and rapid recovery, without increasing postoperative complications. D2 + rCME group showed a better trend of long-term efficacy, especially significant beneficial for LAGC patients who with positive TDs.

The short- and long-term effect of laparoscopic total gastrectomy in D2 radical treatment combined with spleno-pancreatectomy under membrane anatomy

OBJECTIVE

To explore the short- and long-term effect of laparoscopic total gastrectomy in D2 radical treatment combined with spleno-pancreatectomy under membrane anatomy.

METHODS

From June 2013 to June 2018, 70 patients with gastric cancer underwent total gastrectomy combined with spleno-pancreatectomy involving 37 cases in laparoscopy group and 33 cases in laparotomy group. The intraoperative and postoperative conditions of patients in the two groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

In the laparoscopy group, the operation time and the number of positive lymph node dissection was similar to the laparotomy group. Statistical difference was found in intraoperative bleeding [(79.19 ± 39.63)ml vs (214.39 ± 152.47)m1], the number of lymph node dissection [(47.27 ± 13.94) vs (35.45 ± 9.81)], the first time of aerofluxus [(2.92 ± 0.76)d vs (3.76 ± 1.09)d], the first fluid intake time [(7.49 ± 0.96)d vs (8.27 ± 1.91)d] and the postoperative hospital stay [(11.95 ± 1.90)d vs (15.39 ± 4.07)d] (P < 0.05), So the laparoscopy group was significantly superior to the laparotomy group. The incidences of postoperative complications in laparoscopy group and the laparotomy group were 35.13% and 27.27%, and the difference was not statistically significant. (P > 0.05). No stark difference in postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo Classification (P > 0.05). The K-M survival curve showed no significant difference in 3-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic total gastrectomy in D2 radical treatment combined with spleno-pancreatectomy under membrane anatomy is feasible and safe, which can remove more perigastric lymph nodes. With advantages of less intraoperative blood loss and fast postoperative recovery, it cannot increase postoperative complications and long-term survival are comparable to open surgery.

A novel method of anvil placement of circular stapler for esophagojejunostomy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: results of consecutive 200 cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer is still a demanding operation because of technical difficulties, especially of intracorporeal esophago-jejunal anastomosis.

METHODS

We introduced a newly designed method of anvil placement of circular stapling devices (CS) for laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy (EJS). A small incision was made on the anterior wall of the stomach, from which the anvil was inserted into the stomach and proceeded to the thoracic esophagus. Then, the abdominal esophagus was transected by a linear stapler, and the anvil into the esophagus was drawn back to the esophageal stump by pulling out the cotton tape pre-attached to the anvil. Intracorporeal EJS by Roux-en-Y reconstruction was performed by CS inserted into the abdominal cavity from the umbilical wound.

RESULTS

A total of consecutive 200 gastric cancer patients underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy using this method. There was no operative mortality. Anastomotic complications occurred in 12 cases (6.0%): 9 cases of stenosis (4.5%) and 3 cases of bleedings (1.5%). Anastomotic leakage was not observed. As for non-anastomotic complications, there occurred 2 pulmonary complications (1.0%), 3 pancreatic leakages (1.5%), and 8 bowel obstructions due to internal hernia (4.0%). With a median follow-up period of 47.1 months, 5-year overall survival for assessable patients (n = 193) was 60.3% (95% CI 52.6-67.2). The total rate of peritoneal recurrence was 9.8%.

CONCLUSION

Our new method of anvil placement for laparoscopic EJS with CS is safe and feasible with favorable survival outcomes. It eliminates the need for suturing, and will promote the clinical application of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

CLINICAL TRIALS

UMIN000046119.

Accuracy of preoperative clinical staging for locally advanced gastric cancer in KLASS-02 randomized clinical trial

Purpose

The discrepancy between preoperative and final pathological staging has been a long-standing challenge for the application of clinical trials or appropriate treatment options. This study aimed to demonstrate the accuracy of preoperative staging of locally advanced gastric cancer using data from a large-scale randomized clinical trial.

Materials and methods

Of the 1050 patients enrolled in the clinical trial, 26 were excluded due to withdrawal of consent (n = 20) or non-surgery (n = 6). The clinical and pathological staging was compared. Risk factor analysis for underestimation was performed using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Regarding T staging by computed tomography, accuracy rates were 74.48, 61.62, 58.56, and 85.16% for T1, T2, T3 and T4a, respectively. Multivariate analysis for underestimation of T staging revealed that younger age, ulcerative gross type, circular location, larger tumor size, and undifferentiated histology were independent risk factors. Regarding nodal status estimation, 54.9% of patients with clinical N0 disease were pathologic N0, and 36.4% of patients were revealed to have pathologic N0 among clinical node-positive patients. The percentage of metastasis involvement at the D1, D1+, and D2 lymph node stations significantly increased with the advanced clinical N stage. Among all patients, 29 (2.8%), including 26 with peritoneal seeding, exhibited distant metastases.

Conclusions

Estimating the exact pathologic staging remains challenging. A thorough evaluation is mandatory before treatment selection or trial enrollment. Moreover, we need to set a sufficient case number when we design the clinical trial considering the stage migration.

Laparoscopic vs Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes of the KLASS-02 Randomized Clinical Trial

Question

What is the oncologic safety profile of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for the treatment of clinically advanced gastric cancer in terms of 5-year survival?

Findings

In this randomized clinical trial of 1050 patients, in patients who underwent laparoscopic or open distal gastrectomy, the 5-year overall survival rates (88.9% vs 88.7%) and relapse-free survival rates (79.5% vs 81.1%) did not differ significantly. The late complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (6.5% vs 11.0%).

Meaning

The 5-year follow-up results of the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS)-02 trial support the rationale for laparoscopic surgery in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Importance

The long-term safety of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains uncertain given the lack of 5-year follow-up results.

Objective

To compare the 5-year follow-up results in patients with clinically AGC enrolled in the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS)-02 randomized clinical trial who underwent laparoscopic or open distal gastrectomy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The KLASS-02, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, showed that laparoscopic surgery was noninferior to open surgery for patients with locally AGC. The present study assessed the 5-year follow-up results, including 5-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates and long-term complications, in patients enrolled in KLASS-02. From November 21, 2011, to April 29, 2015, patients aged 20 to 80 years diagnosed preoperatively with locally AGC were enrolled. Final follow-up was on June 15, 2021. Data were analyzed June 24 to September 9, 2021.

Interventions

Patients were treated with R0 resection either by laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy as the full analysis set of the KLASS-02 trial.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Five-year OS and RFS rates, recurrence patterns, and long-term surgical complications were evaluated.

Results

This study enrolled a total of 1050 patients. A total of 974 patients were treated with R0 resection; 492 (50.5%) in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group (mean [SD] age, 59.8 [11.0] years; 351 men [71.3%]) and 482 (49.5%) in the open gastrectomy group (mean [SD] age, 59.4 [11.5] years; 335 men [69.5%]). In patients who underwent laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy, the 5-year OS (88.9% vs 88.7%) and RFS (79.5% vs 81.1%) rates did not differ significantly. The most common types of recurrence were peritoneal carcinomatosis (73 of 173 [42.1%]), hematogenous metastases (36 of 173 [20.8%]), and locoregional recurrence (23 of 173 [13.2%]), with no between-group differences in types of recurrence at each cancer stage. The correlation between 3-year RFS and 5-year OS at the individual level was highest in patients with stage III gastric cancer (ρ = 0.720). The late complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic than in the open surgery group (32 of 492 [6.5%] vs 53 of 482 [11.0%]). The most common type of complication in both groups was intestinal obstruction (13 of 492 [2.6%] vs 24 of 482 [5.0%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The 5-year outcomes of the KLASS-02 trial support the 3-year results, which is the noninferiority of laparoscopic surgery compared with open gastrectomy for locally AGC. The laparoscopic approach can be recommended in patients with locally AGC to achieve the benefit of low incidence of late complications.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01456598

Laparoscopic vs. Open Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Case-Control Study

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries, the use of minimally invasive techniques has not attained the same widespread acceptance for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its feasibility and oncological adequacy. We aimed to examine the safety and oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic technique with radical intent for the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer by comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy at two Western regional institutions. Methods: The trial was designed as a retrospective comparative matched case-control study for postoperative pathological diagnoses of locally advanced gastric carcinoma. Between January 2015 and September 2021, 120 consecutive patients who underwent curative-intent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were retrospectively recruited and compared with 120 patients who received open gastrectomy. In order to obtain a comparison that was as homogeneous as possible, the equal control group of pairing (1:1) patients submitted to open gastrectomy who matched those of the laparoscopic group was statistically generated by using a propensity matched score method. The following potential confounder factors were aligned: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidity, ASA, adjuvant therapy, tumour location, type of gastrectomy, and pT stage. Patient demographics, operative findings, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: In the case-control study, the two groups were clearly comparable with respect to matched variables, as was expected given the intentional primary selective criteria. No statistically significant differences were revealed in overall complications (16.7% vs. 20.8%, p = 0.489), rate of reoperation (3.3% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.714), and mortality (4.2% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.987) within 30 days. Pulmonary infection and wound complications were observed more frequently in the OG group (0.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.01, for each of these two categories). Anastomotic and duodenal stump leakage occurred in 5.8% of the patients after laparoscopic gastrectomy and in 3.3% after open procedure (p = 0.072). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly longer operative time (212 vs. 192 min, p < 0.05) but shorter postoperative length of stay (9.1 vs. 11.6 days, p < 0.001). The mean number of resected lymph nodes after D2 dissection (31.4 vs. 33.3, p = 0.134) and clearance of surgical margins (97.5% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.432) were equivalent between the groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection appears to be safe and feasible in terms of perioperative morbidity for locally advanced gastric cancer, with comparable oncological equivalency with respect to traditional open surgery.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: has the time come for considered it a standard procedure?

Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymphadenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer. A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase III evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer. At present, laparoscopic gastrectomy is considered a standard procedure for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries. On the other hand, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer have been recently published, in particular concerning the latest results obtained by laparoscopic approach to advanced gastric cancer. It seems very useful to update the review of literature in light of these new evidences for this subject and draw some considerations.

Evaluating quality and completeness of gastrectomy for gastric cancer: review of surgical videos from the public domain

Background

YouTube^® has provided a forum to share surgical videos in the public domain which may be used for education. The quality of surgery and accompanying educational material is unknown. YouTube^® videos of gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy (D2-LND) for gastric cancer were evaluated for quality and completeness.

Methods

YouTube^® was searched using the terms "D2 lymphadenectomy" and "Gastric Cancer" for open and laparoscopic videos. The Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgical Society (KLASS) outlined 22 steps that define quality and completeness of D2-LND. These guidelines were used to score D2-LND for each video. Four physician reviewers independently scored each surgical video. Scores were compared using Student's t-test.

Results

Ten laparoscopic and 10 open surgery videos were assessed. Each video was scored for quality and completeness and assigned a score out of 22. Mean score for open D2-LND was 15 (95% CI: 12.54-17.46). Mean score for laparoscopic D2-LND was 15.4 (95% CI: 14.34-16.46; P=0.77). The most consistently performed steps were the dissection of lymph node stations 1, 3, 4 and 5. The most commonly omitted steps were the dissection of lymph node station 6: exposure and identification of the lowest anterior superior pancreaticoduodenal vein; removal of the prepancreatic soft tissues above the lowest anterior superior pancreaticoduodenal vein; removal of the prepancreatic soft tissues above the level of the bifurcation of the anterior superior pancreaticoduodenal vein and right gastroepiploic vein.

Conclusions

There is a wide range of quality and completeness of D2-LND videos. On average, D2-LND videos are only two-thirds complete.

Laparoscopic vs Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Five-Year Outcomes From the CLASS-01 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

It is not clear whether laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy produce similar outcomes among patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Data from a multicenter, randomized clinical trial (Chinese Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgical Study [CLASS]-01) showed that laparoscopic distal gastrectomy did not result in inferior disease-free survival at 3 years compared with open distal gastrectomy.

Objective

To report 5-year overall survival data from the CLASS-01 trial of laparoscopic vs open distal gastrectomy among patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Design, Setting, and Patients

This was a noninferiority, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted at 14 centers in China. A total of 1056 eligible patients with clinical stage T2, T3, or T4a gastric cancer without bulky nodes or distant metastases were enrolled from September 12, 2012, to December 3, 2014. Final follow-up was on December 31, 2019.

Interventions

Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio after stratification by site, age, cancer stage, and histologic features to undergo either laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (n = 528) or open distal gastrectomy (n = 528) with D2 lymphadenectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The 5-year overall survival rates were updated to compare laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with open distal gastrectomy. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. In addition, per-protocol and as-treated analyses were performed for overall survival.

Results

Data from 1039 patients (726 men [69.9%]; mean [SD] age, 56.2 [10.7] years) who received curative therapy were analyzed. At 5 years, the overall survival rates were 72.6% in the laparoscopic distal gastrectomy group and 76.3% in the open distal gastrectomy group (log-rank P = .19; hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.93-1.48; P = .19). After comparison for competing risk events, gastric cancer-related deaths (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.87-1.49; P = .34) and deaths from other causes (hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.74-2.05; P = .42) did not differ significantly between groups. Overall rates of survival did not differ significantly between groups with each tumor stage.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume specialized institutions resulted in similar 5-year overall survival compared with open distal gastrectomy among patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01609309.

Surgical Treatment for Gastric Cancer

Surgery is an essential component of curative-intent treatment strategies for gastric cancer. However, the care of each patient with gastric cancer must be individualized based on patient and tumor characteristics. It is important that all physicians who will be caring for patient with gastric cancer understand the current best practices of surgical management to provide patients with the highest quality of care. This article aims to provide this information while acknowledging areas of surgical management that are still controversial.

Landscape of interventional clinical trials involving gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Background

Gastric cancer (GC) is the third most common cause of malignancy associated mortality globally. The cornerstone of curative treatment involves surgical gastrectomy. In this study, we explore clinical trials involving gastrectomy for GC, highlighting inadequacies and underlining promising surgical interventions and strategies.

Materials and methods

On 1 May 2020, ClinicalTrials.gov was explored for interventional trials related to gastrectomy for GC, without adding limitations for location or date. All data pertaining to the trials were collected. Characteristics such as phase, duration, enrolment size, location, treatment allocation, masking and primary endpoint were analysed.

Results

One hundred thirty-eight clinical trials met the search criteria. Clinical trials were performed in only 14 countries; most of them occurring in China. Most trials (33%) were still in the recruiting phase. On average, the length of trials was 3.9 years. Most trials had parallel assignment, were randomised and masked. The primary endpoint which was mostly commonly studied was overall survival (33%). The most common intervention studied is laparoscopic gastrectomy in 43 (31%) trials.

Conclusions

Our study exposed a small number of trials, publication rate, absence of geographic variety in clinical trials involving gastrectomy for GC. Adequate management of trial design can help decrease duration and increase validity of results. More trials comparing different surgical techniques are needed to update the surgical practice of gastrectomy for GC.

Comparison of delta-shaped anastomosis and Billroth I reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Background

This study intends to compare the short-term effects and long-term survival of gastric cancer patients who underwent delta-shaped anastomosis (DA) and Billroth I reconstructions after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data from 257 patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy between January 2013 and December 2017. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to the reconstruction method used: the DA group (n=91) and the Billroth I group (n=166). The clinical data, short-term efficacy, and long-term results were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

The operation time (P<0.001) and the post-operative length of hospital stay (P<0.001) were shorter in the DA group than in the Billroth I group. The time to the first oral intake of a soft diet after surgery was earlier in the DA group than in the Billroth I group (P=0.014). Kaplan-Meier (log-rank test) analysis showed no significant difference in the 5-year survival rates between the 2 groups for patients at the same pathological stage. Multivariate analysis showed that abnormal carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) (P=0.006), chemotherapy (P<0.001), T stage (P<0.001), and N stage (P<0.001) were independent prognostic factors for survival.

Conclusions

DA and Billroth I are feasible and safe reconstruction methods of the digestive tract after gastric cancer. DA is the recommended reconstruction method for laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

Complete mesogastric excision for locally advanced gastric cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomized clinical trial

Implementation of complete mesogastric excision in gastric cancer surgery, named D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision (D2+CME), has recently been proposed as an optimal procedure. However, the safety and efficacy of D2+CME remain uncertain. In this randomized controlled trial, patients receiving D2+CME exhibit less intraoperative blood loss, more lymph node harvesting, and earlier postoperative flatus than patients receiving conventional D2 radical surgery. Univariate Cox regression analysis reveals that the risk ratio for postoperative flatus in D2+CME group is 1.247 (p = 0.044). Overall postoperative complications are comparable between the two groups, but complications are significantly less severe in the D2+CME group than the D2 group (Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ IIIa: 4 D2+CME patients [11.8%] versus 9 D2 patients [33.3%]; p = 0.041). In conclusion, our work shows that D2+CME is associated with better short-term outcomes and surgical safety than conventional D2 dissection for patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer patients receiving D2+CME exhibit less intraoperative blood loss

The number of lymph nodes harvested with D2+CME is significantly improved

D2+CME surgery could provide faster postoperative flatus

D2+CME is less likely to cause severe complications than conventional surgery

Surgeon Quality Control and Standardization of D2 Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Multicenter Observational Study (KLASS-02-QC)

OBJECTIVE

To qualify surgeons to participate in a randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open distal D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

No studies have sought to qualify surgeons for a randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter prospective observational study evaluating unedited videos of laparoscopic and open D2 gastrectomy performed by 27 surgeons. Surgeons performed 3 of each laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomies with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer. Five peers reviewed each unedited video using a video assessment form. Based on experts' review of videos, a separate review committee decided surgeons as "Qualified" or "Not-qualified."

RESULTS

Twelve surgeons (44.4%) were qualified on initial evaluation whereas the other 15 surgeons were not. Another 9 surgeons were finally qualified after re-evaluation. The median score for Qualified was significantly higher than Not-qualified (P < 0.001).Significant differences between Qualified and Not-qualified were noted both in operation type and in all evaluation area of surgical skill, perigastric, and extra-perigastric lymphadenectomy, although the inter-rater variability of the assessment score was low (kappa = 0.285). However, Not-qualified surgeons' scores improved upon re-evaluation of resubmitted videos.When compared laparoscopy with open surgery, median scores were similar between the 2 groups (P = 0.680). However, open gastrectomy scores for surgical skills were significantly higher than for laparoscopic surgery (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Our surgeon quality control study for gastrectomy represents a milestone in surgical standardization for surgical clinical trials. Our methods could also serve as a system for educating surgeons and assessing surgical proficiency.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for serosa-invasive gastric cancer: A single-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Whether laparoscopic gastrectomy is suitable for patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer remains controversial. We performed this study to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic gastrectomy compared with after open gastrectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 906 consecutive patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer from January 2004 to December 2014 in our center, who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. After propensity score matching, 334 patients were included in each group. Surgical conditions and short- and long-term results were compared.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with less estimated blood loss and longer operation time, while the number of harvested lymph nodes was not significantly different between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy. Patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy had an earlier time to first flatus, first diet, and first ambulation and were discharged earlier. Overall and pulmonary postoperative complication rates were lower in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group. With a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year overall survival was 39.3% in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group and 34.3% in the open gastrectomy group, and the 5-year disease-free survival was 36.4% in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group and 32.7% in the open gastrectomy group. Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with better 5-year overall survival in patients aged ≥60 years. The overall recurrence rates and patterns were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is an alternative surgical approach for patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer in terms of short-term outcomes and long-term survival, and it might be more advantageous for certain populations.

Trends in Oncology: an Updated Review of Minimally Invasive Surgery vs. Traditional Open Surgery

Objective: To review the recent trends in methodology for the most frequent oncological surgeries. More specifically, this paper will compare the minimally invasive methods to the conventional open method. It aims to find out whether minimally invasive surgeries are feasible treatments for certain types of cancers.

Methods: A review of retrospective studies searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library etc. was used to identify the studies published on this topic within a period of 6 years. Oncologic outcomes, postoperative complications/outcomes, and intraoperative outcomes were the main variables in the comparison to the surgical methods under review.

Conclusion: Despite the recent controversy with minimally invasive surgery being contraindicated for cervical cancer, it is still an acceptable method for other types of common cancers. However, there are limitations to the approach, and the surgeon should make a prudent selection between minimally invasive and open surgery depending on the type of tumor and patient characteristics. Further studies, especially with randomized control trials, must be conducted.

Are the elderly patient's changes in the health-related quality of life one year after gastrectomy for stomach cancer different from those in young patients?

Purpose

Gastrectomy for elderly patients can significantly deteriorate the health-related quality of life (HRQoL). There was no report comparing HRQoL of elderly patients with young patients after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. This study assessed the differences in the changes of HRQoL at one year after gastrectomy according to age.

Methods

From May 2014 to Feb 2016, we prospectively enrolled patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer. They completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and gastric questionnaires preoperatively and at postoperative 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months.

Results

We included 57 elderly patients (≥70 years old) and 74 younger patients. The elderly had similar demographic, surgical, and pathological characteristics with young patients except that elderly had more comorbidity, laparoscopic gastrectomies, and lesser postoperative chemotherapy. One month after gastrectomy, the score of global health status/quality of life, physical, role, and social functioning were significantly impaired in elderly patients. Among them, physical and role functioning were more impaired than those of young patients. The scores of physical functioning, role functioning, cognitive functioning, and social functioning were not fully recovered till 1 year after surgery. There was a significant age group difference in the changes in physical function over the 1-year follow-up.

Conclusion

Elderly patients' global health status/quality of life and social functioning significantly decreased at postoperative 1 month and recovered by 6 months after gastrectomy. There was a significant age-specific difference in physical functioning throughout the 1-year follow-up. Surgeons need to pay more attention to recovery of the elderly patients' HRQoL after gastrectomy.

Long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy for grossly early gastric cancer-mimicking advanced gastric cancer: Propensity score matching analysis

Laparoscopic gastrectomy became an option in the treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC) in clinical practice. However, whether laparoscopic surgery for grossly EGC-mimicking advanced gastric cancer (AGC) patients is oncologically safe long-term is still controversial.We retrospectively analyzed 472 patients with AGC who were diagnosed as clinical EGC. Patients received laparoscopic or open gastrectomy with standard lymph node (LN) dissection from January 2007 to February 2015. We used a 1:3 propensity score matching method for the analysis. The matching factors were age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and pathologic stage. After the matching process, we evaluated the 5-year overall survival and the cumulative incidence curve of recurrence.All of the analyzed patients were pathologically diagnosed with AGC after surgery (grossly EGC-mimicking AGC). The median (range) duration of follow-up was 58.0 (0-132) months. After propensity score matching, 31.5% of patients in the laparoscopy group had D1+ LN dissection and 99.2% of patients in the open group had D2 LN dissection. The 5-year overall survival rate between the laparoscopy (n = 92) and open groups (n = 244) were not significantly different (95.3% versus 91.4%, P = .224). There was no significant difference between the cumulative recurrence incidence curves of the matched groups (P = .319).Laparoscopic surgery for grossly EGC-mimicking AGC might be safe in terms of long-term survival outcome. After confirming grossly EGC-mimicking AGC in the final pathology report, no additional surgery might be required.

Current perspectives on the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted surgery for gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Robotic gastrectomy is performed worldwide as part of the treatment for gastric cancer and is associated with good clinical outcome. This review aims to describe the current issues, debates, and future directions associated with the use of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

AREA COVERED

Here, we review the current evidence surrounding the safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy, including our institutional experience. Current issues associated with robotic gastrectomy, including feasibility, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes, are described.

EXPERT OPINION

Sophisticated movements, articulating instruments, and the rapid introduction of fast-developing novel technology make robotic gastrectomy use more frequent. However, the need for well-designed prospective randomized trials is warranted.

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: The KLASS-02-RCT Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

It is unclear whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy. The noninferiority of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer compared with open surgery in terms of 3-year relapse-free survival rate was evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A phase III, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted for patients with histologically proven locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma suitable for distal subtotal gastrectomy. The primary end point was the 3-year relapse-free survival rate; the upper limit of the hazard ratio (HR) for noninferiority was 1.43 between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups.

RESULTS

From November 2011 to April 2015, 1,050 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopy (n = 524) or open surgery (n = 526). After exclusions, 492 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 482 underwent open surgery and were included in the analysis. The laparoscopy group, compared with the open surgery group, suffered fewer early complications (15.7% v 23.4%, respectively; P = .0027) and late complications (4.7% v 9.5%, respectively; P = .0038), particularly intestinal obstruction (2.0% v 4.4%, respectively; P = .0447). The 3-year relapse-free survival rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 76.0% to 85.0%) for the laparoscopy group and 81.3% (95% CI, 77.0% to 85.0%; log-rank P = .726) for the open group. Cox regression analysis after stratification by the surgeon revealed an HR of 1.035 (95% CI, 0.762 to 1.406; log-rank P = .827; P for noninferiority = .039). When stratified by pathologic stage, the HR was 1.020 (95% CI, 0.751 to 1.385; log-rank P = .900; P for noninferiority = .030).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was comparable to open surgery in terms of relapse-free survival for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy could be a potential standard treatment option for locally advanced gastric cancer.

Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma in the USA: Insights and Oncologic Outcomes in 220 Patients

BACKGROUND

While multiple Asian and a few Western retrospective series have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer, its reliability for thorough resection, especially for locoregional disease, has not yet been firmly established, and reported learning curves vary widely. To support wider implementation of robotic gastrectomy, we evaluated the learning curve for this approach, assessed its oncologic feasibility, and created a selection model predicting the likelihood of conversion to open surgery in a US patient population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data on all consecutive patients who underwent robotic gastrectomy at a high-volume institution between May 2012 and March 2019.

RESULTS

Of the 220 patients with gastric cancer selected to undergo curative-intent robotic gastrectomy, surgery was completed using robotics in 159 (72.3%). The median number of removed lymph nodes was 28, and ≥ 15 lymph nodes were removed in 94% of procedures. Surgical time decreased steadily over the first 60-80 cases. Complications were generally minor: 7% of patients experienced complications of grade 3 or higher, with an anastomotic leak rate of 2% and mortality rate 0.9%. Factors predicting conversion to open surgery included neoadjuvant chemotherapy, BMI ≥ 31 kg/m², and tumor size ≥ 6 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the safety and oncologic feasibility of robotic gastrectomy for selected patients with gastric cancer. Proficiency can be achieved by 20 cases and mastery by 60-80 cases. Ideal candidates for this approach are patients with few comorbidities, BMI < 31 kg/m², and tumors < 6 cm.

Visceral Fat Area (VFA) Superior to BMI for Predicting Postoperative Complications After Radical Gastrectomy: a Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Obesity may impact surgical outcomes of gastrectomy. Whether visceral fat area (VFA) is a better obesity parameter than body mass index (BMI) is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare the accuracy and effectiveness of VFA and BMI in predicting the short-term surgical outcomes of gastrectomy.

METHODS

Patients who were diagnosed with gastric cancer were measured for BMI and VFA preoperatively and then divided into a VFA-H (VFA-high) group and VFA-L (VFA-low) group, at the cutoff point of 100 cm², and a BMI-H (BMI-high) group and BMI-L (BMI-low) group, at the cutoff point of 25 kg/m². The short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the different groups.

RESULTS

In total, 276 patients were enrolled in this study; 55 (19.9%) patients were classified into the BMI-H group, and 122 (44.2%) patients were classified into the VFA-H group. There was a significant correlation between BMI and VFA (r = 0.652, p < 0.001). Compared with the VFA-L group, the VFA-H group had a higher incidence of postoperative complications (31.1% vs. 13.0%; p < 0.001), longer operation duration (270.0 (235.0-305.0) vs. 255.0 (223.8-295.0), p = 0.046), and more blood loss (100.0 (100.0-150.0) vs. 80.0 (80.0-100.0), p < 0.001), while the BMI-H group had more blood loss than the BMI-L group (100.0 (100.0-120.0) vs. 100.0(80.0-100.0), p = 0.006). Logistic regression showed that VFA was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications (odds ratio 2.813, 95% CI 1.523-5.194; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

For gastric cancer patients, VFA is superior to BMI in accurately and effectively illuminating the impact of obesity on short-term surgical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02800005.

Open vs. laparoscopic surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: Short-term and long-term survival outcomes

The aim of the present study was to compare the short-term and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy vs. open gastrectomy in treating locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) after neoadjuvant therapy. This study retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 270 patients with LAGC, who underwent laparoscopic (n=49) or conventional open (n=221) surgery following neoadjuvant therapy between January 2007 and December 2016 in China National Cancer Center. Postoperative parameters and survival outcomes including overall survival and disease-free survival were analyzed. Patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy (LP) had significantly shorter postoperative stay and a decreased number of metastatic lymph nodes harvested compared to those who underwent open surgery. The 75% disease-free survival (DFS) time in the laparoscopic surgery group (25.7 months) was higher compared with the open surgery group (15.6 months). However, no significant difference was observed in 5-year overall survival and DFS between the two groups. In conclusion, LG provides non-inferior short- and long-term survival outcomes compared with open surgery, suggesting a laparoscopic approach may be justified for patients with LAGC receiving neoadjuvant therapy. More randomized controlled trials are required to investigate the positive effects of LG for LAGC following neoadjuvant therapy.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in patients with advanced gastric cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) to determine its safety and feasibility.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 51 patients who underwent gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer [cT3-4/N1-3 or macroscopic type 3 (> 80 mm) or type 4] following NAC between November 2009 and January 2018. After excluding two patients who underwent palliative surgery due to peritoneal dissemination, 49 patients were ultimately selected for this cohort study. The patients were then divided into the LG group and open gastrectomy (OG) group, after which the clinicopathological characteristics as well as short- and long-term outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

Compared with the OG group, the LG group demonstrated a significantly lower amount of intraoperative blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. The overall complication rates were 10% (2 of 20 patients) and 24% (7 of 29 patients) in the LG and OG groups (P = 0.277), respectively. No significant differences in 5-year disease-free (LG 44.4% vs. OG 53.3%; P = 0.382) or overall survival rates (LG 46.9% vs. OG 54.0%; P = 0.422) were observed between the groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that the surgical procedure (LG vs. OG) was not an independent risk factor for disease-free (P = 0.645) or overall survival (P = 0.489).

CONCLUSIONS

LG may be a potential therapeutic option for patients with gastric cancer following NAC considering its high success rates and acceptable short- and long-term outcomes.

Minimally invasive gastrectomy for cancer and anastomotic options

In this review article, we explore patient selection criteria for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) gastrectomy, present evidence on the risks and benefits of minimally invasive techniques, describe operative techniques focusing specifically on reconstruction options, and discuss the learning curve associated with these operations.

Short-term Outcomes of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy With D2 Lymphadenectomy to Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer (KLASS-02-RCT)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of KLASS-02-RCT, a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 lymphadenectomy with open distal gastrectomy (ODG).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Although several benefits of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery have been reported, strong evidence is still limited, especially in locally advanced gastric cancer which requires extensive lymph node dissection.

METHODS

Enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4a and N0-1 gastric adenocarcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, 90-day mortality, postoperative pain, and recovery were compared between LDG and ODG groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1050 patients were randomly assigned to LDG (n = 526) or ODG group (n = 524) between November 2011 and April 2015. After excluding patients who received bypass or no surgery, 1011 patients were analyzed as actual treatment group. Mean number of totally retrieved lymph nodes was similar in both groups (LDG = 46.6 vs ODG = 47.4, P = 0.451). Early morbidity rate was significantly lower after LDG (16.6%) than after ODG (24.1%; P = 0.003). Postoperative analgesics use and patients' reported pain score were significantly lower after LDG. First day of flatus was earlier after LDG (3.5 vs 3.7 d, P = 0.025) and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in LDG group (8.1 vs 9.3 d, P = 0.005). Ninety days' mortality rate was similar in both groups (LDG = 0.4% vs ODG = 0.6%, P = 0.682).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer shows benefits in terms of lower complication rate, faster recovery, and less pain compared with open surgery.

Effect of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy vs Open Distal Gastrectomy on Long-term Survival Among Patients With Stage I Gastric Cancer: The KLASS-01 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is gaining popularity over open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer because of better early postoperative outcomes. However, to our knowledge, no studies have proved whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy.

Objective

To examine whether the long-term survival among patients with stage I gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is noninferior to that among patients undergoing open distal gastrectomy.

Design

The Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group, which includes 15 surgeons from 13 institutes, conducted a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority, prospective randomized clinical trial (KLASS-01) of patients with histologically proven, preoperative clinical stage I gastric adenocarcinoma from January 5, 2006, to August 23, 2010. Survival and recurrence status of the patients was determined in December 2016.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (n = 705) or open distal gastrectomy (n = 711). Of these patients, 85 received a surgical approach opposite the one to which they were randomized (63 randomized to the open surgery group and 22 to the laparoscopic group).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Difference in 5-year overall survival between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups. The noninferiority margin was prespecified as -5% (corresponding hazard ratio of 1.54), with an assumed survival of 90% after 5 years in the open surgery group.

Results

Among the 1416 patients (mean [SD] age, 57.3 [11.1] years; 940 [66.4%] male) included in the study, the 5-year overall survival rates were 94.2% in the laparoscopic group and 93.3% in the open surgery group (log-rank P = .64). Intention-to-treat analysis confirmed the noninferiority of the laparoscopic approach compared with the open approach (difference, 0.9 percentage points; 1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.6 to infinity). The 5-year cancer-specific survival rates were similar between the 2 groups (97.1% in the laparoscopic group and 97.2% in the open surgery group, log-rank P = .91; difference, -0.03 percentage points; 1-sided 97.5% CI, -1.8 to infinity). Per-protocol analysis results were consistent with the intention-to-treat results for overall and cancer-specific survival rates.

Conclusions and Relevance

The KLASS-01 trial revealed similar overall and cancer-specific survival rates between patients receiving laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is an oncologically safe alternative to open surgery for stage I gastric cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00452751.

Early results in laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery

Amaç: Bu çalışmada bir üniversite kliniğinde gerçekleştirilen laparoskopik gastrektomilerin erken dönem sonuçlarının paylaşılması amaçlanmıştır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Eylül 2015- Eylül 2018 tarihleri arasında yapılan laparoskopik gastrektomiler total ve distal olmak üzere iki gruba ayrılmış,  teknik, patolojik sonuç ve erken postoperatif komplikasyonlar açısından incelenmiştir.Bulgular: Çalışmaya 11’i erkek, 7’si kadın olmak üzere 18 hasta dahil edilmiştir. Yaş ortalaması 57,4 olup, ortalama BMI 26,3 idi. 13 hastada cerrahi ilk planda tutulmuş sadece beş hastaya neoadjuvan tedavi protokolü uygulanmıştır. Total gastrektomi 14 hastada, distal gastrektomi 4 hastada tercih edilen ameliyat yöntemidir. Tüm hastalara tümör yerleşimine göre standart D2 lenf disseksiyonu uygulandı ve Total gastrektomi grubunda Ortalama 33,2 distal gastrektomi grubunda 32 lenf nodu disseke edildi. Ortalama oral başlama süresi ve Total gastrektomi grubunda 6,4 gün distal gastrektomi grubunda 2,5 gün idi. Duodenal güdük kaçağı 4 hastada, özefagojejunostomi kaçağı 2 hastada tespit edilirken 1 hastada da dren yerinde kanama görüldü.Sonuç: Laparoskopik gastrektomi ve lenfatik disseksiyonun yeterliliğini gösteren birçok çalışma bulunmaktadır. Ancak öğrenim süreci uzun, teknik zorlukları fazla olan bu ameliyatlarda deneyim ve tecrübe arttıkça ameliyat sürenin kısalacağını ve komplikasyon oranının azalacağını düşünmekteyiz.

15-year experience of laparoscopic gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer: analysis on short-term and long-term oncologic outcome

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is now a widely accepted treatment option for gastric cancer. However, there is insufficient evidence for LG for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Many retrospective studies have shown that LG for AGC is safe and feasible, but very few studies have shown the actual outcome in general practice. The aim of this study is to analyze our last 15 years of experience in LG for AGC.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review from May 2003 to May 2017 in Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. A total of 1592 patients who had LG for AGC were enrolled of which 109 patients with open conversion were excluded. We evaluated the short-term and long-term oncologic outcomes of LG for AGC.

RESULTS

A total of 1483 patients were analyzed. There were 432 cases of total gastrectomy, 982 cases of distal gastrectomy, and 69 cases of proximal gastrectomy. The total complication rate was 9.1% (135/1483), which included wound-related complications (0.7%), postoperative bleeding (0.5%), anastomosis or stump leakage (2.2%), intestinal obstruction (0.9%), pancreatic fistula (0.1%), intra-abdominal abscess (1.6%), and lung morbidity (3.0%). The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade 3 and above complications was 4.9%. Age was the only significant risk factor in multivariate analysis (OR 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.04, P = 0.01). 5-year overall survival stratified by stage was as follows: stage IB 88.9%, stage IIA 88.7%, stage IIB 84.2%, stage IIIA 71.7%, stage IIIB 56.8%, stage IIIC 45.4%, and stage IV 25%. Total recurrence rate was 14.4%, which included local recurrence (1.1%) and distant metastases (13.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

During our 15 years of experience, we have successfully performed 1483 cases of AGC with laparoscopy. Our results showed short-term and long-term oncologic outcomes that were comparable with other studies. LG is safe and feasible in general practice for advanced gastric cancer when performed by experienced surgeons.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Cancer: A Western Center Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for cancer has been introduced in institutions worldwide in an effort to minimize surgical trauma, while aiming to provide comparable oncological outcomes to conventional open gastrectomy (OG). The aim of this study was to present our results during the period of implementation of the laparoscopic technique.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 2012, LG for the treatment of gastric cancer was introduced at our institution. The results presented are based on a retrospective analysis of data from a cohort of all patients treated with curative intent over the period 2010-2018.

RESULTS

During the study period, 206 patients underwent surgery for gastric cancer: 129 patients (62.6%) had an OG and 77 patients (37.4%) an LG. The conversion rate due to technical reasons was 2.6%. LG was associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss [mean (mL), OG 544 versus LG 176] and shorter hospital stay than OG [mean (d), OG 12 versus LG 8], fewer severe complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIb) [OG 29 (22.5%) versus LG 9 (11.7%), P = 0.081], significantly lower anastomotic leak rate [OG 18 (14.0%) versus LG 1 (1.3%)] and no 90-day mortality. The percentage of R0 resections was similar between the two groups (OG 82.2% versus LG 85.7%, P = 0.507), while the mean number of resected lymph nodes was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group [OG 34 versus LG 39, P = 0.030].

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that similar and, in some aspects, better short-term outcomes can be achieved with LG with maintained oncological quality.

Advancements and challenges in treating advanced gastric cancer in the West

Gastric cancer is a leading cause of cancer incidence and death worldwide. Patients with advanced gastric cancer benefit from a multi-modality treatment regimen. Sound oncologic resection with negative margins and complete lymphadenectomy plays a crucial role in long-term survival for patients with resectable disease. The utilization of minimally invasive techniques for gastric cancer has been slowly increasing and is proving to be both technically and oncologically safe. Perioperative chemotherapy is the current standard of care for advanced gastric cancer. A variety of chemotherapy regimens have been used with the combination of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin being the current recommendation given its superior ability to induce a complete pathologic response and prolong survival. The use of radiation has been more controversial with its optimal place in the treatment sequence being unclear. There are current ongoing studies assessing the impact of radiation as an adjunct or in place of chemotherapy. Targeted treatments (e.g., trastuzumab for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive tumors and pembrolizumab for programmed death-ligand 1 positive tumors) are showing promise and are part of a continued emphasis on individualized care. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy may also play a role in preventing peritoneal recurrences for patients with high risk lesions. The treatment of patients with advanced gastric cancer in the West continues to advance and improve with a better understanding of optimal treatment sequences and the utilization of personalized treatment regimens.

Gastric cancer surgery: historical background and perspective in Western countries versus Japan

Gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy plays a decisive role in the management of resectable gastric cancer in Japan. Before recent advances in chemotherapy, Japanese surgeons considered that extensive surgery involving extended lymphadenectomy with combined resection of neighboring organ(s) was required to eliminate any possible lymphatic cancer spread and improve patient survival. This approach differs radically from that in Western countries, which aim to improve survival outcomes by multidisciplinary approaches including perioperative chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy with limited lymph node dissection. However, a randomized controlled trial conducted in Japan found that more extensive lymphadenectomy including the para-aortic lymph nodes provided no survival benefit over D2 lymphadenectomy. Splenic hilum dissection with splenectomy also failed to show superiority over the procedure without splenectomy in patients with proximal gastric cancer, except in cases with tumor invasion of the greater curvature. Furthermore, bursectomy recently demonstrated similar outcomes to omentectomy alone. Although "D2 lymphadenectomy" as carried out in Japan contributes to low local recurrence rates and good survival outcomes, the results of randomized controlled trials have led to a decreased extent of surgical resection, with no apparent adverse effects on survival outcome. Notably, gastrectomy with D2 dissection has tended to become acceptable for advanced gastric cancer in Western countries, based on the latest results of the Dutch D1D2 trial. Differences in surgical practices between the West and Japan have thus lessened and procedures are becoming more standardized. Japanese D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer is evolving toward more minimally invasive approaches, while consistently striving to achieve the optimal surgical extent, thereby promoting consensus with Western counterparts.

Long-Term Outcomes in Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Large Comprehensive Study Proposing Novel Hypotheses

BACKGROUND

The long-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer (GC) remain obscure, especially for advanced cancer and disease affecting the upper stomach and in older patients. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the long-term efficacy of LG for GC using a large prospective database.

METHODS

Totally, 1877 consecutive patients (1186 receiving LG and 691 OG) operated in 2004-2016 were analyzed, with a median follow-up of 63 months. Association of LG versus OG with disease-specific survival (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) overall and in various subgroups were investigated using multivariable Cox regression. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Before PSM, overall, there was no significant association of LG versus OG with survival after multivariable adjustment; however, in subgroup analyses, LG was associated with superior DSS in patients aged ≥ 70 years and those with upper GC. No significant associations regarding DFS were observed overall or in stratifications. PSM analyses revealed that LG was associated with better DSS also in patients aged ≥ 70 years (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.15-0.72) and in those with upper GC (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.29-0.91), and with better DFS in those with upper GC (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.37-0.99). Multivariable analysis showed that age, hepatitis B, performance status, tumor histology, stage, and vascular invasion were significantly associated with post-LG survival. LG-specific nomograms were then constructed with concordance indexes of 0.814 (DSS) and 0.809 (DFS) and excellent calibration.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large institutional analysis, while LG for GC was associated with DSS and DFS similar to those for OG overall, non-inferior LG-associated survival especially DSS was observed in some subgroups rarely investigated in prospective or randomized settings. There could still be biases even after PSM due to confounders not accounted for in this observational study. However, these findings offer novel hypotheses for further validation.

Clockwise, Modularized Lymphadenectomy in Laparoscopic Gastric Cancer Surgery: a New Laparoscopic Surgery Model

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study is to present the clockwise, modularized lymphadenectomy model of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients, which is based on our clinical practice experience in laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery.

METHODS

From Jan 2015 to July 2017, 116 patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy were retrospectively collected and analyzed. According to the different resection models, patients were divided into two groups: traditional laparoscopic lymphadenectomy group (63 patients) and clockwise, modularized lymphadenectomy group (53 patients). Operation-related parameters were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The clockwise, modularized lymphadenectomy group had less dissection time (119.8 ± 19.1 min vs. 135.3 ± 23.8 min, p < 0.001) and less intraoperative blood loss (81.7 ± 42.9 ml vs. 91.4 ± 28.7 ml, p = 0.016) compared with the traditional laparoscopic lymphadenectomy group. Meanwhile, the clockwise, modularized lymphadenectomy group had more numbers of examined lymph nodes (40.5 ± 14.3 vs. 33.9 ± 11.0, p = 0.007) than the traditional laparoscopic lymphadenectomy group. Besides, there was no statistically significant difference in the postoperative complication rates between the two groups. The clockwise, modularized lymphadenectomy group had shorter postoperative hospital stay than the traditional laparoscopic lymphadenectomy group (8.7 ± 3.2 days vs. 10.4 ± 3.9 days, respectively, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Through the adoption of the fixed sequence of lymphadenectomy, requirements and standard of lymphadenectomy of each lymph node station, and specific surgical skills for intraoperative exposure by the clockwise and modularized lymphadenectomy model, we can optimize and facilitate the laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery.

Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Mid-Term Results and Current Evidence

INTRODUCTION

Although the first laparoscopic gastrectomy was performed in 1991, there was a long delay until it was incorporated into the regular practice of western surgeons. In Brazil, there are only few case series reported and data on its safety and efficacy along with mid- and long-term results are desired.

OBJECTIVE

Present the mid-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy with curative intent in the treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma and review the current evidence on the therapy of this neoplasia with the laparoscopic access.

METHODS

Patients who underwent D2 laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 59.2 years and the mean body mass index was 24.2 kg/m². Subtotal gastrectomy was performed in 73.9%. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 36.7, increased lymph node count and shorter operative time were observed in the last 34 cases. Median hospital stay was 8 days. Postoperative complications occurred in 22 (31.9%) cases. Surgical mortality was 4.3%.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be performed safely with excellent short- and mid-term results. As experience increases, surgical duration is reduced and lymph node count rises.

Long-term Survival Outcomes of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: Five-year Results of a Phase II Prospective Clinical Trial

Purpose

Despite an increased acceptance of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in early gastric cancer (EGC), there is insufficient evidence for its oncological safety in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This is a prospective phase II clinical trial to evaluate the feasibility of LG with D2 lymph node dissection (LND) in AGC.

Materials and Methods

The primary endpoint was set as 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The eligibility criteria were as follows: 20-80 years of age, cT2N0-cT4aN3, American Society of Anesthesiologists score of 3 or less, and no other malignancy. Patients were enrolled in this single-arm study between November 2008 and May 2012. Exclusion criteria included cT4b or M1, or having final pathologic results as EGC. All patients underwent D2 lymphadenectomy. Three-year DFS rates were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

A total of 157 patients were enrolled. The overall local complication rate was 10.2%. Conversion to open surgery occurred in 11 patients (7.0%). The mean follow-up period was 55.0±20.4 months (1–81 months). The cumulative 3-year DFS rates were 76.3% for all stages, and 100%, 89.3%, 100%, 88.0%, 71.4%, and 35.3% for stage IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB, and IIIC, respectively. Recurrence was observed in 37 patients (23.6%), including hematogenous (n=6), peritoneal (n=13), locoregional (n=1), distant node (n=8), and mixed recurrence (n=9).

Conclusions

In addition to being technically feasible for treatment of AGC in terms of morbidity, LG with D2 LND for locally advanced gastric cancer showed acceptable 3-year DFS outcomes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01441336

TOTAL OMENTECTOMY IN GASTRIC CANCER SURGERY: IS IT ALWAYS NECESSARY?

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, total omentectomy is performed along with gastric resection and extended lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer (GC) surgery. However, solid evidences regarding its oncologic benefit is still scarce.

AIM

To evaluate the incidence of metastatic omental lymph nodes (LN) in patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for GC, as well as its risk factors and patients' outcomes.

METHODS

All consecutive patients submitted to D2/modified D2 gastrectomy due to gastric adenocarcinoma from March 2009 to April 2016 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective collected database.

RESULTS

Of 284 patients included, five (1.8%) patients had metastatic omental LN (one: pT3N3bM0; two: pT4aN3bM0; one: pT4aN2M0 and one pT4bN3bM0). Four of them deceased and one was under palliative chemotherapy due relapse. LN metastases in the greater omentum significantly correlated with tumor's size (p=0.018), N stage (p<0.001), clinical stage (p=0.022), venous invasion growth (p=0.003), recurrence (p=0.006), site of recurrence (peritoneum: p=0.008; liver: p=0.023; ovary: p=0.035) and death (p=0.008).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of metastatic omental LN of patients undergoing radical gastrectomy due to GC is extremely low. Total omentectomy may be avoided in tumors smaller than 5.25 cm and T1/T2 tumors. However, the presence of lymph node metastases in the greater omentum is associated with recurrence in the peritoneum, liver, ovary and death.

Current status of laparoscopic total gastrectomy

In this article, the current state of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) was reviewed, focusing on lymph node dissection and reconstruction. Lymph node dissection in LTG is technically similar to that in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer; however, LTG for advanced gastric cancer requires extended lymph node dissections including splenic hilar lymph nodes. Although a recent randomized controlled trial clearly indicated no survival benefit in prophylactic splenectomy for lymph node dissection at the splenic hilum, some patients may receive prognostic benefit from adequate splenic hilar lymph node dissection. Considering reconstruction, there are two major esophagojejunostomy (EJS) techniques, using a circular stapler (CS) or using a linear stapler (LS). A few studies have shown that the LS method has fewer complications; however, almost all studies have reported that morbidity (such as anastomotic leakage and stricture) is not significantly different for the two methods. As for CS, we grouped various studies addressing complications in LTG into categories according to the insertion procedure of the anvil and the insertion site in the abdominal wall for the CS. We compared the rate of complications, particularly for leakage and stricture. The rate of anastomotic leakage and stricture was the lowest when inserting the CS from the upper left abdomen and was significantly the highest when inserting the CS from the midline umbilical. Scrupulous attention to EJS techniques is required by surgeons with a clear understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of each anastomotic device and approach.

Introducing laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer in general practice: a retrospective cohort study based on a nationwide registry database in Japan

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is considered a technically demanding procedure with safety issues, it has been performed in several hospitals in Japan. Data from a nationwide web-based data entry system for surgical procedures (NCD) that started enrollment in 2011 are now available for analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from 32,144 patients who underwent total gastrectomy and were registered in the NCD database between January 2012 and December 2013. Mortality and morbidities were compared between patients who received LTG and those who underwent open total gastrectomy (OTG) in the propensity score-matched Stage I cohort and Stage II-IV cohort.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in mortality rate between LTG and OTG in both cohorts. Operating time was significantly longer in LTG while the blood loss was smaller. In the Stage I cohort, LTG, performed in 33.6% of the patients, was associated with significantly shorter hospital stay but significantly higher incidence of readmission, reoperation, and anastomotic leakage (5.4% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.01). In the Stage II-IV cohort, LTG was performed in only 8.8% of the patients and was associated with significantly higher incidence of leakage (5.7% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.02) although the hospital stay was shorter (15 days vs. 17 days, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

LTG was more discreetly introduced than distal gastrectomy, but remained a technically demanding procedure as of 2013. This procedure should be performed only among the well-trained and informed laparoscopic team.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic and open approach in total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy - systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Gastric cancer is a worldwide health concern, being one of the five most common malignant neoplasms worldwide. Currently, an open approach is the gold standard for surgical treatment. Incorporation of laparoscopy as a method of choice for gastric resections remains controversial because of limited evidence of eligibility. To date, there are no high-quality randomized quality trials on totally laparoscopic D2 total gastrectomies.

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess currently available literature and provide meta-analysis on acquired data regarding short-term outcomes with a subgroup analysis of western and eastern studies.

Materials and methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes of interest were morbidity and short-term complications.

Results

An initial reference search yielded 3,073 articles. Finally, we chose eight studies covering 1,582 patients that we included in the quantitative analysis. We did not find statistical differences regarding operative time, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, cardiac complications, pulmonary complications, or number of harvested lymph nodes. We found significant differences regarding length of hospital stay and morbidity in the Asian population.

Conclusion

This systematic review indicates that a laparoscopic approach for D2 total gastrectomy does not increase morbidity. Furthermore, it allows for a shorter hospital stay. However, more randomized controlled trials are required to fully assess this approach because available data are of limited quality.

Gastric Cancer Etiology and Management in Asia and the West

Regional variation in treatment paradigms for gastric adenocarcinoma has attracted a great deal of interest. Between Asia and the West, major differences have been identified in tumor biology, implementation of screening programs, extent of surgical lymphadenectomy, and routine use of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant treatment strategies. Minimally invasive techniques, including both laparoscopic and robotic platforms, have been studied in both regions, with attention to safety, feasibility, and long-term oncologic outcomes. The purpose of this review is to discuss advances in the understanding of the etiology and underlying biology of gastric cancer, as well as the current state of management, focusing on the differences between Asia and the West.

Study on safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for clinical stage I gastric cancer: the protocol of the CLASS02-01 multicenter randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for the treatment of gastric cancer remains lack of clinical evidence. The Chinese Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (CLASS) Group recently launched a multicenter randomized clinical trial (CLASS02-01) to compare the safety of LTG for clinical stage I gastric cancer with the conventional open total gastrectomy (OTG).

METHODS

This CLASS02-01 trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open, and non-inferiority trial. Two hundred patients who met the inclusion criteria and did not accord with the exclusion criteria will be randomly divided into LTG group (n = 100) and OTG group (n = 100). The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the early operative morbidity and mortality of LTG compared with OTG for clinical stage I gastric adenocarcinoma. The second purpose is to evaluate the recovery course and compare the postoperative hospital stay of the patients enrolled in this study.

DISCUSSION

This CLASS02-01 trial is the first prospective randomized two-arm controlled study to determine the safety of LTG compared with OTG. Through this trial, we hope to show that experienced surgeons can safely perform LTG with lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03007550 . December 30, 2016.

Comparison of Intracorporeal and Extracorporeal Esophagojejunostomy after Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Based on Short-Term Outcomes

Background:

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is increasingly performed in patients with gastric cancer. However, the usage of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (IEJ) following LTG is limited, as the safety and efficacy remain unclear. The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of IEJ following LTG.

Methods:

Studies published from January 1994 to January 2017 comparing the outcomes of IEJ and extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EEJ) following LTG were reviewed and collected from the PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI). Operative results, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications were compared and analyzed. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Review Manager 5.3.

Results:

Seven nonrandomized studies with 785 patients were included. Compared with EEJ, IEJ has less blood loss (WMD: −13.52 ml; 95% CI: −24.82–−2.22; P = 0.02), earlier time to first oral intake (WMD: −0.49 day; 95% CI: −0.83–−0.14; P < 0.01), and shorter length of hospitalization (WMD: −0.62 day; 95% CI: −1.08–−0.16; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between IEJ and EEJ regarding the operation time, anastomotic time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, time to first flatus, anastomosis leakage rate, anastomosis stenosis rate, and proximal resections (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions:

Compared with EEJ, IEJ has better cosmesis, milder surgical trauma, and a faster postoperative recovery. IEJ can be performed as safely as EEJ. IEJ should be encouraged to surgeons with sufficient expertise.

Hot issues in minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery has become an indispensable part of gastric cancer treatment after more than 20 years of rapid development. The change of operation indications, the innovation of minimally invasive devices and surgical technique, and the idea of innovation are hot issues in minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer. In this paper, we will discuss these hot issues in detail.