Randomized comparison of surgical stress and the nutritional status between laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Enteral Nutrition in Operated-On Gastric Cancer Patients: An Update

It is well established that the preoperative nutritional status of gastric cancer (GC) patients significantly affects the prognosis of the operated patients, their overall survival, as well as the disease-specific survival. Existing data support that preoperative assessment of nutritional status and early correction of nutritional deficiencies exert a favorable effect on early postoperative outcomes. A variety of relevant indices are used to assess the nutritional status of GC patients who are candidates for surgery. The guidelines of almost all international organizations recommend the use of oral enteral nutrition (EN). Oncologically acceptable types of gastrectomy and methods of patient rehabilitation should take into account the expected postoperative nutritional status. The majority of data support that perioperative EN reduces complications and hospital stay, but not mortality. Oral EN in the postoperative period, albeit in small amounts, helps to reduce the weight loss that is a consequence of gastrectomy. Iron deficiency with or without anemia and low serum levels of vitamin B12 are common metabolic sequelae after gastrectomy and should be restored. EN also significantly helps patients undergoing neoadjuvant or adjuvant antineoplastic therapy. The occurrence of the so-called "postgastrectomy syndromes" requires dietary modifications and drug support. This review attempts to highlight the benefits of EN in GC patients undergoing gastrectomy and to emphasize the type of necessary nutritional management, based on current literature data.

Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Optimal surgical management for gastric cancer remains controversial. We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes after open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG), and robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken. An NMA was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-NMA guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed using R and Shiny.

RESULTS

Twenty-two RCTs including 6890 patients were included. Overall, 49.6% of patients underwent LAG (3420/6890), 46.6% underwent OG (3212/6890), and 3.7% underwent RG (258/6890). At NMA, there was a no significant difference in recurrence rates following LAG (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.49) compared with OG. Similarly, overall survival (OS) outcomes were identical following OG and LAG (OS: OG, 87.0% [1652/1898] vs. LAG: OG, 87.0% [1650/1896]), with no differences in OS in meta-analysis (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.77-1.52). Importantly, patients undergoing LAG experienced reduced intraoperative blood loss, surgical incisions, distance from proximal margins, postoperative hospital stays, and morbidity post-resection.

CONCLUSIONS

LAG was associated with non-inferior oncological and surgical outcomes compared with OG. Surgical outcomes following LAG and RG superseded OG, with similar outcomes observed for both LAG and RG. Given these findings, minimally invasive approaches should be considered for the resection of local gastric cancer, once surgeon and institutional expertise allows.

Impact of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications on survival outcomes in patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative intra-abdominal infection is known to adversely affect survival outcomes in patients with gastric cancer; however, previous reports have investigated this complication only in open surgery. This adverse effect is expected to be weakened by less invasive surgery, such as a laparoscopic approach, by way of maintaining immune function.

METHODS

This study included 1223 patients with gastric cancer who underwent open (n = 439) or laparoscopic (n = 784) curative surgery between 2010 and 2015. For each approach, patients were divided into two groups based on presence or absence of postoperative intra-abdominal infection of Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher (C-group and NC-group, respectively). Survival outcomes were compared in propensity-matched cohorts to evaluate the impact of the complication.

RESULTS

The incidences of Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade II postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications were 9.7% (43/439) in open surgery and 9.8% (70/714) in laparoscopic surgery. After propensity score matching, 86 patients in open surgery and 138 in laparoscopic surgery were extracted for analysis. The 5-year overall survival rate in the open C-group (n = 43) was worse than that in the open NC-group (n = 43) but with no significant difference (70.9% vs. 82.8%, log-rank P = 0.18). The 5-year overall survival rates were equivalent between the laparoscopic C-group (n = 69) and the laparoscopic NC-group (n = 69) (90.5% vs. 90.4%, log-rank P = 0.99).

CONCLUSION

In general, postoperative intra-abdominal infection adversely affects survival outcomes; however, its impact may be weakened by less invasive surgery. Further evaluation using larger datasets is necessary before reaching definitive conclusions.

Early Red Flags Associated with Delayed Discharge in Patients Undergoing Gastrectomy: Analysis of Perioperative Variables and ERAS Protocol Items

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) perioperative pathways are safe and effective for patients undergoing gastrectomy. However, adherence to these protocols varies and is generally underreported. This retrospective study aimed to assess whether perioperative variables or deviation from ERAS items is associated with delayed discharge after gastrectomy.

METHODS

All patients undergoing gastrectomy at our institution were managed with a standardised perioperative pathway according to ERAS principles. The target length of stay was set as the ninth post-operative day (POD). All significant variables were derived from a bivariate analysis and were entered into a logistic regression to confirm their statistical value.

RESULTS

The study included 180 patients. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that incomplete immunonutrition, failure to extubate the patient at the end of surgery, intraoperative crystalloids >2150 ml and blood transfusion >268 ml, surgery duration >195 min, and failure to mobilise patients within 24 h from surgery were associated with delayed discharge. The logistic regression model was statistically significant (p < 0.001) and correctly classified 73.6% of cases. Sensitivity and specificity were 74.1% and 73.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results seem clinically significant and consistent with those of previous studies. The reported perioperative variables showed a strong relationship with the length of hospital stay.

Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Minimally Invasive Surgical Outcomes in Advanced Gastric Cancer: An International Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

No international consensus on the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) exists. In the absence of well-designed, comparative studies between neoadjuvant versus adjuvant strategies, concerns about increased risk of postoperative complications remain barriers to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for AGC. We evaluated surgical outcomes of AGC patients who received minimally invasive radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy after NAC.

METHODS

We collected data from two high-volume gastric cancer programs in the United States and China between January 2015 and December 2019 with the last follow-up in February 2020. AGC patients undergoing minimally invasive radical surgery were included. After propensity score-matching, surgical outcomes were analyzed. Risk-factor of complications was analyzed in the whole cohort.

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity score-matching, 97 patients were included in each cohort. NAC + surgery cohort was younger (58.2 ± 10.3 vs. 61.3 ± 9.6, P = 0.036) with lower preoperative WBC count (5.7 ± 2.8 vs. 6.9 ± 2.1 × 10⁹/ml) than the surgery upfront cohort. NAC was not a risk-factor for postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR], 0.859; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-1.60; P = 0.633). Overall risk-factors of postoperative complications included age ≥ 60 years (OR, 21.338; 95% CI, 5.00-91.05; P < 0.001), tumor size ≥ 5 cm (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.83; P < 0.001), operation time ≥ 240 min (OR, 5.53; 95% CI, 1.26-24.26; P = 0.012), and ASA classification ≥ II (OR, 13.14; 95% CI, 4.12-24.73; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC before minimally invasive radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy does not increase postoperative complications, and these findings support broader application of NAC and MIS for AGC. Additional studies are required to determine the effect of NAC on long-term survival.

Nutrition update in gastric cancer surgery

Patients with gastric cancer are often malnourished during tumor progression. Malnutrition is a risk factor for postoperative complications and a poor prognosis. Early evaluation and management of nutrition can improve these outcomes. Various combined indices in which albumin is the primary component are used to evaluate the nutritional status, including the Prognostic Nutritional Index, Glasgow Prognostic Score, and Controlling Nutritional Status score. Both the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines recommend immediate and early oral/enteral nutrition. However, few reports have described the additional effects of preoperative immunonutrition on clinical outcomes of gastric cancer surgery. Gastrectomy types and reconstruction methods that consider the postoperative nutritional status have been used when oncologically acceptable. Total gastrectomy has recently tended to be avoided because of its negative impact on nutritional status. New findings obtained from the emergence of continuous glucose measurement, such as glucose fluctuation and nocturnal hypoglycemia, may affect nutritional management after gastrectomy. Some prospective clinical studies on perioperative nutritional intervention have set postoperative body weight loss as a primary endpoint. It seems important to continue oral nutritional supplement, even in small doses, to reduce body weight loss after gastrectomy. Evidence generated by prospective, well-developed randomized controlled studies must be disseminated so that nutritional therapy is widely recognized as an important multimodal therapy in patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery.

Serum Inflammatory Cytokines Comparison in Gastric Cancer Therapy

To compare serum inflammatory cytokines between laparoscopic-assisted and open radical gastrectomy in the perioperative period, 80 cases of advanced gastric cancer were chosen for the study. They were divided into laparoscopy group (40 cases) and abdominal open surgery group (40 cases), performed laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrostomy and conventional open radical gastrectomy, respectively. Serum Heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1), TNF-α, IL-6 and CRP were measured by ELISA on preoperative day 1, post-operative day 1 and post-operative day3. Serum HO-1, TNF-α, IL-6 and CRP had no significant difference between the laparoscopy group and the open group on pre-operative day 1. Serum HO-1, IL-6 and CRP of the laparoscopy group were significantly lower than that of the open group on post-operative day 1 and day 3 except for Serum TNF-α which had no significant difference. Laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy was minimally invasive compared with conventional open radical gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer patients.

A Comparison of the Body Composition Changes Between Laparoscopy-assisted and Open Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) for gastric cancer may prevent the loss of body weight or lean body mass after surgery due to its reduced surgical stress compared with open total gastrectomy (OTG).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 303 patients were examined in this study. All patients received the same perioperative care via fast-track surgery. The body weight and composition were evaluated using a bioelectrical impedance analyzer within 1 week before and at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eight patients received OTG, and 95 received LATG. Although the clinical T factor and N factor were significantly different between these two groups, other clinical factors were similar. The respective body weight loss (1 week/1 month/3 months) was -4.7%/-8.0%/-11.9% in the OTG group and -4.7%/-8.2%/-11.6% in the LATG group, that were not significantly different between the two groups at any time point of measurement (p=0.698/0.528/0.534, respectively). The respective lean body mass loss (1 week/1 month/3 months) was -4.2%/-6.4%/-7.4% in the OTG group and -4.0%/-5.8%/-6.2% in the LATG group, that were not significantly different between the groups (p=0.503/0.588/0.946, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The body composition changes were similar between the OTG and LATG groups using the same perioperative care of fast-track surgery. Adopting a laparoscopic approach would not help in reducing loss of body weight or lean body mass after gastric cancer surgery.

Reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The development of clinical guidelines for the surgical management of gastric cancer should be based on robust evidence from well-designed trials. Being able to reliably compare and combine the outcomes of these trials is a key factor in this process.

OBJECTIVES

To examine variation in outcome reporting by surgical trials for gastric cancer and to identify outcomes for prioritisation in an international consensus study to develop a core outcome set in this field.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic literature searches (Evidence Based Medicine, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) and a review of study protocols of randomised controlled trials, published between 1996 and 2016.

INTERVENTION

Therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer. Outcomes were listed verbatim, categorised into groups (outcome themes) and examined for definitions and measurement instruments.

RESULTS

Of 1919 abstracts screened, 32 trials (9073 participants) were identified. A total of 749 outcomes were reported of which 96 (13%) were accompanied by an attempted definition. No single outcome was reported by all trials. 'Adverse events' was the most frequently reported 'outcome theme' in which 240 unique terms were described. 12 trials (38%) classified complications according to severity, with 5 (16%) using a formal classification system (Clavien-Dindo or Accordion scale). Of 27 trials which described 'short-term' mortality, 15 (47%) used one of five different definitions. 6 out of the 32 trials (19%) described 'patient-reported outcomes'.

CONCLUSION

Reporting of outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials is inconsistent. A consensus approach to develop a minimum set of well-defined, standardised outcomes to be used by all future trials examining therapeutic surgical interventions for gastric cancer is needed. This should consider the views of all key stakeholders, including patients.

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.

Compliance to D2 lymphadenectomy in laparoscopic gastrectomy

The objective of this study is to describe the compliance to D2 lymphadenectomy in laparoscopic gastrectomy. Radical partial or total gastrectomy with modified D2 lymphadenectomy is the standard of care for locally advanced gastric cancer. It is unclear whether compliance to D2 lymphadenectomy in laparoscopy is comparable to that in open surgery. A review of the literature was performed and results are described in a descriptive review. Available randomized trials are mostly performed for early gastric cancer, for which formal D2 lymphadenectomy is usually not required. Most trials report no differences in number of retrieved lymph nodes between open and laparoscopic gastrectomy. Only one trial used adherence to D2 lymphadenectomy as primary outcome parameter, and found no difference between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. Results from randomized trials in advanced gastric cancer are awaited. In the meantime, the laparoscopic approach can be used in experienced centers.

Does a laparoscopic approach attenuate the body weight loss and lean body mass loss observed in open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer? a single-institution exploratory analysis of the JCOG 0912 phase III trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for gastric cancer may prevent the loss of body weight and lean body mass resulting from reduced surgical stress in comparison to open distal gastrectomy (ODG). A multicenter phase III trial conducted by the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG0912 trial) was performed to confirm the non-inferiority of LADG to ODG for stage I gastric cancer in terms of relapse-free survival.

METHODS

This study was performed as a single-institution exploratory analysis using the data of the patients from our hospital who were enrolled in the JCOG0912 phase III trial. Body weight and lean body mass were evaluated using a bioelectrical impedance analyzer within 1 week before and at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

One-hundred six patients were randomized to undergo ODG (54 patients) or LADG (51 patients). Body weight loss at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months was -3.0%, -4.9%, and -5.4%, respectively, in the ODG group and -2.7%, -4.3%, and -5.7%, respectively, in the LADG group; the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.330, 0.166, and 0.656, respectively). Lean body mass loss at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months was -2.8%, -4.1%, and -2.3%, respectively, in the ODG group and -2.7%, -2.9%, and -3.0%, respectively, in the LADG group; the differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.610, 0.413, and 0.925, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach did not attenuate the loss of body weight and lean body mass in comparison to patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Is ERAS effective and safe in laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is still unclear whether enhanced recovery after surgery is effective and safe in laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma.

METHODS

Cochrane library databases, Medline, Embase, and Pubmed were searched from January 1, 1986, to December 31, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fast-track recovery with conventional recovery strategies in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma were included. The main outcomes measured were postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus, hospital charge, and overall complication rate.

RESULTS

Six RCTs with 400 patients were included in this study. Fast-track surgery has shorter postoperative hospital stays (weighted mean difference (WMD) - 2.65; 95% CI, - 4.01 to - 1.29, z = 3.82, P < 0.01) and less hospitalization expenditure (WMD - 523.43; 95% CI, - 799.79 to - 247.06, z = 3.71, P < 0.01) than conventional recovery strategies. There was no significant difference with respect to duration to first flatus (WMD - 17.72; 95% CI, - 39.46-4.02, z = 1.60, P = 0.11) and complication rate (OR 1.57; 95% CI, 0.82-2.98, z = 1.37, P = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced recovery after surgery is effective and safe and is thus recommended in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in UK: current status and future perspectives

The aim of this study is to review the literature and report the various minimally invasive methods used to treat gastric cancer in the UK and compare it with worldwide practice. Published randomised studies, non-randomised studies and case series reporting the use of minimal invasive approach to treat gastric cancer were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and their outcomes were highlighted suggesting their effectiveness. Several randomised, controlled trials and meta-analyses have proven the clinical and oncological safety of the laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Similarly, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR (endoscopic mucosal resection) and ESD (endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection) have also been proven feasible and safe to treat gastric cancer of various stages in prospective and retrospective comparative studies. However, UK based studies on minimally invasive surgery to treat gastric cancer is scarce and the paucity of trials led to uncertain outcomes. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR and ESD are feasible procedures in terms of clinical and oncological safety but mainly being practiced in Asian countries with high prevalence of stomach cancer. The UK based practice is still small and limited but the introduction of MIGOCS and STOMACH trial might help to widen the application of this technique.

Risk factors for severe weight loss at 1 month after gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Body weight loss (BWL) is frequently observed in gastric cancer patients who undergo gastrectomy for gastric cancer. The risk factors for severe BWL after gastrectomy remain unclear.

METHODS

The present study retrospectively examined patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer between January 2012 and June 2014 at Kanagawa Cancer Center. All patients received perioperative care based on the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol. The %BWL value was calculated based on the percentage of body weight at 1 month after surgery in comparison to the preoperative body weight. Severe BWL was defined as %BWL > 10%. The risk factors for severe BWL were determined by both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

There were 278 patients examined. The median age of the patients was 68 years. The operative procedures included total gastrectomy [n=97; open (n=61) and laparoscopic {n=36)] and distal gastrectomy (n=181). Surgical complications of grade ≥ 2 (as defined by the Clavien-Dindo classification) were observed in 37 patients, these included: pancreatic fistula (n=9), anastomotic leakage (n=5), and abdominal abscess (n=3). There were no cases of surgery-associated mortality. Both univariate and multivariate logistic analyses demonstrated that surgical complications, and total gastrectomy were significant risk factors for severe BWL.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical complications and total gastrectomy were identified as being significant risk factors for severe BWL in the 1^st month after gastrectomy. To maintain body weight after gastrectomy, physicians should pay careful attention to patients who undergo total gastrectomy and those who develop surgical complications.

Pancreas-related complications following gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus minimally invasive surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreas-related complications are quite uncommon but potentially life-threatening occurrences that may occasionally complicate the postoperative course of gastrectomy. A number of reports have described such conditions after both standard open and minimally invasive surgery. Our study has the purpose to systematically determine the pooled incidence of pancreatic events following radical gastrectomy. We also aimed to elucidate whether any difference in incidence exists between patients operated via conventional open or minimally invasive surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized or well-matched studies comparing conventional with minimally invasive oncological gastrectomy and reporting pancreas-related postoperative complications. We evaluated possible differences in outcomes between open and minimally invasive surgery. A meta-analysis of relevant comparisons was performed using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies, whereby 6 randomized and 14 non-randomized comparative studies including a total of 7336 patients, were considered eligible for data extraction. Globally, more than 1% of patients experienced some pancreatic occurrences during the postoperative course. The use of minimally invasive surgery showed a trend toward increased overall pancreatic morbidity (OR 1.39), pancreatitis (OR 2.69), and pancreatic fistula (OR 1.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Although minimally invasive radical gastrectomy is currently established as a valid alternative to open surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer, a higher risk of pancreas-related morbidity should be taken into account.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches to Gastric Resection

Minimally invasive gastric resections carry several advantages, including less intraoperative blood loss, faster recovery time, reduced pain, and decreased hospital length of stay and quicker return to work. Numerous trials have proved that laparoscopic and robotic-assisted gastrectomy provides equivalent surgical and oncologic outcomes to open approaches. As with any minimally invasive approach, advanced minimally invasive training and good judgment by a surgeon are paramount in selecting patients in whom a minimally invasive approach is feasible. With increasing research in patient populations with more advanced disease, the indications are likely to continue to expand.

Effectiveness of postoperative elemental diet (Elental®) in elderly patients after gastrectomy

Background

We aimed to investigate the efficacy of postoperative early intervention with an elemental diet to reduce weight loss and enhance recovery after gastrectomy. Nutritional status and gastrointestinal immune function tend to worsen, and postoperative weight loss is inevitable in these patients; therefore, improvement in their postoperative condition is important, especially in gastric cancer patients aged ≥80 years.

Methods

Clinical outcomes and postoperative nutritional status were compared between 21 and 22 consecutive elderly patients aged ≥80 years who underwent distal gastrectomy before and after the introduction of postoperative oral elemental diet (Elental®, 300 kcal/day), respectively, between October 2011 and June 2016.

Results

A significant reduction in postoperative complications was noted in the nutrition support group (N-group) as compared with the control group (C-group). In particular, the prevalence of systemic complications was significantly lower in the N-group (33.3 vs. 4.5 %, p = 0.015), whereas no significant difference was observed in the prevalence of locoregional complications. The percentage of weight loss and reduction in BMI from 1 month to 1 year after surgery was significantly lower in the N-group (p = 0.012 each). The nutrition status (albumin, total protein, hemoglobin, and C-reactive protein levels) at 1 month after surgery showed improvements (p = 0.005, p = 0.048), and hospital stay was decreased in the N-group as compared to the C-group (16.0 vs. 12.5 days, p = 0.041).

Conclusions

Early intervention with an elemental diet after distal gastrectomy is valuable for reducing perioperative weight loss and improving nutritional management and may be associated with enhanced postoperative recovery in elderly patients.

Laparoscopic-assisted versus open radical gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Previous studies comparing laparoscopic-assisted to open gastrectomy (OG) for resectable gastric cancer were inexhaustive, so an updated meta-analysis was performed to clarify quality of life, patient satisfaction, safety and effectiveness associated with laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG).

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, and The Cochrane Library were searched from inception to December 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LAG with OG for resectable gastric cancer. Relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled with random-effects model. Furthermore, trial sequential analysis (TSA) was employed to indicate the credibility of pooled estimate.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs totaling 2,307 gastric cancer patients (1,163 in laparoscopic and 1,144 in open) were included. Compared with OG, LAG showed higher patient satisfaction and quality of life, less blood loss, hospital stay and overall postoperative morbidity, and longer operating time, which were confirmed by TSA. LAG also accelerated time to first flatus, first walking and first intake and reduced frequency of analgesic administration and days of fever. There were no significant difference between the two groups in number of retrieved lymph nodes, mortality, recurrence, long-term overall survival and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

For patients with resectable gastric cancer, LAG decreased blood loss, length of hospital stay and overall postoperative morbidity and improved postsurgical recovery. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:756-767. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Currently there are two surgical options for potentially curable patients (i.e. people with non-metastatic gastric cancer), laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. However, it is not clear whether one of these options is superior.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic gastrectomy or laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for people with gastric cancer. In particular, we planned to investigate the effects by patient groups, such as cancer stage, anaesthetic risk, and body mass index (BMI), and by intervention methods, such as method of anastomosis, type of gastrectomy and laparoscopic or laparoscopically-assisted gastrectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) until September 2015. We also screened reference lists from included trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently selected references for further assessment by going through all titles and abstracts. Further selection was based on review of full text articles for selected references.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted study data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes, the mean difference (MD) or the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. We performed meta-analyses where it was meaningful.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, 2794 participants were randomised in 13 trials included in this review. All the trials were at unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (which included 53 participants) did not contribute any data to this review. A total of 213 participants were excluded in the remaining trials after randomisation, leaving a total of 2528 randomised participants for analysis, with 1288 undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy and 1240 undergoing open gastrectomy. All the participants were suitable for major surgery.There was no difference in the proportion of participants who died within thirty days of treatment between laparoscopic gastrectomy (7/1188: adjusted proportion = 0.6% (based on meta-analysis)) and open gastrectomy (4/1447: 0.3%) (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.10; risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; participants = 2335; studies = 11; I(2) = 0%; low quality evidence). There were no events in either group for short-term recurrence (participants = 103; studies = 3), proportion requiring blood transfusion (participants = 66; studies = 2), and proportion with positive margins at histopathology (participants = 28; studies = 1). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life, time to return to normal activity or time to return to work. The differences in long-term mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25; participants = 195; studies = 3; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), serious adverse events within three months (laparoscopic gastrectomy (7/216: adjusted proportion = 3.6%) versus open gastrectomy (13/216: 6%) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34; participants = 432; studies = 8; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), long-term recurrence (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; participants = 162; studies = 4; very low quality evidence), adverse events within three months (laparoscopic gastrectomy (204/268: adjusted proportion = 16.1%) versus open gastrectomy (253/1222: 20.7%) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.01; participants = 2490; studies = 11; I(2) = 38%; very low quality evidence), quantity of perioperative blood transfused (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.38; participants = 143; studies = 2; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), length of hospital stay (MD -1.82 days, 95% CI -3.72 to 0.07; participants = 319; studies = 6; I(2) = 83%; very low quality evidence), and number of lymph nodes harvested (MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.51 to 0.25; participants = 472; studies = 9; I(2) = 40%; very low quality evidence) were imprecise. There was no alteration in the interpretation of the results in any of the subgroups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low quality evidence, there is no difference in short-term mortality between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. Based on very low quality evidence, there is no evidence for any differences in short-term or long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. However, the data are sparse, and the confidence intervals were wide, suggesting that significant benefits or harms of laparoscopic gastrectomy cannot be ruled out. Several trials are currently being conducted and interim results of these trials have been included in this review. These trials need to perform intention-to-treat analysis to ensure that the results are reliable and report the results according to the CONSORT Statement.

Laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery: Current evidence and future perspectives

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely accepted as a standard alternative for the treatment of early-stage gastric adenocarcinoma because of its favorable short-term outcomes. Although controversies exist, such as establishing clear indications, proper preoperative staging, and oncologic safety, experienced surgeons and institutions have applied this approach, along with various types of function-preserving surgery, for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. With technical advancement and the advent of state-of-the-art instruments, indications for laparoscopic gastrectomy are expected to expand as far as locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic gastrectomy appears to be promising; however, scientific evidence necessary to generalize this approach to a standard treatment for all relevant patients and care providers remains to be gathered. Several multicenter, prospective randomized trials in high-incidence countries are ongoing, and results from these trials will highlight the short- and long-term outcomes of the approach. In this review, we describe up-to-date findings and critical issues regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Enhanced recovery after surgery with laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for stomach carcinomas

AIM: To study the efficacy of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for stomach carcinomas.

METHODS: From June 2010 to December 2012, 61 gastric cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy at First Hospital of Jilin University were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial. (Clinical Trials.gov, registration ID: NCT01955096). The subjects were divided into the ERAS program group and the conventional control group. The clinical characteristics, recovery variables, and complications of patients were analyzed.

RESULTS: The time to first ambulation, oral food intake, and time to defecation were significantly shorter in the ERAS group (n = 30), compared to the conventional group (n = 31; P = 0.04, 0.003, and 0.01, respectively). The postoperative hospital stay was less in the ERAS group (6.8 ± 1.1 d) compared to the conventional group (7.7 ± 1.1 d) (P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the ERAS (1/30) and conventional care groups (2/31) (P = 1.00). There were no readmissions or mortality during the 30-d follow-up period.

CONCLUSION: The ERAS program is associated with a shorter hospital stay in gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. The ERAS protocol is useful in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Clinical application of fast-track surgery with Chinese medicine treatment in the devascularization operation for cirrhotic portal hypertension

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effect of fast-track surgery combined with Chinese medicine treatment in devascularization operation for cirrhotic esophageal varices.

METHODS

Seventy-two patients with cirrhotic esophageal varices were selected from January 2009 to June 2013, and randomly assigned to a conventional group and a fast-track group (fast-track surgery combined with Chinese medicine treatment) using a randomized digital table, 36 cases in each group. Operation and anesthesia recovery time, postoperative hospitalization and quality of life were recorded and compared between groups during the perioperative period.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional group, the fast-track group had longer operation time (253.6±46.4 min vs. 220.6±51.0 min) and anesthesia recovery time (50.5±15.9 min vs. 23.5±9.6 min; P<0.01); less bleeding (311.3±46.8 mL vs. 356.2±57.5 mL; P<0.01) and less transfusion (1932.3±106.9 mL vs. 2045.6±115.4 mL; P<0.01); as well as faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, shorter postoperative hospitalization and higher quality of life. There were no serious postoperative complications and no further bleeding occurred.

CONCLUSION

Fast-track surgery combined with Chinese medicine treatment is a safe and feasible approach to accelerate the recovery of patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension in perioperative period of devascularization operation.

Influences of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy and open gastrectomy on serum interleukin-6 levels in patients with gastric cancer among Asian populations: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

To compare the effects of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) and open gastrectomy (OG) on serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels in gastric cancer (GC) patients from Asia.

METHODS

The following scientific literature databases were searched for relevant clinical studies: PubMed, EBSCO, Ovid, Wiley, Web of Science, Cochrane library, EMBASE, WANFANG and VIP databases. The studies retrieved from database searches were screened based on stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria to select high quality cohort studies for the present meta-analysis. The data extracted from final selected studies were analyzed using STATA 12.0 software.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies were initially retrieved from database searches, and 11 clinical cohort studies were eventually enrolled in this meta-analysis. The 11 selected studies contained a combined total of 767 GC patients (427 patients in LAG group and 340 patients in OG group). Meta-analysis results demonstrated that postoperative serum IL-6 levels in GC patients in LAG group was significantly lower than the OG group (SMD = -2.16, 95% CI = -3.19 ~ -1.14, P < 0.001). The difference in serum IL-6 levels between the preoperative and postoperative GC patients was significantly lower in the LAG group compared to the difference found in the OG group (SMD = -3.44, 95% CI = -4.87 ~ -2.01, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis based on country showed that, in both Chinese and Japanese GC patients, the postoperative increase in serum IL-6 levels in LAG group were significantly lower than the increase observed in the OG group (all P < 0.05). In Korean GC patients, the postoperative increase in serum IL-6 levels was not significantly different between the LAG group and OG group (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our results provide strong evidence that LAG is associated with significantly lower serum IL-6 levels, compared to OG. Thus, LAG carries markedly lower risk of adverse inflammatory reactions in GC patients among Asian population.