Role of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy in Very Elderly Patients with Gastric Cancer Who Have Outlived the Average Lifespan

Laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer in patients among octogenarians: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Currently, there is no consensus regarding whether super-elderly (aged > 80 years) patients are suitable candidates for laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to analyse the short-term outcomes and oncological prognosis of laparoscopic gastrectomy in super-elderly patients with gastric cancer (GC).

METHODS

Following PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 guidelines, we searched the Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Pubmed databases from inception until May 2024 and performed a meta-analysis. All published studies exploring the surgical outcomes and oncological prognosis of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in super-elderly patients with GC were reviewed. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 1,085 studies were retrieved, eight of which were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 807 patients > 80 years of age with GC. The meta-analysis showed that compared with open gastrectomy, patients with GC > 80 years old who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy had a longer operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 30.48, p < 0.001), less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -166.96, P < 0.001), shorter postoperative exhaust time (WMD =-0.83, p < 0.001), shorter length of stay (WMD = -0.78, p < 0.001), fewer overall complications (Odds ratio [OR] = 0.54, p = 0.003), higher 5-year overall survival rate (OR = 1.66, p = 0.03) and disease-specific survival rate (OR = 3.23, p < 0.001). Furthermore, laparoscopic gastrectomy did not significantly affect the number of lymph node dissections, the rate of D2 radical gastrectomy, major postoperative complications, or postoperative pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to open gastrectomy, patients with GC aged > 80 years who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy may have better short-term outcomes. Age should not be a contraindication for minimally invasive surgery.

Surgical options and survival prognosis in geriatric patients beyond average lifespan with locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The appropriateness of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for super-geriatric patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) is inconclusive, and the prognostic factors are also yet to be elucidated. Herein, we aimed to investigate the surgical and oncological outcomes of LG versus open gastrectomy (OG) for geriatric patients with LAGC who have outlived the average lifespan of the Chinese population (≥ 78 years).

METHODS

This is a monocentric, retrospective, comparative study. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize selection bias and ensure well-balanced characteristics. The primary endpoint of interest was 3-year overall survival, while secondary endpoints included procedure-related variables, postoperative recovery indices, and complications. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to identify unfavorable prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Of 196 eligible individuals, 107 underwent LG and 89 underwent OG, with a median age (interquartile range [IQR]) of 82 [79, 84] years. PSM yielded 61 matched pairs, with comparable demographic and tumor characteristics. The LG group had a significantly lower overall complication rate than the OG group (31.1% vs. 49.2%, P = 0.042), as well as shorter duration of postoperative hospital stay [12 (11, 13) vs. 13 (12, 15.5) d, P < 0. 001], less intraoperative blood loss [95 (75, 150) vs. 230 (195, 290) mL, P < 0.001], but a longer operative time [228 (210, 255.5) vs. 196 (180, 219.5) min, P < 0.001]. The times to first aerofluxus, defecation, liquid diet, and half-liquid diet were comparable. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed no significant difference in 3-year overall survival between the groups, either in the entire cohort or in subgroups with different TNM staging. Moreover, Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index scores of > 6 [hazard ratio (HR) 4.003; P = 0.021] and pathologic TNM stage III (HR 3.816, P = 0.023) were independent unfavorable prognostic factors for long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

LG performed by experienced surgeons offers the benefits of comparable or better surgical and oncological safety profiles than OG for super-geriatric patients with LAGC.

Dismal prognosis of elderly gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 3

BACKGROUND

Although the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of 3 is relatively common in elderly patients, there have been few debates on the indications for gastrectomy in elderly gastric cancer (GC) patients with ASA3. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate gastrectomy's clinical relevance in elderly patients with GC and ASA3.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 228 consecutive elderly GC patients (aged ≥ 75 years) without prior treatments who underwent curative gastrectomy between 2013 and 2017.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients with ASA3 showed significantly poorer prognosis than those with ASA1 and 2 (p = 0.004). The multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed that ASA3 (p = 0.021) and pStage (p = 0.007) were independent prognostic factors, respectively. Elderly GC patients with pStage III and ASA3 exhibited uniquely dismal prognosis (p < 0.001); however, several survivors were still confirmed. Postoperative complications (PCs) were only the final remnant independent prognostic factor (p = 0.020) among the 33 elderly GC patients with ASA3, where dead patients included cancer-specific and other deaths, especially pneumonia. PCs were independently associated with prognostic nutritional index (PNI) (< 42.7) in elderly GC patients, and the most frequent complication was pneumonia, which was significantly associated with ASA3 and marginally associated with PNI in a multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

ASA3 has a dismal prognosis after curative gastrectomy in the elderly GC patients, but the number of survivors was confirmed. Curative gastrectomy is not considered contraindicated even in elderly GC with ASA3. Preoperative malnutrition is associated with PCs, which proposing preoperative nutritional intervention in the context of treatment strategy for the elderly GC patients with ASA3.

Technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer in elderly patients ≥ 80 years old

BACKGROUND

As the incidence of gastric cancer increases in elderly patients worldwide, laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for elderly patients with gastric cancer is also increasing. However, whether LG is an optimal surgical modality for elderly patients with gastric cancer remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the technical and oncological safety of LG for elderly patients ≥ 80 years old with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients who received curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer from 2003 to 2015 were enrolled in the study. They were divided into the LG in elderly patients aged over 80 years (LG-E) group, open gastrectomy (OG) in elderly patients (OG-E) group, and LG in non-elderly patients < 80 years (LG-NE) group. Patients' demographics and short- and long-term outcomes, such as postoperative complications and 5-year survival rate, were compared between the three groups, retrospectively.

RESULTS

The LG-E, OG-E, and LG-NE groups comprised 45, 43, and 329 patients, respectively. In the comparison between the LG-E and OG-E groups, the incidence of distal gastrectomy (DG) and the proportions of patients with pathological tumor stage T1, pathological N0, and final stage I were significantly higher in the LG-E versus OG-E group (89 vs. 56%, 76% vs. 16%, 82% vs. 37%, and 84% vs. 35%, p < 0.01, respectively). Blood loss and the incidence of overall postoperative complications in the LG-E group were significantly lower than those in the OG-E group (40 vs. 240 g, p < 0.01, and 29% vs. 53%, p < 0.05, respectively). Although the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was not significantly different between the two groups, the 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rate was significantly higher in the LG-E group versus OG-E group (93% vs. 78%, p < 0.05). Overall comorbidities were significantly higher in the LG-E group versus LG-NE group, but there were no significant differences in short-term outcomes between the two groups. Further, although the 5-year OS rate was significantly lower in the LG-E group versus LG-NE group (67% vs. 87%, p < 0.01), there was no significant difference between the two groups in 5-year DSS rate.

CONCLUSION

LG is technically and oncologically safe for the treatment of gastric cancer in both elderly patients aged ≥ 80 years and the non-elderly and can be an optimal surgical modality for elderly patients with gastric cancer.

Evaluation of Peroperative and Oncological Results in Laparoscopic Surgery of Gastric Cancer in Elderly Patients: Single-Center Study

Introduction: Laparoscopic treatment of gastric cancer in elderly patients is still controversial. The aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic gastrectomy in elderly gastric cancer patients based on the long- and short-term results of laparoscopic surgery. Materials and Methods: The data of 163 patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Patients were categorized into two groups by age based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria: elderly (≥65 years, 80 cases) and nonelderly (<65 years, 83 cases). Patient characteristics and clinicopathological findings, surgical findings, short- and long-term results were compared between the two groups. Results: The patients in the study group were in the age range of 22-87 years and 80 (49%) patients were found out to be 65 years old or older. When all complications were categorized according to Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification, >3 serious complication rates were similar between groups (P = .421). Although the length of hospital stay and the need for intensive care were higher in the elderly group, the difference was not significant (P = .066; P = .072). There was no significant difference between the two in terms of in-hospital mortality (P = .364). No statistically significant differences were found in the rates of overall survival (nonelderly group; 61.17 ± 3.34, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 54.61-67.74 versus elderly group; 56.48 ± 3.80, 95% CI: 49.03-63.93; P = .176) and disease-specific survival (nonelderly group; 64.24 ± 3.15, 95% CI: 58.06-70.40 versus elderly group; 61.93 ± 3.57, 95% CI: 54.93-68.93; P = .363) between the age groups. Conclusion: In conclusion, although laparoscopic gastrectomy is a feasible and safe method in elderly gastric cancer patients, further randomized prospective studies are needed.