ABSTRACT
Objective:To investigate the clinical efficacy of proximal gastrectomy and total gastrectomy in the treatment of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG).Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 170 patients with Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG who were admitted to Guangdong Provincial People′s Hospital from January 2010 to December 2018 were collected. There were 125 males and 45 females, aged from 30 to 85 years, with a median age of 64 years. Of the 170 patients, 82 cases undergoing proximal gastrectomy were allocated into the proximal gastrectomy group and 88 cases undergoing total gastrectomy were allocated into the total gastrectomy group. Observation indica-tors: (1) surgical and postoperative situations; (2) follow-up and survival; (3) analysis of prognostic factors. Follow-up was conducted using telephone interview and outpatient examination to detect survival of patients up to December 2021. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was analyzed using the t test. Measure-ment data with skewed distribution were represented as M( Q1, Q3) or M(range), and comparison between groups was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Comparison of ordinal data was analyzed using the rank sum test. Kaplan-Meier method was used to draw survival curves, and Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis. COX proportional hazard model was used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Variables with P<0.1 in univariate analysis were included for multivariate analysis. Results:(1) Surgical and postoperative situations. Cases with surgical approach as transthoracic or thoraco-abdominal approach, transabdominal approach, the operation time, cases with volume of intra-operative blood loss ≤100 mL or >100 mL, cases with length of proximal margin ≤1.5 cm or >1.5 cm, cases with radical surgery outcome as R 0, R 1, R 2, the number of lymph nodes harvest, cases with anastomotic leakage, cases with anastomotic stricture, cases with incision infection, cases with pleural infection or effusion, cases with abdominal infection or ascites were 61, 21, (211±18)minutes, 46, 36, 44, 38, 73, 6, 3, 15(9,22), 5, 2, 2, 4, 2 in the proximal gastrectomy group, respec-tively. The above indicators were 12, 76, (263±15)minutes, 27, 61, 45, 43, 82, 4, 2, 23(18,32), 4, 1, 3, 1, 4 in the total gastrectomy group, respectively. There were significant differences in the surgical approach, operation time, volume of intraoperative blood loss and the number of lymph nodes harvest between the two groups ( χ2=63.94, t=-25.50, χ2=11.19, Z=-5.62, P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the length of proximal margin or radical surgery outcome between the two groups ( χ2=0.11, Z=-0.95, P>0.05) and there was no significant difference in the anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, incision infection, pleural infection or effusion, abdominal infection or ascites between the two groups ( P>0.05). (2) Follow-up and survival. All the 170 patients were followed up for 89(64,106)months. Of the 170 patients, the 5-year overall survival rates were 43.8% and 35.5% of the Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG patients, respectively, showing no significant difference between them ( χ2=0.87, P>0.05). Of the patients with Siewert type Ⅱ AEG, the 5-year overall survival rates were 41.7% and 54.3% in the patients with proximal gastrectomy and the total gastrectomy, respectively, showing no significant difference between them ( χ2=1.05, P>0.05). Of the patients with Siewert type Ⅲ AEG, the 5-year overall survival rates were 31.3% and 37.5% in the patients with proximal gastrectomy and the total gastrectomy, respectively, showing no significant difference between them ( χ2=0.33, P>0.05). The 5-year overall survival rates were 39.0% and 44.2% in the proximal gastrectomy group and the total gastrectomy group, respectively, showing no significant difference between the two groups ( χ2=0.63, P>0.05). Of the patients in TNM stage Ⅰ, stage Ⅱ, stage Ⅲ, the 5-year overall survival rates were 65.3%, 36.3%, 27.1% in the proximal gastrectomy group, versus 83.3%, 48.0%, 39.7% in the total gastrectomy group, showing no signifi-cant difference between the two groups ( χ2=0.02, 1.50, 1.21, P>0.05). (3) Analysis of prognostic factors. Results of univariate analysis showed that pathological N staging, degree of tumor differen-tiation and radical surgery outcome were related factors influencing prognosis of AEG patients ( hazard ratio=1.71, 1.70, 2.85, 95% confidence interval as 1.16-2.60, 1.15-2.50, 1.58-5.14, P<0.05). Results of multivariate analysis showed that pathological N staging and radical surgery outcome were independent factors influencing prognosis of AEG patients ( hazard ratio=1.55, 2.18, 95% confidence interval as 1.05-2.31, 1.18-4.02, P<0.05). Conclusions:There is no significant difference in the prognosis of Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy or total gastrectomy. Proximal gastrectomy can be used for the treatment of advanced Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG.
ABSTRACT
With the continuous update and improvement of minimally invasive techni-ques, laparoscopic and robotic surgeries have increased significantly for the surgical treatment of adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG). Due to the anatomical particularity and biolo-gical characteristics of Siewert type Ⅱ AEG, surgical approach, the range of resection, lymph node dissection and digestive tract reconstruction cannot be unified at present, which is also the contro-versy between gastrointestinal surgery and thoracic surgery. Laparoscopic minimally invasive techni-que may be more conducive to lower mediastinal lymph node dissection. Laparoscopic surgery of AEG after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is safe and feasible. Robotic surgery may be the direction of minimally invasive surgery in the future. The authors mainly investigate strategies of minimally invasive surgery for the surgical treatment of AEG, and look forward to more clinical trials on Siewert type Ⅱ AEG surgery to guide surgical treatment.
ABSTRACT
Objective:To investigate the application value of individualized full-course nutritional intervention in neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for locally advanced Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG).Methods:The perspec-tive randomized control study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 90 patients with locally advanced Siewert type Ⅱ and Ⅲ AEG who underwent nCRT in the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University from February 2012 to December 2018 were selected. Patient were divided into two groups with 1:1 according to random number table. Patients undergoing nCRT combined with individualized full-course nutritional intervention were allocated into experimental group, and patients undergoing nCRT combined with common nutritional intervention were allocated into control group. Observation indicators: (1) grouping situations of the enrolled patients; (2) changing situations of nutritional status and quality of life of patients in nCRT and preoperative waiting period; (3) efficacy evaluation and adverse effects of nCRT; (4) surgical and recovery situations. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the t test. Measurement date with skewed distribution were represented as M ( P25, P75) or M (range), and comparison between groups was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Count data were represented as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Comparison of ordinal data was conducted using the non-parameter rank sum test. Repeated measurement data were analyzed using the repeated ANOVA. Results:(1) Grouping situations of the enrolled patients: a total of 90 patients were selected for eligibility. There were 77 males and 13 females, aged from 26 to 74 years, with a median age of 62 years. Of 90 patients, there were 45 cases in the experimental group and 45 cases in the control group. (2) Changing situations of nutritional status and quality of life of patients in nCRT and preoperative waiting period: ① during the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preoperative waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the body mass was (67±10)kg, (66±9)kg, (67±10)kg, (68±10)kg, (70±10)kg for the experi-mental group, respectively, and (65±9)kg, (59±8)kg, (62±8)kg, (64±8)kg, (66±9)kg for the control group. The multivariate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the body mass ( χ2=195.010, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, intervention effect of body mass changing between the two groups ( F=93.974, 60.638, 4.144, P<0.05). ② During the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preoperative waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the total protein was (66±4)g/L, (65±4)g/L, (65±4)g/L, (68±4)g/L, (71±5)g/L for the experimental group, respectively, and (65±4)g/L, (62±5)g/L, (63±5)g/L, (65±5)g/L, (67±6)g/L for the control group. The multivariate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the total protein ( χ2=652.524, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, interven-tion effect of total protein changing between the two groups ( F=672.507, 6.424, 5.057, P<0.05). ③ During the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preoperative waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the albumin was (40±3)g/L, (38±4)g/L, (38±4)g/L, (39±4)g/L, (40±4)g/L for the experimental group, respectively, and (39±4)g/L, (35±5)g/L, (36±4)g/L, (36±4)g/L, (37±5)g/L for the control group. The multivariate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the albumin ( χ2=289.324, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, intervention effect of albumin changing between the two groups ( F=4 210.683, 5.013, 7.330, P<0.05). ④ During the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preoperative waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the prealbumin was (228±41)mg/L, (222±56)mg/L, (223±47)mg/L, (227±46)mg/L, (233±53)mg/L for the experimental group, respectively, and (202±49)mg/L, (174±68)mg/L, (179±54)mg/L, (185±51)mg/L, (193±57)mg/L for the control group. The multi-variate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the prealbumin ( χ2=297.324, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, intervention effect of prealbumin changing between the two groups ( F=871.545, 6.111, 14.426, P<0.05). ⑤ During the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preoperative waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the hemoglobin was (124±14)g/L, (121±14)g/L, (125±13)g/L, (127±13)g/L, (128±13)g/L for the experimental group, respectively, and (121±18)g/L, (114±14)g/L, (116±14)g/L, (117±16)g/L, (118±22)g/L for the control group. The multivariate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the hemoglobin ( χ2=257.560, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, intervention effect of hemoglobin changing between the two groups ( F=2 533.553, 4.142, 4.985, P<0.05). ⑥ During the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preopera-tive waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) score was 4.4±1.2,6.3±1.4, 5.5±1.4, 4.3±1.4, 3.4±1.7 for the experimental group, respec-tively, and 4.9±1.2, 7.4±1.7, 7.3±1.6, 6.3±1.4, 6.0±1.5 for the control group. The multivariate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the PG-SGA score ( χ2=289.543, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, intervention effect of PG-SGA score changing between the two groups ( F=648.583, 41.906, 26.098, P<0.05). ⑦ During the nCRT treatment (week 3, week 6) and the preoperative waiting period (week 9, week 12, week 15), the quality of life questionnaire of stomach (QLQ-ST022) score was 13±3, 16±6, 16±4, 14±4, 12±5 for the experimental group, respectively, and 15±4, 21±6, 20±4, 17±4, 15±5 for the control group. The multivariate test was conducted based on the mauchly's test of sphericity for the QLQ-STO22 ( χ2=279.865, P<0.05). There were significant differences in the time effect, interaction effect, interven-tion effect of QLQ-STO22 changing between the two groups ( F=710.238, 7.261, 16.794, P<0.05). (3) Efficacy evaluation and adverse effects of nCRT: there were 25 patients and 20 cases of the experimental group with partial response and stable disease, showing the objective response rate and disease control rate as 55.6%(25/45)and 100.0%(45/45). There were 18 patients and 27 cases of the control group with partial response and stable disease, showing the objective response rate and disease control rate as 40.0%(18/45)and 100.0%(45/45). There was no significant difference in the nCRT efficacy between the two groups ( P>0.05). Cases with leukopenia, neutropenia, anemia, nausea, and loss of appetite were 27, 25, 19, 30, 34 for the experimental group, versus 37, 34, 29, 39, 42 for the control group, showing significant differences between the two groups ( χ2=5.409, 3.986, 4.464, 5.031, 5.414, P<0.05). (4) Surgical and recovery situations: patients of the experimental group underwent surgeries successfully. Two patients of the control group diagnosed with peritoneal metastasis after laparoscopic exploration underwent conversion therapy and no surgery, the other 43 patients underwent surgeries. The time to postoperative gastric tube removal, time to postopera-tive drainage tube removal, time to postoperative first flatus, time to postoperative first defecation, duration of postoperative hospital stay were 2.0 days (1.5 days, 3.0 days), 6.0 days (5.0 days,11.0 days), 2.0 days (1.5 days, 2.5 days), 2.0 days (1.5 days, 2.5 days), 7.0 days (6.0 days,14.0 days) for the experimental group, versus 3.0 days (2.0 days,4.0 days), 7.0 days (5.5 days,14.0 days), 2.0 days (1.5 days,3.0 days), 3.0 days (2.0 days,3.5 days), 8.0 days (6.0 days, 17.0 days) for the control group, showing significant differences between the two groups ( Z=-3.477, -4.398, -3.068, -5.786, -3.395, P<0.05). Conclusion:For AEG patients undergoing nCRT, the individualized full-course nutrition intervention involving nutritionists is beneficial to improve the nutritional status, reduce adverse reactions, and improve the quality of life of the patients, promote postoperative short-term recovery. Registry: this study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov in United States, with the registry number of NCT01962246.
ABSTRACT
Due to the unique position and biological behaviors of adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG), the pattern of treatment has gradually changed from surgery alone leading by surgeons to comprehensive treatment by multidisciplinary teams including thoracic surgeons, oncologists, radiotherapy physicians, anesthetists and so on. The development of laparoscopic surgery makes the jointed operation possible by laparoscopy and thoracoscopy. The concept of enhanced recovery after surgery could further promote minimally invasive surgery in AEG. Meanwhile, with the continuous innovation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, popularization of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and bold attempt of targeted therapy and immunotherapy, the resection rate, pathologic release rate and long-term survival of AEG have already achieved inspiring effects.