ABSTRACT
Currently, gastric cancer is the sixth most prevalent cancer in the world. The recommended treatment for advanced disease is gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. However, there is no consensus regarding the performance of an omentectomy as part of the treatment. The procedure is considered by some authors to be essential for the elimination of a micrometastasis since cells in the peritoneum prefer growing in milky spots in the omentum. On the other hand, retrospective studies demonstrated that there is the possibility that omentum preservation may not impact patients' overall survival. Therefore, the objective of this review was to quantify the effect of performing an omentectomy to determine whether it is necessary. Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov and LILACS were searched up to September 2022. Selection was restricted to comparative studies in patients with advanced GC (≥T2). The certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADEPro and the risk of bias with ROBINS-I and RoB 2.0. Five cohort studies, and one randomized controlled trial (RCT) were included. The meta-analysis found that there were no significant differences between the procedures for overall survival, relapse-free survival, and peritoneal recurrence. Furthermore, in perioperative outcomes, a significant difference was only found in intraoperative bleeding, which was lower in patients who had their omentum preserved. Therefore, omentum preservation in patients with advanced gastric cancer has been shown to have no inferior results than resection in long-term outcomes.
Subject(s)
Gastrectomy , Omentum , Stomach Neoplasms , Humans , Cohort Studies , Gastrectomy/methods , Omentum/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/surgeryABSTRACT
This study aims to estimate whether prophylactic cervical lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences the short- and long-term results through a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Twenty-eight articles were selected in this systematic review, encompassing 9180 patients. Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution, as it is associated with worse short-term results compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Esophageal Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy/methods , Humans , Lymph Node Excision/methods , Lymphatic MetastasisABSTRACT
There is no consensus on the timing of extubation after esophagectomy. There is a fear that premature extubation may result in a high risk of urgent reintubation. On the other hand, there is a risk of lung damage in prolonged intubation. The present systematic review compares early and late extubation. Five articles were selected. Early extubation after esophagectomy does not increase the risk of reintubation, mortality, complications, and length of stay.
Subject(s)
Airway Extubation , Esophagectomy , Airway Extubation/adverse effects , Esophagectomy/adverse effects , Humans , Intubation, IntratrachealABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Achalasia may evolve to sigmoid megaesophagus in 10-15% of patients and is usually treated with esophagectomy, which has high morbi-mortality. Many surgeons debate the applicability of the Heller myotomy for treating sigmoid megaesophagus. This study intents to analyze the effectiveness of myotomy for treating patients with sigmoid megaesophagus. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, Lilacs and Embase alongside manual search of references. The inclusion criteria were clinical trials, cohort, case-series; patients with sigmoid megaesophagus and esophageal diameter ≥ 6 cm; and patients undergoing primary myotomy. The exclusion criteria were reviews, case reports, cross-sectional studies, editorials, letters, congress abstracts, full-text unavailability; previous surgical treatment for achalasia; and pediatric or animal model studies. No restrictions on language and date of publication, and no filters were applied. Subgroups analyses were performed to assess the laparoscopic myotomy perioperative outcomes. Besides, subgroup analyses were performed to assess the long-term outcomes of the studies with a follow-up time > 24 months. To verify heterogeneity, the I2 test was used. The random effects were applied, and the fixed model was evaluated as sensitivity analysis. To assess risk of bias and certainty of evidence, the tools ROBINS-I and GRADE were used, respectively. Registration number: CRD42020199667. RESULTS: Sixteen articles were selected, encompassing 350 patients. The mean age ranged from 36 to 61 years old, and the mean follow-up ranged from 16 to 109 months. Complications rate was 0.08 (CI: 0.040-0.153; P = 0.01). Need for retreatment rate was 0.128 (CI: 0.031-0.409; P = 0.01). The probability of good or excellent outcomes after myotomy was 0.762 (CI: 0.703-0.812; P < 0.01). Postoperative mortality rate was 0.008 (CI: 0.004-0.015; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Surgical myotomy is an option for avoiding esophagectomy in achalasia, with a low morbi-mortality rate and good results. It is effective for most patients and only a minority will demand retreatment.
