ABSTRACT
Background: Studies on survival and prognostic factors in individuals with remnant gastric cancer (RGC) after gastric cancer (GC) are rare. It is debatable whether prognosis of RGC after GC is worse than that of only primary GC (OPGC). The objective of this study is to compare the survival outcomes between post-GC RGC and OPGC undergoing surgical resection and to identify the prognostic factors of disease-specific survival (DSS) for RGC. Methods: We retrospectively collected data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database among patients who underwent GC surgery in 1988-2020. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to balance baseline characteristics. Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis was performed to compare their overall survival (OS) and DSS. Multivariable Cox analyses were performed to identify the independent prognostic factors of DSS for post-GC RGC by estimating hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: There were 76 patients with RGC and 32,763 patients with OPGC included and analyzed. After balancing the baseline characteristics by PSM, no significant difference existed between OPGC and RGC groups in both OS (P=0.65) and DSS (P=0.28). Fixed-time analyses also showed no difference between the two groups for the 5-year (60.0%, RGC vs. 53.3%, OPGC, P=0.38) and 10-year DSS (56.7%, RGC vs. 48.3%, OPGC, P=0.34). Multivariable analysis revealed that area of lower income ($75,000+ vs. <$55,000, HR =0.21, 95% CI: 0.05-0.89, P=0.03), cardiac tumor [middle vs. cardia, HR =0.16, 95% CI: 0.03-0.77, P=0.02; distal vs. cardia, HR =0.10, 95% CI: 0.02-0.58, P=0.01; not otherwise specified (NOS) vs. cardia, HR =0.11, 95% CI: 0.03-0.51, P=0.004], deeper invasion (T3-4 vs. Tis-2, HR =5.19, 95% CI: 1.21-22.15, P=0.03), higher grade (G3 vs. G1-2, HR =7.35, 95% CI: 1.41-38.48, P=0.02) and not receiving chemotherapy (yes vs. no/unknown, HR =0.16, 95% CI: 0.04-0.60, P=0.007) were independent risk factors for postsurgical DSS in patients with post-GC RGC. Conclusions: The prognosis of post-GC RGC was comparable to that of OPGC following surgical resection. The independent prognostic factors for RGC are similar to those established for OPGC. Our findings suggest that RGC following first GC might be the same entity to OPGC and curative resection should be considered in selected patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Due to its nutritional advantages over total gastrectomy, proximal gastrectomy (PG) with anti-reflux techniques has gained significant attention in East Asian countries in recent years. The double flap technique (DFT) and modified side overlap and fundoplication by Yamashita (mSOFY) are two promising anti-reflux interventions following PG. However, anastomotic stenosis after DFT and gastroesophageal reflux after mSOFY have been reported in several patients. To address these concerns, a hybrid reconstruction procedure was designed, namely, right-sided overlap with single flap valvulopasty (ROSF), for proximal gastrectomy, with the aim of reducing anastomotic stricture and reflux. Among the 38 patients who underwent ROSF at our hospital, one developed Stooler grade II anastomotic stenosis. Herein, we present the successful management of this patient through endoscopic stricturotomy (ES). Case summary: A 72-year-old female complaining of "epigastric pain and discomfort for more than 1 month" was diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (Siewert type II). She underwent laparoscopic-assisted PG and ROSF procedures at our hospital and recovered well after surgery. However, she started experiencing progressive difficulty in eating and vomiting approximately 3 weeks after the intervention. Endoscopy revealed Stooler grade II esophagogastric anastomotic stenosis. ES with insulated tip (IT) Knife nano was eventually performed, and the patient was able to resume a normal diet without experiencing any discomfort during the 5-month follow-up period. Conclusion: Endoscopic stricturotomy using IT Knife nano successfully treated anastomotic stenosis following ROSF with no associated complications. Thus, ES to treat anastomotic stenosis after PG with valvulopasty can be considered a safe option and should be performed in centers with the required expertise.
