[D2 and D3 lymph node dissection for colon cancer]. / Rezul'taty limfodissektsii d2 i d3 pri rake obodochnoi kishki.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surgical and oncological results of standard and extended lymph node dissection (D2 and D3) in patients with colon cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed treatment outcomes in 74 patients with colon cancer stage T1-4aN0-2M0 who underwent right- and left-sided hemicolectomy, resection of sigmoid colon with standard and extended lymph node dissection (D2 and D3). RESULTS: Surgical approach and level of D3 lymph node dissection did not increase intra- and postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic interventions were followed by significantly lower intraoperative blood loss and earlier gas discharge. Metastatic lesion of apical lymph nodes was observed in 5 out of 36 patients who underwent D3 lymph node dissection (13.8%), and metastases in regional lymph nodes rN1-2 were found in all these patients. Overall 5-year survival was 86%. Disease-free and overall 5-year survival were similar after D2 and D3 lymph node dissection. CONCLUSION: D3 lymph node dissection is safe for colon cancer. Metastatic lesions of apical lymph nodes during D3 lymph node dissection were detected only in patients with lesions of regional lymph nodes (rN1-2). Disease-free and overall 5-year survival were similar after D2 and D3 lymph node dissection.

Comparison of D2 vs D3 lymph node dissection for RIght COloN cancer (RICON): study protocol for an international multicenter open-label randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer is a global health concern, ranking fifth in both new diagnoses and deaths among tumors worldwide. Surgical intervention remains the primary treatment for localized cases, with a historical evolution marked by a focus on short-term outcomes. While Japan pioneered radical tumor removal with a systematic categorization of lymph nodes (D1, D2, D3), the dissemination of Japanese practices to the West was delayed until 90th of last century. Discrepancies between Japanese D3 dissection and the CME with CVL principle persist, with variations in longitudinal margins and recommended procedures. Non-randomized trials indicate the superiority of D3 over D2, but a consensus is lacking. METHODS: This prospective, international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial employs a two-arm, parallel-group, open-label design to rigorously compare the 5-year overall survival outcomes between D2 and D3 lymph node dissection in stage II-III right colon cancer. Building on prior studies, the trial aims to address existing knowledge gaps and provide a comprehensive evaluation of the outcomes associated with D3 dissection. The study population comprises patients with right colon cancer, ensuring a focused investigation into the specific context of this disease. The trial design emphasizes its global scope and collaboration across multiple centers, enhancing the generalizability of the findings. DISCUSSION: This study's primary objective is to elucidate the potential superiority in 5-year overall survival benefits of D3 lymph node dissection compared to the conventional D2 approach in patients with stage II-III right colon cancer. By examining this specific subset of patients, the research aims to contribute valuable insights into optimizing surgical strategies for improved long-term outcomes. The trial's international and multicenter nature enhances its applicability across diverse populations. The outcomes of this study may inform future guidelines and contribute to the ongoing discourse surrounding the standardization of colon cancer surgery, particularly in the context of right colon cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03200834. Registered on June 27, 2017.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in elderly patients: a propensity-score matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Scarce research has reported the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in elderly patients. This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in elderly patients. METHODS: A total of 303 elderly patients who underwent distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer from June 2017 to June 2021 were enrolled. Variables used to calculate propensity score matching included sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists, history of diabetes, and history of hypertension. The statistical significance of continuous variables was tested using an independent sample t test. chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test were used for the evaluation of 3-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: After performing 1:1 propensity score matching, 248 patients were included for analysis (laparoscopic = 124, open = 124). Compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group showed significant advantages in estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), pain scale on the first postoperative day (P = 0.002), time to first flatus (P = 0.004), time to first liquid diet (P = 0.005), hospital stays (P < 0.001), and total complications (P = 0.011), but devoted much more operation time (P < 0.001). No statistical difference was observed between the two groups in 3-year recurrence-free survival (P = 0.315) or overall survival (P = 0.159). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis demonstrated that laparoscopic surgery had the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and faster postoperative recovery in distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric, indicating that laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is safe and effective for treating elderly patients with distal gastric cancer.

Laparoscopic D2+ lymph node dissection in patients with obesity and gastric cancer: A retrospective study.

D2 lymph node dissection is widely used in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, and its efficacy and safety are known for patients with obesity. Currently, D2+ lymph node dissection is also applied to certain patients with gastric cancer of later stages. Due to the high difficulty of D2+ surgery, it is more challenging to perform on patients with obesity. There is currently limited research on the efficacy and safety of D2+ surgery in obese patients with gastric cancer. The present study aimed to retrospectively analyze the clinical data of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer admitted to a single gastroenterology department. Patients with a body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 were included in the study. A total of 149 patients were selected as the research subjects and divided into two groups. The observation group comprised 74 patients who underwent D2+ lymph node dissection, while the control group comprised 75 patients who underwent standard D2 lymph node dissection. The surgical performance, postoperative recovery and postoperative complications of the two groups were compared. The results showed that the rates of conversion to open surgery in the D2+ and D2 groups were 5.4% (4/74) and 2.7% (2/75), respectively, and were not significantly different. The duration of surgery in the D2+ group (282.55±23.02 min) was significantly longer than that in the D2 group (271.45±20.05 min). The mean number of lymph node dissections in the D2+ group was 28.57±7.19, which was significantly higher than that in the D2 group (25.29±6.41). No statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, time to first flatus, postoperative hospitalization days, total hospitalization expenses or postoperative complications was detected between the two groups. There were no deaths in either group within the 30-day perioperative period. In addition, there was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate between the two groups, while the 5-year overall survival rate of the D2+ group was significantly higher than that of the D2 group. For obese patients with gastric cancer, D2+ surgery may increase the duration of surgery and slightly increase intraoperative blood loss compared with standard D2 radical surgery, but does not increase the incidence of postoperative complications. Moreover, D2+ surgery increases the number of lymph node dissections and improves the 5-year survival rate of patients. Therefore, it may be concluded that laparoscopic D2+ lymph node dissection is safe and feasible for obese patients with gastric cancer.

Radical gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection after neoadjuvant therapy.

OBJECTIVES: This study focuses on the evaluation of the effectiveness of radical gastrectomy with D2 node dissection after neoadjuvant therapy in the patients with gastric cancer. Gastric cancer is a widespread type of cancer, and it is the third leading cause of death in the cancer patients. Metastases most often occur in the lymph nodes and therefore, in addition to gastrectomy, lymph node dissection is often performed in the patients. We are distinguishing between D1, 2 and 3 dissections. As with other cancers, the effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy is being considered, which aims to improve the patient's prognosis and thus the 5-year survival rate. METHODS: Within the study, we evaluated a group of the patients diagnosed with gastric cancer (n = 41). The average age of the patients was 62.3 years (20-72 years). 68.3 % (n = 28) patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy before surgery, the remaining 31.7 % (n = 13) underwent only radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. In all the cases, an open operational approach was implemented. CONCLUSION: Lymphadenopathy was found in 85.4 % of the patients. Complications occurred in both groups, but in the group with neoadjuvant therapy their share was lower (14.3 % vs 23.1 %), while in the group without neoadjuvant treatment the proportion of duodenal leaks was higher, as well as the number of reoperations. In total, an average of 30 ± 8 lymph nodes were harvested. A lower number of T3-4 cases was found in the neoadjuvant group (17.9 % vs 61.6 %), confirming that the tumour size was significantly smaller in the neoadjuvant group than in the group, who did not undergo it and underwent only surgical treatment. Relapse was found in 29.3 % of the patients after neoadjuvant treatment and in 38.5 % of the patients without neoadjuvant treatment. Also, mortality due to relapse was higher in the group without neoadjuvant treatment (30.8 % vs 21.7 %). The average survival was 25 months (Tab. 3, Fig. 3, Ref. 60).

Laparoscopic Versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter, Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study in China.

BACKGROUND: Given the great technical difficulty and procedural complexity of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG), the technical and oncologic safety of LTG versus open total gastrectomy (OTG) in the field of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is yet undetermined. OBJECTIVE: This multicenter cohort study aimed to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of LTG with those of OTG in AGC patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 588 patients from 3 centers who underwent primary total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy, by well-trained surgeons with adequate experience, for pathologically confirmed locally AGC (T2N0-3, T3N0-3, or T4N0-3) between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, were identified, and their clinical data were collected from three participating centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), 450 cases (LTG, n = 225; OTG, n = 225) were eligible and assessed. RESULTS: No significant difference in the number of retrieved lymph nodes, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates, or 5-year overall survival (OS) rates between both surgical groups were observed. Although LTG had significantly longer surgical time (262 vs. 180 min, p < 0.001), LTG was associated with fewer postoperative complications [relative risk (RR) 0.583, 95% CI 0.353-0.960, p = 0.047), less intraoperative bleeding (120 vs. 200 ml, p < 0.001), longer proximal margin resection (3 vs. 2 cm, p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospitalization (11 vs. 13 days, p < 0.001). The mortality rate was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: LTG was not inferior to OTG in terms of survival outcomes and was associated with shorter surgical and postoperative hospitalization time and fewer postoperative complications, suggesting LTG with D2 lymphadenectomy as an important alternative to OTG for patients with AGC, but to be carried out in highly experienced centers.

Long-term and short-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open surgery for advanced gastric cancer: An updated meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of laparoscopy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains controversial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a literature search on the EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane Library databases to identify relevant available articles published between the time of the databases' inception and July 2020. RESULTS: A total of 14,689 patients were included in the 41 studies identified. A total of 6976 patients were in an laparoscopic approach group (LG) and 7713 patients were in an open approach group (OG). The meta-analysis showed that in randomized control trials (RCTs), LG were better than OG in terms of estimated blood loss, time to oral intake and time to first flatus while the operation time and proximal resection margin (PRM) were significantly worse in LG than in OG. In the non-RCTs, LG had shorter hospital stays, less blood loss, less intraoperative transfusion, less time to oral intake, time to first flatus, time to ambulation; less overall or serious complications; and better 3-year and 5-year overall or disease-free survival (DFS). Operation times and PRM were significantly worse for LGs. CONCLUSION: The safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for AGC is not inferior to that of traditional open surgery, and to a certain extent, can reduce trauma, facilitate recovery, and be validated in RCTs and non-RCTs. In the real-world cohort, laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer achieved a better survival rate and DFS rate. However, to evaluate the efficacy of these two methods more comprehensively, high-quality randomized controlled trials and longer follow-up times are still needed.

D2 dissection improves disease-specific survival in advanced gastric cancer patients: 15-year follow-up results of the Italian Gastric Cancer Study Group D1 versus D2 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The extended lymphadenectomy (D2) was recently introduced in several guidelines as the optimal treatment for gastric cancer, based only on the 15-year follow-up results of the Dutch randomised trial, while the British Medical Research Council (MRC) study failed to demonstrate a survival benefit over the more limited D1 dissection. The Italian Gastric Cancer Study Group randomised controlled trial (RCT) was also undertaken to compare D1 versus D2 gastrectomy, and a tendency to improve survival in patients with advanced resectable disease (pT > 1N+) was documented despite negative results in the entire patient population. Now we present the 15-year follow-up results of survival and gastric cancer-related mortality. METHODS: Between June 1998 and December 2006, eligible patients with gastric cancer who signed the informed consent were randomised at 5 centres to either D1 or D2 gastrectomy. Intraoperative randomisation was implemented centrally by phone call. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS); secondary end-points were disease-specific survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality. Analyses were by intention to treat. Strict quality control measures for surgery, lymph node removal, pathology and patient follow-up were implemented and monitored. Registration number: ISRCTN11154654 (http://www.controlled-trials.com). FINDINGS: A total of 267 eligible patients were assigned to either D1 (133 patients) or D2 (134) procedure. Median follow-up time was 16.76 years. Analyses were done both in overall patient population and in pT > 1N+. One hundred patients (38.5) were alive without recurrence. OS and disease-specific survival (DSS) were very high in both arms. In overall population, they were not different between D1 and D2 arm (51.3% vs. 46.8% and 65% vs. 67% respectively, p = 0.31 and p = 0.94). DSS was significantly higher after D2 in pT > 1N+ patients (29.4% vs. 51.4%, p = 0.035). OS and DSS were better after D1 in patients older than 70 years (p = 0.003 and p = 0.006). DSS was higher after D1 also in early stages (p = 0.01). INTERPRETATION: After 15-year follow up, despite no relevant difference in overall population, DSS and gastric cancer-related mortality of patients with advanced disease and lymph node metastases are improved by D2 procedure. Further data available from this trial suggest that D1 procedure should be preferably used in older patients and in early disease. As accurate detection of advanced diseases can be currently provided by adequate preoperative workup in referral centres, D2 procedure should be recommended in these cases. FUNDING: Piedmont Regional fund for Finalized Healthy Research Project, Application 2003 for data collection.

D2 lymph node dissection confers little benefit on the overall survival of older patients with resectable gastric cancer: a propensity score-matching analysis of a multi-institutional dataset.

PURPOSE: Aging societies comprise an increasing number of elderly gastric cancer (GC) patients. We herein attempted to determine whether D2 lymphadenectomy is beneficial for older GC patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a multi-institutional dataset including 3484 patients who received surgical resection for GC. For the analysis, we selected patients aged ≥ 80 years who were clinically diagnosed with T1N + or T2-4 GC. To balance the essential variables including the type of gastrectomy and the stage of progression, propensity score matching was conducted, and we compared the background clinical factors and postoperative outcomes of the patients allocated to the D2 (n = 87) and non-D2 (n = 87) dissection groups. RESULTS: The D2 group had significantly longer operative times, more blood loss, and more retrieved lymph nodes (median 32 vs 24, P < 0.001) than the non-D2 group. The D2 group had a greater incidence of intra-abdominal abscesses (grade ≥ II in the Clavien-Dindo classification) than the non-D2 group (3.5% vs 0%, P = 0.040). The overall disease-specific and relapse-free survival rates of the D2 group tended to be poorer than those of the non-D2 group (hazard ratios 1.49, 1.70 and 1.14, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: D2 lymphadenectomy for older patients with GC conferred little benefit regarding overall survival despite an occurrence of increased complication rates.

Radical Gastrectomy: Still the Gold Standard Treatment for Gastric Cancer-Our Experience from a Tertiary Care Center from Northeast India.

Gastric cancer (GC) is common in the northeast and southern parts of India. Radical surgery is the cornerstone of treatment and offers the only chance for cure. This study was conducted to assess the outcomes of all resectable gastric cancers that presented to our tertiary cancer center in Northeast India. All patients undergoing upfront surgery for gastric cancer with curative intention between 2012 and 2017 were included in the study. A total of 116 patients who underwent upfront radical gastrectomy were included in the study. Males (58.6%) were more common than females (41.4%). Mean age at presentation was 56.12 years (range 26-89). The most common mode of presentation was pain abdomen (53.8%). The most common location of tumor was the distal part (81%) followed by the proximal part (10.3%). The most commonly done procedure was distal radical gastrectomy (56.9%) followed by subtotal gastrectomy (32.8%). Median number of lymph nodes isolated was 14. Fifty-four patients received adjuvant chemotherapy while 32 patients received adjuvant chemoradiation (CTRT). At a median follow-up of 14 months (range, 2-78 months), overall 5-year survival was 23.75% (mean survival 33.77 months, median survival 24 months). The 5-year survival for stages I-III was 100%, 26.25%, and 11.25%, respectively (P < 0.001). Though perioperative chemotherapy has a role in gastric cancer, it is not the substitute for radical D2 gastrectomy which is still the gold standard treatment especially in high-volume centers.

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy for upper-middle advanced gastric cancer: analysis based on lymph node noncompliance.

BACKGROUND: Increasing number of clinical studies have shown that laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 lymph node (LN) dissection is an effective method for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, reports on the technical feasibility and oncology efficacy of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) in the treatment of AGC are rare. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the clinicopathologic data of 1313 patients with clinical stage of cT2-4aN0-3M0 undergoing laparoscopic radical gastrectomy with D2 LN dissection from June 2007 to December 2013 was performed. Noncompliance was defined as patients with more than one LN station absence as described in the protocol for D2 lymphadenectomy in the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (JGCA). According to the literature, it was subdivided into LN compliance group (all LN stations were detected), minor LN noncompliance group (1-2 LN stations were not detected), major LN noncompliance group (more than 2 LN stations were not detected). Based on the LN noncompliance, the surgical indications of LTG were analyzed with LDG as control. RESULTS: Among the 1313 patients, 197 (39.20%) patients and 321(39.71%) patients in the LDG group and the LTG group had minor LN noncompliance, 59(11.70%) patients and 163(20.10%) patients had major LN noncompliance. The difference in the extent of LN noncompliance between the two groups was statistically significant (p < 0.001). COX proportional hazards regression analysis elucidated that the LN noncompliance was an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS). BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 and the history of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) were independent risk factors for major LN noncompliance in LTG group (p < 0.05), with which patients were defined as a LN noncompliance high-risk group. With the exception of LN noncompliance high-risk group, the difference in the extent of LN noncompliance between LTG group and LDG group was still statistically significant (p = 0.008). Tumor diameter > 60 mm is a preoperative risk factor for station #5 LN noncompliance, and no preoperative risk factors for station #6 LN noncompliance were found, with which patients were defined as LN noncompliance middle-risk group. CONCLUSION: LN noncompliance is an independent prognostic factor for poor prognosis in patients after LTG. Based on this finding, patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2, history of PAS and tumor diameter > 60 mm in the advanced stage of upper-middle gastric cancer represent high/middle-risk groups with LN noncompliance in LTG surgery, which should be carefully selected.

[Standard operation procedure of laparoscopic D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: consensus on CLASS-01 trial].

A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (CLASS-01) of laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced distal gastric cancer provides high-level evidence-based evidence for minimally invasive surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer. The findings showed that the experienced surgeons could perform laparoscopic D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer safely and effectively, with significant minimally invasive advantages, which attracting extensive attention in the academic community. In order to correctly understand and scientifically apply the results of this research in clinical practice, this paper summarized the research consensus of CLASS-01 trail for readers, including relevant definitions, surgical indications, device preparation, perioperative management, surgical principles and standards as well as the operational processes and quality control. The relevant standard procedures in this paper are the consensuses which were reached between the researchers when writing the CLASS-01 research plan. The basic principles referred to the international and domestic treatment guidelines and at the same time fully considered the actual situation of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery in China. It has crucial guiding significance for the scientific development and rational promotion of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer in China.

Analysis of the short- and long-term outcomes of membrane anatomy-guided laparoscopic spleen-preserving circumferential splenic hilar lymph node dissection for treating advanced proximal gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the short- and long-term efficacy of membrane anatomy-guided laparoscopic spleen-preserving circumferential splenic hilar lymph node dissection for the treatment of advanced proximal gastric cancer. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted in 186 patients with advanced proximal gastric cancer who underwent mesenteric anatomy-guided laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymph node dissection for advanced proximal gastric cancer in our center from March 2013 to March 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: one group was the laparoscopic anterior splenic hilar lymph node dissection group which we named L-ASHD, n = 103), while the other group was the laparoscopic circumferential splenic hilar lymph node dissection group which we named L-CSHD, n = 83). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in total operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative length of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative complications, etc. (P > 0.05). The number of harvested splenic hilar lymph nodes and the number of patients with harvested positive splenic hilar lymph nodes were both higher in the L-CSHD than in the L-ASHD (3.90 ± 2.52 vs. 3.02 ± 3.07, P < 0.05; 19 vs. 9 patients, P < 0.05). The positive rate of lymph nodes behind the splenic hilar was 8.4%. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that patients in the L-CSHD had similar OS and DFS compared with those of patients in the L-ASHD. CONCLUSION: Membrane anatomy-guided laparoscopic spleen-preserving circumferential splenic hilar lymph node dissection for advanced proximal gastric cancer is safe and feasible and can help avoid the incomplete dissection of positive lymph nodes.

Robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymph node dissection during total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Robotic system may have potential advantages to facilitate the technically challenging splenic hilar lymphadenectomy during gastrectomy for gastric cancer. However, robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy is performed infrequently not only because of the limited availability of the robot but also because of its technical difficulty. In this study, we describe our technique of performing robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy in detail to facilitate wider application and present operative outcomes and the follow-up results of the procedure. METHODS: From 2005 to 2015, 93 patients underwent robotic total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. One patient with obvious lymph node (LN) metastasis received splenectomy and was excluded from the analysis. Intraoperative complications, operation and console time, estimated blood loss, postoperative morbidity and mortality, the number of harvested LNs in total and at the splenic hilum, and 5-year overall survival were analyzed, retrospectively. RESULTS: Among the 92 patients, robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy was successfully performed in 91 patients except one who experienced intraoperative splenic artery injury which demanded splenectomy to be performed simultaneously. The overall mean operation time and console time were 287.2 ± 66.0 and 180.2 ± 47.2 min, respectively. Mean estimated blood loss was 141.1 ± 227.0 ml. The mortality was 1.1% (1/92). The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 16.3% (15/92). There was no case of pancreatic fistula, whole splenic infarction, or the delayed aneurysm of splenic artery. The mean numbers of harvested LNs in total and at the splenic hilum were 50.8 ± 18.1 and 1.9 ± 2.6. The 5-year overall survival was 86.3% and 5-year recurrence-free survival was 87.4%. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that robotic application for spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy could be a feasible and safe method.

The Safety and Feasibility of Single-Port Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Single-port laparoscopic surgery maximizes the advantages of laparoscopic surgery by reducing damage of the abdominal wall. However, no comparative studies have addressed its application to gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). We therefore aimed to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (SLG) for the treatment of AGC by comparing it with conventional multi-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (MLG). METHODS: We searched the prospective gastric cancer database of our institute for patients with AGC who underwent SLG or MLG between October 2007 and December 2013. Cases of R2 resection with distant metastasis or concurrent surgery for comorbid malignant lesions were excluded. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables, and the short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: We identified 216 patients who underwent SLG (n = 100) or MLG (n = 116). After propensity score matching, we selected 73 pairs of patients who underwent SLG (distal gastrectomy, 49; total gastrectomy, 24) or MLG (distal gastrectomy, 45; total gastrectomy, 28). While the mean operative times were comparable between the groups, the SLG group had less blood loss, a lower postoperative morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stays. The 5-year survival rates were 74.2% in the SLG group and 60.2% in the MLG group (P = 0.081 by log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: SLG is shown to be safe and feasible for the treatment of AGC, with better short-term results and acceptable oncologic outcomes and may be applicable for AGC treatment.

Standard operation procedure of laparoscopic D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: consensus on CLASS-01 trial / 中华胃肠外科杂志

A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (CLASS-01) of laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced distal gastric cancer provides high-level evidence-based evidence for minimally invasive surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer. The findings showed that the experienced surgeons could perform laparoscopic D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer safely and effectively, with significant minimally invasive advantages, which attracting extensive attention in the academic community. In order to correctly understand and scientifically apply the results of this research in clinical practice, this paper summarized the research consensus of CLASS-01 trail for readers, including relevant definitions, surgical indications, device preparation, perioperative management, surgical principles and standards as well as the operational processes and quality control. The relevant standard procedures in this paper are the consensuses which were reached between the researchers when writing the CLASS-01 research plan. The basic principles referred to the international and domestic treatment guidelines and at the same time fully considered the actual situation of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery in China. It has crucial guiding significance for the scientific development and rational promotion of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer in China.

Standard operation procedure of laparoscopic D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: consensus on CLASS-01 trial / 中华胃肠外科杂志

A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (CLASS-01) of laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced distal gastric cancer provides high-level evidence-based evidence for minimally invasive surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer. The findings showed that the experienced surgeons could perform laparoscopic D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer safely and effectively, with significant minimally invasive advantages, which attracting extensive attention in the academic community. In order to correctly understand and scientifically apply the results of this research in clinical practice, this paper summarized the research consensus of CLASS-01 trail for readers, including relevant definitions, surgical indications, device preparation, perioperative management, surgical principles and standards as well as the operational processes and quality control. The relevant standard procedures in this paper are the consensuses which were reached between the researchers when writing the CLASS-01 research plan. The basic principles referred to the international and domestic treatment guidelines and at the same time fully considered the actual situation of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery in China. It has crucial guiding significance for the scientific development and rational promotion of laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer in China.

Recent updates in perioperative chemotherapy and recurrence pattern of gastric cancer.

Gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection has become the global standard procedure for locally advanced gastric cancer to maximally reduce locoregional recurrence. In East Asia, based on the evidence of the ACTS-GC and the CLASSIC trials, postadjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 monotherapy or capecitabine and oxaliplatin after curative D2 gastrectomy is the current standard strategy. However, approximately 20% to 30% of patients still develop distant recurrence even after these postadjuvant chemotherapies, especially in those with pathological stage III disease. This review summarizes recent (2008-2018) evidence on the benefits of adjuvant therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer. JACRO GC-07, a Phase III trial, recently showed a superior 3-year recurrence-free survival of the S-1 plus docetaxel regimen in comparison to S-1 monotherapy for patients with pathological stage III gastric cancer after curative D2 gastrectomy. With regard to recent new evidence on neoadjuvant strategy, JCOG0501, a Phase III trial, did not show any superiority in 3-year overall survival (OS) of additional neoadjuvant chemotherapy with S-1/cisplatin over postadjuvant S-1 monotherapy in scirrhous type gastric cancer. Further clinical trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy are ongoing to improve the poor prognosis for gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastases. These trials could lead to new evidence for improved treatment of gastric cancer in the near future.

Progress of preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy in gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gastric carcinoma, a highly common malignant tumor, is treated mainly by surgery. Meanwhile, radiotherapy is attracting increased attention as a crucial locoregional therapy. However, the application of radiotherapy in gastric carcinoma is still limited and radiation standards remain debatable. MAIN BODY: The use of preoperative radiotherapy for treating gastroesophageal junction cancer has advanced. However, additional phase III clinical trials are needed to further verify the therapeutic value of preoperative radiotherapy for gastric cancer. Patients with D1 or D1 plus lymphadenectomy can benefit from postoperative radiotherapy obviously, and postoperative radiotherapy may be effective for patients with D2 lymphadenectomy with a high N stage. The target volume delineation of preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy should be based on clinical experience and the characteristics of lymphatic drainage. CONCLUSIONS: With the advancement of radiotherapy technology, preoperative and postoperative radiotherapy are becoming increasingly accepted as important auxiliary treatments for gastric cancer.