Morbidity and Mortality After Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy to Treat Gastric Cancer: An Interim Report: A Phase III Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Trial (The KLASS-07 Trial).

PURPOSE: We conducted a randomized prospective trial (KLASS-07 trial) to compare laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) for gastric cancer. In this interim report, we describe short-term results in terms of morbidity and mortality. METHODS AND METHODS: The sample size was 442 participants. At the time of the interim analysis, 314 patients were enrolled and randomized. After excluding patients who did not undergo planned surgeries, we performed a modified per-protocol analysis of 151 and 145 patients in the LADG and TLDG groups, respectively. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics, including comorbidity status, did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. Blood loss was somewhat higher in the LADG group, but statistical significance was not attained (76.76±72.63 vs. 62.91±65.68 mL; P=0.087). Neither the required transfusion level nor the operation or reconstruction time differed between the 2 groups. The mini-laparotomy incision in the LADG group was significantly longer than the extended umbilical incision required for specimen removal in the TLDG group (4.79±0.82 vs. 3.89±0.83 cm; P<0.001). There were no between-group differences in the time to solid food intake, hospital stay, pain score, or complications within 30 days postoperatively. No mortality was observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term morbidity and mortality rates did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. The KLASS-07 trial is currently underway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03393182.

Prognostic Outcome of Pulmonary Resection for Pulmonary Metastases from Gastric Cancer.

PURPOSE: Regardless of the devastating outcomes of pulmonary resection for metastases from gastric cancer, a handful of patients survive long after pulmonary metastasectomy. This study aimed to identify a good candidate for pulmonary resection for metastases from gastric cancer. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2023, 564 patients underwent pulmonary metastasectomy in our department, of which 12 patients underwent pulmonary resection for metastases from gastric cancer. Variables evaluated were the number and size of metastatic lesions, surgical procedure, disease-free interval (DFI), and the serum carcinoembryonic antigen at pulmonary metastasectomy. RESULTS: The DFI following gastrectomy ≤12.5 months group had a significantly worse overall survival (OS) than the other group (p = 0.005). A comparison between DFI following gastrectomy ≤12.5 months group and DFI following gastrectomy >12.5 months group showed a significant difference in serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) value at pulmonary metastasectomy (p = 0.048). The serum CEA value at pulmonary metastasectomy >5.8 ng/ml group had a significantly worse OS than the other group (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Pulmonary metastasectomy can be indicated in some patients with metastasis from gastric cancer who have longer DFI from gastrectomy and lower serum CEA at pulmonary metastasectomy.

Surgical and Perioperative Treatments for Esophagogastric Junction Cancer.

Esophagogastric junction cancer (EGJC) is a rare malignant disease that occurs in the gastroesophageal transition zone. In recent years, its incidence has been rapidly increasing not only in Western countries but also in East Asia, and it has been attracting the attention of both clinicians and researchers. EGJC has a worse prognosis than gastric cancer (GC) and is characterized by complex lymphatic drainage pathways in the mediastinal and abdominal regions. EGJC was previously treated in the same way as GC or esophageal cancer, but, in recent years, it has been treated as an independent malignant disease, and treatment focusing only on EGJC has been developed. A recent multicenter prospective study revealed the frequency of lymph node metastasis by station and established the optimal extent of lymph node dissection. In perioperative treatment, the combination of multi-drug chemotherapy, radiation therapy, molecular targeted therapy, and immunotherapy is expected to improve the prognosis. In this review, we summarize previous clinical trials and their important evidence on surgical and perioperative treatments for EGJC.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for nonmetastatic T4a gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of reconstructed individual participant data from propensity score-matched studies.

BACKGROUND: ​The applicability of laparoscopy to nonmetastatic T4a patients with gastric cancer remains unclear due to the lack of high-quality evidence. The purpose of this study was to compare the survival rates of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for these patients through a meta-analysis of reconstructed individual participant data from propensity score-matched studies. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and CNKI were examined for relevant studies without language restrictions through July 25, 2023. Individual participant data on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were extracted from the published Kaplan-Meier survival curves. One-stage and two-stage meta-analyses were performed. In addition, data regarding surgical outcomes and recurrence patterns were also collected, which were meta-analyzed using traditional aggregated data. RESULTS: Six studies comprising 1860 patients were included for analysis. In the one-stage meta-analyses, the results demonstrated that LG was associated with a significantly better DFS (Random-effects model: P = 0.027; Restricted mean survival time [RMST] up to 5 years: P = 0.033) and a comparable OS (Random-effects model: P = 0.135; RMST up to 5 years: P = 0.053) than OG for T4a gastric cancer patients. Two-stage meta-analyses resulted in similar results, with a 13% reduced hazard of cancer-related death (P = 0.04) and 10% reduced hazard of overall mortality (P = 0.11) in the LG group. For secondary outcomes, the pooled results showed an association of LG with less estimated blood loss, faster postoperative recovery and more retrieved lymph nodes. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery for patients with nonmetastatic T4a disease is associated with a potential survival benefit and improved surgical outcomes.

Overall Volume of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery Positively Impacts Gastric Cancer Outcomes at Centers with Low Gastrectomy Volume.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between hospital volume and surgical mortality is well documented. However, complete centralization of surgical care is not always feasible. The present study investigates how overall volume of upper gastrointestinal surgery at hospitals influences patient outcomes following resection for gastric adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: National Cancer Database (2010-2019) patients with pathologic stage 1-3 gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent gastrectomy were identified. Three cohorts were created: low-volume hospitals (LVH) for both gastrectomy and overall upper gastrointestinal operations, mixed-volume hospital (MVH) for low-volume gastrectomy but high-volume overall upper gastrointestinal operations, and high-volume gastrectomy hospitals (HVH). Chi-squared tests were used to analyze sociodemographic factors and surgical outcomes and Kaplan-Meier method for survival analysis. RESULTS: In total, 26,398 patients were identified (LVH: 20,099; MVH: 539; HVH: 5,760). The 5-year survival was equivalent between MVH and HVH for all stages of disease (MVH: 56.0%, HVH 55.6%; p = 0.9866) and when stratified into early (MVH: 69.9%, HVH: 65.4%; p = 0.1998) and late stages (MVH: 24.7%, HVH: 32.0%; p = 0.1480), while LVH had worse survival. After matching patients, postoperative outcomes were worse for LVH, but there was no difference between MVH and HVH in terms of adequate lymphadenectomy, margin status, readmission rates, and 90-day mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite lower gastrectomy volume for cancer, postoperative gastrectomy outcomes at centers that perform a high number of upper gastrointestinal cancer surgeries were similar to hospitals with high gastrectomy volume. These hospitals offer a blueprint for providing equivalent outcomes to high volume centers while enhancing availability of quality cancer care.

Palliative Surgery for Patients with Gastroesophageal Junction or Gastric Cancer: A Report on Clinical Observational Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have focused on palliative surgery in patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) or gastric cancer. We sought to evaluate clinical observational outcomes following palliative surgery in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with GEJ or gastric cancer who underwent palliative surgery (1/2010-11/2022) were identified. The primary outcomes were symptom improvement, ability to tolerate an oral diet, discharge to home, 30 "good days" without hospitalization, and receipt of systemic treatment. Postoperative outcomes and survival were secondarily evaluated. RESULTS: Among 93 patients, the median age was 59 (IQR 47-68) years, and the median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) was 1 (range 0-3). The most frequent indication for palliative surgery was primary tumor obstruction [75 (81%) patients]. The most common procedures were feeding tube placement in 60 (65%) and intestinal bypass in 15 (16%) patients. A total of 75 (81%) patients experienced symptom improvement. Of these, 19 (25%) developed recurrent and 49 (65%) developed new symptoms. ECOG-PS was significantly associated with symptom-free time. Among those who underwent a bypass, resection, or ostomy creation for malignant obstruction, 16 (80%) tolerated an oral diet. Postoperatively, 87 (94%) were discharged home, 72 (77%) had 30 good days, and 64 (69%) received systemic treatment. Postoperative complications occurred in 35 (38%) patients, and 7 (8%) died within 30 days. The median survival time was 7.7 (95% CI 6.4-10.40) months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with incurable GEJ or gastric cancer can benefit from palliative surgery. Prognosis and performance status should inform goals-of-care discussions and patient selection for surgical palliation.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Improve Survival in cT2N0M0 Gastric Adenocarcinoma Patients: A Multicenter Propensity Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: According to current international guidelines, stage cT2N0M0 gastric adenocarcinoma warrants preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery. However, upfront surgery is often preferred in clinical practice, depending on patient clinical status and local treatment preferences. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of cT2N0M0 patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed among 32 centers, including gastric adenocarcinoma patients operated between January 2007 and December 2017. Patients with cT2N0M0 stage were divided into upfront surgery (S) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery (CS) groups. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to compensate for baseline differences between the groups. RESULTS: Among the 202 patients diagnosed with cT2N0M0 stage, 68 (33.7%) were in the CS group and 134 (66.3%) were in the S group. CS patients were younger (mean age 62.7 ± 12.8 vs. 69.8 ± 12.1 years for S patients; p < 0.001) and had a better health status (World Health Organization performance status = 0 in 60.3% of CS patients vs. 34.5% of S patients; p = 0.006). During follow-up, recurrence occurred in 27.2% and 19.6% of CS and S patients, respectively, after IPTW (p = 0.32). Five-year OS was similar between CS and S patients (78.9% vs. 68.3%; p = 0.42), as was 5-year DFS (70.4% vs. 68.5%; p = 0.96). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with neither OS nor DFS in multivariable analysis after IPTW. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cT2N0M0 gastric adenocarcinoma did not present a survival or recurrence benefit if treated with perioperative chemotherapy followed by surgery as opposed to surgery alone.

Premature mortality for patients after completely resected early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or stomach.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the life expectancy burden of esophago-gastric cancer by analyzing years of life lost (YLL) for a Western patient population after treatment of early esophageal (EAC) or early gastric (GAC) adenocarcinoma. BACKGROUND: For patients with early EAC or GAC, the short-term prognosis after surgical resection is very good. Little data is available regarding long-term prognosis when compared to the general population. METHODS: Two hundred and fourteen patients with pT1 EAC (n = 112) or GAC (n = 102) were included in the study. Patients with EAC underwent transthoracic en-bloc esophagectomy; those with GAC had total or subtotal gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy. Surviving patients had a median follow-up of approximately 14 years. YLL was calculated using average life expectancy data from Germany. RESULTS: Patients with EAC were younger (median age 61 years) than those with GAC (66 years) (p = 0.031). The male:female ratio was 10:1 for EAC and 3:2 for GAC (p < 0.001). Multivariate survival analysis showed the age of the patients ≥60 years and the existence of lymph node metastasis was associated with poor prognosis. The median YLL for all patients who died over follow-up was 8.0 years. For patients under 60 years, it was approximately 20 years, and for older patients, approximately 5 years (p < 0.001) without difference in tumor stage between these age cohorts. YLL did not differ for GAC vs. EAC. CONCLUSION: After surgical resection, the prognostic burden as measured by YLL is relevant for all patients with early esophageal and gastric adenocarcinomas and especially for younger patients. Reasons for YLL need further studies.

Characteristics and prognostic impact of cancer cachexia defined by the Asian Working Group for Cachexia consensus in patients with curable gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Cachexia is prevalent in cancer patients. The conventional diagnostic criteria for cachexia are often based on Western evidence, lacking consensus for Asian populations. This study aims to compare Asian Working Group for Cachexia (AWGC) criteria with Fearon's criteria, assessing their differences in population characteristics and prognostic impact. METHODS: The clinical data of patients who underwent radical gastrectomy between 2013 and 2019 were prospectively collected. Cachexia diagnosis involves the utilization of either AWGC criteria and the previous international consensus proposed by Fearon et al. A scoring model is established based on the optional criteria according to the AWGC criteria. Univariate and multivariate logistic and Cox regression analysis were conducted to determine the independent effect factors for postoperative complications and overall survival. RESULTS: In a total of 1330 patients, 461 met AWGC cachexia criteria and 311 met Fearon's criteria. Excluding 262 overlapping cases, those diagnosed solely with AWGC-cachexia had higher age and lower BMI, albumin, hemoglobin, and handgrip strength compared to those by Fearon's criteria alone. AWGC-cachexia independently increased the risk of postoperative complications, whereas Fearon's criteria did not. Patients with AWGC-cachexia also exhibited shorter overall survival than Fearon's criteria. The AWGC-based cachexia grading system effectively stratifies the risks of postoperative complications and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The AWGC criteria is more effective in diagnosing cancer cachexia in the Asian population and provide better prognostic indicators.

Predictors of 1-year mortality after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: One-year mortality is important for referrals to specialist palliative care or advance care planning (ACP). This helps optimize comfort for those who cannot be cured or have a lower life expectancy. Few studies have investigated the risk factors for 1-year mortality after gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC). METHODS: A total of 1415 patients with gastric cancer (stages I-IV) who underwent gastrectomy between 2005 and 2020 were included. The patients were randomly assigned to the investigation group (n = 850) and validation group (n = 565) in a 3:2 ratio. In the investigation group, significant independent prognostic factors for predicting 1-year survival were identified. A scoring system for predicting 1-year mortality was developed which was validated in the validation group. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis revealed that the following seven variables were significant independent factors for 1-year survival: age ≧78, preoperative comorbidity, total gastrectomy, postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo classification CD â‰§ 3a), stage III and IV, and R2 resection. While developing a 1-year mortality score (OMS), an age ≧78 was scored 2, preoperative comorbidity, total gastrectomy, and postoperative complication (CD â‰§ 3a) were scored 1, and stage III, IV, and R2-resection were scored 2, 3, and 3, respectively. OMS 3 had a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 66% for predicting death within 1 year. In the validation group, OMS 5 had a sensitivity of 55% and a specificity of 93% for predicting death within 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: OMS may provide important information and help surgeons select the timing of ACP in patients with GC.

Surgeon age in relation to patients' long-term survival after gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing surgeon age may influence patient outcomes after complex procedures due to gained experience but also decreased technical and cognitive abilities. This study aimed to clarify whether surgeon age influences patients' long-term survival after gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Population-based cohort study including all patients who underwent open and curatively intended gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma between 2006 and 2015 in Sweden, with follow-up throughout 2020. Surgeon age, categorized into three equal-sized groups (tertiles), was assessed in relation to 5-year all-cause mortality rate (main outcome) and 5-year disease-specific death (secondary outcome) using multivariable Cox regression adjusted for patient age, sex, education, co-morbidity, pathological tumour stage, tumour sublocation and neoadjuvant therapy. Lymph node yield, resection margin status, in-hospital complications and annual surgeon volume of gastrectomy were considered potential mediators. RESULTS: Among 1647 patients, the 5-year all-cause mortality rate was increased for surgeon age ≥55 years (adjusted HR 1.21, 95% c.i. 1.04 to 1.41) and borderline elevated for age 47-54 years (HR 1.16, 95% c.i. 0.99 to 1.36), compared with age ≤46 years. Five-year disease-specific death was increased for surgeon age ≥55 years (HR 1.25, 95% c.i. 1.06 to 1.48) and 47-54 years (HR 1.22, 95% c.i. 1.02 to 1.44), compared with age ≤46 years. The associations attenuated and became statistically non-significant after adjustment for lymph node yield, resection margin status and complications. CONCLUSION: Surgeon age ≥47 years might be associated with worse long-term survival in patients who undergo gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma, possibly mediated in part by differences in lymph node yield, resection margin status and complications.

Siewert II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: Still searching for the right treatment transabdominal or transthoracic surgical approaches?

INTRODUCTION: To date, the discussion is still ongoing whether the Siewert II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) should be resected either by thoracoabdominal esophagectomy or gastrectomy with resection of the distal esophagus by transhiatal extension. The aim of our study was to compare the oncological and perioperative outcomes of the transthoracic approach (TTA) and the transabdominal approach (TAA). METHODS: Searches of electronic databases identifying studies from Cochrane, PubMed and Google Scholar were performed. Randomised and non-randomised studies comparing TTA and TAA approaches for surgical treatment of AEG Siewert type II were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa and Jada scales were used to evaluate methodological quality. The risk of bias was assessed using the Rob v2 and Robins-I tools. Meta-analyses were conducted for the outcomes. RESULTS: We included 17 trials (2 randomised controlled trials and 15 cohorts) involving 15297 patients. Longer three-year overall survival, five-year overall survival and R0 resection rates were observed in the TTA group. However, TTA had greater morbidity and pulmonary complications. CONCLUSION: Transthoracic approach appears to be preferable for selected Siewert II tumours. This may lead to higher survival rates and better R0 resection rate. Well-designed studies are needed to confirm the results of this systematic review.

Long-term survival outcomes of robotic total gastrectomy for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Robotic gastrectomy is a safe and feasible approach for gastric cancer (GC); however, its long-term oncological efficacy remains unclear. The authors evaluated the long-term survival outcomes and recurrence patterns of patients with locally advanced proximal GC who underwent robotic total gastrectomy (RTG). METHODS: This prospective study (FUGES-014 study) enrolled 48 patients with locally advanced proximal GC who underwent RTG between March 2018 and February 2020 at a tertiary referral teaching hospital. Patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) in the FUGES-002 study were enrolled in a 2:1 ratio to compare the survival outcomes between RTG and LTG. The primary endpoint of the FUGES-014 study was postoperative 30-day morbidity and has been previously reported. Here, the authors reported the results of 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 3-year overall survival (OS), and recurrence patterns. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 48 patients in the RTG and 96 patients in the LTG groups were included. The 3-year DFS rates were 77.1% (95% CI: 66.1-89.9%) for the RTG and 68.8% (95% CI: 60.1-78.7%) for the LTG groups ( P =0.261). The 3-year OS rates were not significantly different between the groups (85.4 vs. 74.0%, P =0.122). Recurrence occurred in nine patients (18.8%) in the RTG and 27 (28.1%) patients in the LTG groups ( P =0.234). Recurrence patterns and causes of death were similar between the groups ( P >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The oncological outcome of RTG was noninferior to that of LTG. Thus, RTG might be an alternative surgical treatment for locally advanced proximal GC.

Reporting of core outcomes in gastric cancer surgery trials over the past 25 years (systematic review).

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer, a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, has seen limited improvement in survival over the past 3 decades. Surgical resection is the cornerstone of curative management but the optimal approach remains unclear. Decision-making is hindered by inconsistent outcome reporting limiting data synthesis between trials. International consensus between healthcare professionals and patients has formed a core outcome set to be reported as a minimum. We appraised outcomes previously reported. METHODS: Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs during years 1995-2021. We searched trial registries for protocols of ongoing and future trials. RESULTS: Ninety-nine articles from 64 studies and 69 trial protocols were included. No study reported all core outcomes: average reported per trial was 4 (interquartile range: 2). 'Serious' adverse events were reported by 98%, completeness of tumour removal by 85% and surgery-related death by 74%. Outcomes important to patients were reported least: quality of life (22%) and nutritional effects (15%). Defining outcomes and time frames used was variable. CONCLUSIONS: Critically important outcomes are poorly reported in the literature and the status has not improved in future trials. Further work is required to improve uptake.

Prediction of 30-Day Morbidity and Mortality After Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Use of an Artificial Neural Network.

BACKGROUND: Conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is indicated primarily for unsatisfactory weight loss or gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study aimed to use a comprehensive database to define predictors of 30-day reoperation, readmission, reintervention, or mortality. An artificial neural network (ANN) was employed to optimize prediction of the composite endpoint (occurrence of 1+ morbid event). METHODS: Areview of 8895 patients who underwent conversion for weight-related or GERD-related indications was performed using the 2021 MBSAQIP national dataset. Demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, and other factors were assessed for bivariate and subsequent multivariable associations with the composite endpoint (P ≤ .05). Factors considered in the multivariable model were imputed into a three-node ANN with 20% randomly withheld for internal validation, to optimize predictive accuracy. Models were compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: 39% underwent conversion for weight considerations and 61% for GERD. Rates of 30-day reoperation, readmission, reintervention, mortality, and the composite endpoint were 3.0%, 7.1%, 2.1%, .1%, and 9.1%, respectively. Of the nine factors associated with the composite endpoint on bivariate analysis, only non-white race (P < .001; odds ratio 1.4), lower body-mass index (P < .001; odds ratio .22), and therapeutic anticoagulation (P = .001; odds ratio 2.0) remained significant upon multivariable analysis. Areas under ROC curves for the multivariable regression, ANN training, and validation sets were .587, .601, and .604, respectively. DISCUSSION: Identification of risk factors for morbidity after conversion offers critical information to improve patient selection and manage postoperative expectations. ANN models, with appropriate clinical integration, may optimize prediction of morbidity.

Intraoperative assessment of the curative potential to predict survival after gastric cancer resection: A national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The surgeon's intraoperative assessment of the curative potential of tumor resection following gastrectomy adds new information that could help clinicians and patients by predicting survival. METHODS: All patients in Sweden undergoing gastric cancer resection between 2006 and 2018 were grouped according to a prospectively registered variable; the surgeon's intraoperative assessment of the curative potential of surgery: curative, borderline curative, or palliative. Factors affecting group allocation were analyzed with multivariable logistic regression, while survival was analyzed using multivariable Cox regression and the Kaplan-Meier method. Positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated. RESULTS: Of 2341 patients undergoing gastric cancer resection, 1547 (71%) were deemed curative, 340 (15%) borderline curative, and 314 (14%) palliative (140 missing assessments). Advanced stage increased the risk of borderline curative resection (Stage III, odds ratio (OR) = 6.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.92-9.31), as did emergency surgery OR = 3.31 (1.74-6.31) and blood loss >500 mL; OR = 1.63 (1.06-2.49). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion both decreased the risk of borderline curative resection, OR = 0.58 (0.39-0.87) and 0.57 (0.40-0.80), respectively. In multivariable Cox regression, the surgeon's assessment independently predicted worse survival for borderline curative (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.29-1.83) and palliative resections (HR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.45-2.19), compared to curative resections. The sensitivity of the surgeon's assessment of long-term survival was 96.7%. The PPV was 50.7% and the NPV was 92.1%. CONCLUSION: The surgeon's intraoperative assessment of the curative potential of gastric cancer surgery may independently aid survival prediction and is analogous to prognostication by pathologic Staging. Advanced disease, emergency surgery, and a high intraoperative blood loss, increases the risk of a borderline curative or palliative resection. Conversely, neoadjuvant treatment and MDT discussion reduce the risk of borderline curative or palliative resection.

Assessment of Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Hilar Lymphadenectomy for Advanced Proximal Gastric Cancer Without Invasion Into the Greater Curvature: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The survival benefit of laparoscopic total gastrectomy combined with spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy (LSTG) for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer (APGC) without invasion into the greater curvature remains uncertain. Objective: To compare the long-term and short-term efficacy of LSTG (D2 + No. 10 group) and conventional laparoscopic total gastrectomy (D2 group) for patients with APGC that has not invaded the greater curvature. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this open-label, prospective randomized clinical trial, a total of 536 patients with clinical stage cT2 to 4a/N0 to 3/M0 APGC without invasion into the greater curvature were enrolled from January 2015 to October 2018. The final follow-up was on October 31, 2021. Data were analyzed from December 2021 to February 2022. Interventions: Eligible patients were randomized to the D2 + No. 10 group or the D2 group. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes were 3-year overall survival (OS) and morbidity and mortality within 30 days after surgery. Results: Of 526 included patients, 392 (74.5%) were men, and the mean (SD) age was 60.6 (9.6) years. A total of 263 patients were included in the D2 + No. 10 group, and 263 were included in the D2 group. The 3-year DFS was 70.3% (95% CI, 64.8-75.8) for the D2 + No. 10 group and 64.3% (95% CI, 58.4-70.2; P = .11) for the D2 group, and the 3-year OS in the D2 + No. 10 group was better than that in the D2 group (75.7% [95% CI, 70.6-80.8] vs 66.5% [95% CI, 60.8-72.2]; P = .02). Multivariate analysis revealed that splenic hilar lymphadenectomy was not an independent protective factor for DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.86; 95% CI, 0.63-1.16) or OS (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.12). Stratification analysis showed that patients with advanced posterior gastric cancer in the D2 + No. 10 group had better 3-year DFS (92.9% vs 39.3%; P < .001) and OS (92.9% vs 42.9%; P < .001) than those in the D2 group. Multivariate analysis confirmed that patients with advanced posterior gastric cancer could have the survival benefit from No. 10 lymph node dissection (DFS: HR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02-0.46; OS: HR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03-0.52). Conclusions and Relevance: Although LSTG could not significantly improve the 3-year DFS of patients with APGC without invasion into the greater curvature, patients with APGC located posterior gastric wall may benefit from LSTG. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02333721.

Hospital volume, postoperative mortality, and costs after gastrectomy for gastric cancer in colombia: is there any association? / Volume hospitalar, mortalidade pós-operatória e custos após gastrectomia por câncer gástrico na colômbia: existe associação?

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: There are no information in the literature associating the volume of gastrectomies with survival and costs for the health system in the treatment of patients with gastric cancer in Colombia. AIMS: The aim of this study was to analyze how gastrectomy for gastric cancer is associated with hospital volume, 30-day and 180-day postoperative mortality, and healthcare costs in Bogotá, Colombia. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study based on hospital data of all adult patients with gastric cancer who underwent gastrectomy between 2014 and 2016 using a paired propensity score. The surgical volume was identified as the average annual number of gastrectomies performed by the hospital. RESULTS: A total of 743 patients were included in the study. Hospital mortality at 30 and 180 days postoperatively was 36 (4.85%) and 127 (17.09%) patients, respectively. The average health care cost was USD 3,200. A total of 26 or more surgeries were determined to be the high surgical volume cutoff. Patients operated on in hospitals with a high surgical volume had lower 6-month mortality (HR 0.44; 95%CI 0.27-0.71; p=0.001), and no differences were found in health costs (mean difference 398.38; 95%CI-418.93-1,215.69; p=0.339). CONCLUSIONS: This study concluded that in Bogotá (Colombia), surgery in a high-volume hospital is associated with better 6-month survival and no additional costs to the health system.

RESUMO RACIONAL: Não há informações na literatura relacionando o volume de gastrectomias bem como a sobrevida e os custos para o sistema de saúde, no tratamento de pacientes com câncer gástrico na Colômbia. OBJETIVOS: analisar como a gastrectomia para câncer gástrico está associada ao volume hospitalar, mortalidade pós-operatória de 30 e 180 dias e custos de saúde em Bogotá, Colômbia. MÉTODOS: Estudo de coorte retrospectivo baseado em dados hospitalares de todos os pacientes adultos com câncer gástrico submetidos à gastrectomia entre 2014 e 2016, utilizando um escore de propensão pareado. O volume cirúrgico foi identificado como o número médio anual de gastrectomias realizadas pelo hospital. RESULTADOS: Foram incluídos no estudo 743 pacientes. A mortalidade hospitalar aos 30 e 180 dias de pós-operatório, foram respectivamente, 36 (4,85%) e 127 (17,09%) pacientes. O custo médio de saúde foi de US$ 3.200. Vinte e seis ou mais cirurgias foram determinadas como ponto de corte de alto volume cirúrgico. Pacientes operados em hospitais de alto volume cirúrgico tiveram menor mortalidade em seis meses (HR 0,44; IC95% 0,27-0,71; p=0,001) e não foram encontradas diferenças nos custos com saúde (diferença média 398,38; IC95% −418,93-1215,69; p=0,339). CONCLUSÕES: Este estudo concluiu que em Bogotá (Colômbia), a cirurgia em um hospital com alto volume cirúrgico está associada a uma melhor sobrevida de seis meses e não há custos adicionais para o sistema de saúde.

Prognostic Predictors After Surgical Intervention for Stage IV Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study aimed to examine the efficacy of surgical intervention after chemotherapy for stage IV gastric cancer and the predictors of survival after surgical intervention. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-three gastric cancer patients who had only one type of incurable factor (e.g., para-aortic lymph node metastasis) and had undergone initial chemotherapy, underwent chemotherapy alone (CX group; n=25), palliative gastrectomy (PS group; n=8), and conversion surgery (CS group; n=10). Their therapeutic outcomes were compared. RESULTS: The CS group had significantly higher 2-year overall survival rates (80%) than the CX group (25%), whose prognosis was similar to that of the PS group (23%; p<0.001). Pathological complete response of para-aortic lymph node or peritoneal metastases was an independent predictor of survival after surgery, as was >6 months of chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: CS may improve the prognosis of patients with stage IV gastric cancer in whom chemotherapy can achieve pathological disappearance of the metastatic lesions.

Clinical impact of gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients with positive lavage cytology without gross peritoneal dissemination.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of gastric cancer patients with positive lavage cytology without gross peritoneal dissemination (P0CY1) is poor. The survival benefit of gastrectomy for these patients has not been established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this population-based cohort study, we investigated the impact of radical gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for P0CY1 patients. Patients who were diagnosed with Stage IV gastric cancer from 2008 to 2015 in all nine cancer-designated hospitals in a tertiary medical area were listed. Patients who were diagnosed with histologically proven adenocarcinoma in both the primary lesion and lavage cytology during the operation or a diagnostic laparoscopic examination were enrolled. Patients with a gross peritoneal lesion or other metastatic lesions were excluded. The primary outcome was the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of gastrectomy for overall survival. We also evaluated the survival time in patients who underwent gastrectomy or chemotherapy in comparison to patients managed without primary surgery or with best supportive care. RESULTS: One hundred patients were enrolled. The aHR (95% confidence interval) of gastrectomy was 0.677 (0.411-1.114, p = 0.125). The median survival time in patients who received gastrectomy (n = 74) was 21.7, while that in patients managed without primary surgery (n = 30) was 20.5 months (p = 0.155). The median survival time in patients who received chemotherapy (n = 76) was 23.0 months, while that in patients managed without chemotherapy was 8.6 months (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Gastrectomy was not effective for improving the survival time in patients with P0CY1 gastric cancer. Surgeons should prioritize the performance of chemotherapy over surgery as the initial treatment.