Safety evaluation of curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients who underwent liver transplantation: a comparative study with conventional gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the technical and oncological safety of curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients who underwent liver transplantation. METHODS: In this study, we compared the surgical and oncological outcomes of two groups. The first group consisted of 32 consecutive patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer after liver transplantation (LT), while the other group consisted of 127 patients who underwent conventional gastrectomy (CG). In addition, a subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of the background differences and the surgical outcomes on the involvement of a specialized liver transplant surgery team. RESULTS: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LT group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, there were more frequent cases of postoperative transfusion in the LT group compared to the CG group (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the overall complications between the groups (25.00 vs 23.62%, p = 0.874). The 5-year overall survival rates of the LT and CG groups were 76.7% and 90.1%, respectively (p < 0.05). The results of the subgroup analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in various early surgical outcomes, such as time to transfusion during surgery, first flatus, time to first soft diet, postoperative complications, hospital stay after surgery, and the number of harvested lymph nodes except for operation time. CONCLUSIONS: Despite one's medical history of undergoing LT, our study demonstrated that curative gastrectomy could be a surgically safe treatment for gastric cancer. However, further study should be conducted to identify the reason gastric cancer patients who underwent liver transplant surgery have lower overall survival rate.

Comparing surgical and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer with serosal invasion: A retrospective study with propensity score matching.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has gradually increased for treating advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, there is a lack of evidence on oncologic safety for AGC, especially with serosal invasion. This study evaluates the surgical and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer with serosal invasion. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 256 patients who underwent OG and 147 patients who underwent LG for gastric cancer with serosal invasion between August 2005 and December 2017. Finally, 124 patients in the LG group and 124 in the OG group were enrolled according to one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. We evaluated surgical and oncological outcomes, including overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in hospital stay and major complications between the two groups. The retrieved lymph nodes of the LG group were similar to those of OG (40 ± 16.23 vs. 38 ± 14.42, p = 0.306), and it showed a similar operation time compared with the other (164 ± 43.86 vs. 156 ± 37.66, p = 0.063). There was no statistical difference in OS (p = 0.761) and RFS (p = 0.121) for survival analysis between the two groups. CONCLUSION: LG for gastric cancer with serosal invasion is feasible and could be considered as a standard treatment.

Comparison of Standard D2 and Limited Lymph Node Dissection in Elderly Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge on the optimal extent of lymphadenectomy among elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer is limited. This study was designed to compare standard D2 and limited lymphadenectomy for evaluating the appropriate extent of lymphadenectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patient's data based on a prospectively collected gastric cancer registry. The inclusion criteria were age above 75 years and histologically confirmed stage II or more advanced gastric cancer. In this study, 103 patients who underwent limited lymph node dissection and 134 patients who underwent standard D2 lymph node dissection were included to evaluate surgical and oncological outcomes using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. RESULTS: The mean age after PSM was approximately 78 years in both groups. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was 5.81 ± 0.87 and 5.75 ± 0.76, respectively, and 12.5% of the patients in both groups had American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of more than 3. The limited lymphadenectomy group showed a shorter operation time and fewer retrieved lymph. However, other surgical outcomes and pathological data were not significantly different between the groups. No postoperative mortality within 30 days was observed. There were no significant differences in overall complications between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates of the limited and standard lymphadenectomy groups were 58.3% and 73.6%, respectively. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate of the limited lymphadenectomy group was lower than that of the standard lymphadenectomy group; however, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Standard D2 lymphadenectomy has better oncological outcomes in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Impact of Esophagojejunal Reconstruction without Division of the Mesentery for Total Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic total gastrectomy without mesentery division (LTG without MD) and conventional total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (CLTG), as well as evaluate the appropriate method for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) reconstruction after total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 301 consecutive patients who underwent TLTG for upper or middle third gastric cancer between January 2016 and May 2019. After propensity score matching, 95 patients who underwent LTG without MD and 95 who underwent CLTG were assessed. Data on clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes, including operation time, length of postoperative hospital stay, pathological findings, and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: The LTG without MD group showed a shorter time to first flatus (3.26±0.80 vs. 3.62±0.81 days, P=0.003) and a shorter time to soft diet (2.80±2.09 vs. 3.52±2.20 days, P=0.002). The total EJ-related complications in the LTG without MD group were comparable to those in the CLTG group (9.47% vs. 3.16%, P=0.083). EJ-related leakage (6.32% vs. 3.16%, P=0.317) and EJ-related stricture (3.16% vs. 1.05%, P=0.317) rates were not significantly different between the LTG without MD and CLTG groups. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of other early surgical outcomes such as early complications, late complications, hospital stay, and readmission rate. CONCLUSIONS: LTG without MD is a safe surgical treatment for upper or middle third gastric cancer. LTG without MD may be an alternative procedure for EJ anastomosis during TLTG.

Early Clinical Outcomes of the Morbidly Obese Patients Who Underwent Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy by Gastric Cancer Surgeons: the Analysis of Fifty Consecutive Cases.

Purpose: The number of bariatric surgeries performed at our tertiary hospital has gradually increased since the national health insurance began to cover their expenses in January of 2019. This study examined the early surgical outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) performed by experienced gastric cancer surgeons. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed and analyzed data from 50 patients who underwent LSG between November of 2018 and April of 2020 at the Asan Medical Center by 1 of 5 experienced surgeons each of whom performed approximately 100-300 cases of gastrectomy annually. The age, body mass index (BMI), weight, presence of comorbidities, operation time, hospital stay after surgery, postoperative complications, postoperative excess weight loss (EWL), and resolution of comorbidities were examined. Results: The mean age, BMI, and weight were 37.29±9.77 years, 37.12 kg/m2, and 102.00 kg, respectively. The mean operation time and postoperative length of hospital stay were 109.59±35.88 and 5.06±1.20 days, respectively. Two patients (4.00%) had early postoperative complications and postoperative leakage; bleeding and stenosis were not reported. The EWL after 1 and 6 months of operation was 26.55% and 60.34%, respectively. The resolution of diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia after 6 months of operation was 88.89%, 54.54%, and 50.00%, respectively. Conclusion: LSG is safe and effective when performed by an experienced gastric cancer surgeon; however, a long-term follow-up of patients is required.