[Incidence of postoperative complications in Chinese patients with gastric or colorectal cancer based on a national, multicenter, prospective, cohort study].

Objective: To investigate the incidence of postoperative complications in Chinese patients with gastric or colorectal cancer, and to evaluate the risk factors for postoperative complications. Methods: This was a national, multicenter, prospective, registry-based, cohort study of data obtained from the database of the Prevalence of Abdominal Complications After Gastro- enterological Surgery (PACAGE) study sponsored by the China Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Union. The PACAGE database prospectively collected general demographic characteristics, protocols for perioperative treatment, and variables associated with postoperative complications in patients treated for gastric or colorectal cancer in 20 medical centers from December 2018 to December 2020. The patients were grouped according to the presence or absence of postoperative complications. Postoperative complications were categorized and graded in accordance with the expert consensus on postoperative complications in gastrointestinal oncology surgery and Clavien-Dindo grading criteria. The incidence of postoperative complications of different grades are presented as bar charts. Independent risk factors for occurrence of postoperative complications were identified by multifactorial unconditional logistic regression. Results: The study cohort comprised 3926 patients with gastric or colorectal cancer, 657 (16.7%) of whom had a total of 876 postoperative complications. Serious complications (Grade III and above) occurred in 4.0% of patients (156/3926). The rate of Grade V complications was 0.2% (7/3926). The cohort included 2271 patients with gastric cancer with a postoperative complication rate of 18.1% (412/2271) and serious complication rate of 4.7% (106/2271); and 1655 with colorectal cancer, with a postoperative complication rate of 14.8% (245/1655) and serious complication rate of 3.0% (50/1655). The incidences of anastomotic leakage in patients with gastric and colorectal cancer were 3.3% (74/2271) and 3.4% (56/1655), respectively. Abdominal infection was the most frequently occurring complication, accounting for 28.7% (164/572) and 39.5% (120/304) of postoperative complications in patients with gastric and colorectal cancer, respectively. The most frequently occurring grade of postoperative complication was Grade II, accounting for 65.4% (374/572) and 56.6% (172/304) of complications in patients with gastric and colorectal cancers, respectively. Multifactorial analysis identified (1) the following independent risk factors for postoperative complications in patients in the gastric cancer group: preoperative comorbidities (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.51-4.28, P<0.001), neoadjuvant therapy (OR=1.42, 95%CI:1.06-1.89, P=0.020), high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores (ASA score 2 points:OR=1.60, 95% CI: 1.23-2.07, P<0.001, ASA score ≥3 points:OR=0.43, 95% CI: 0.25-0.73, P=0.002), operative time >180 minutes (OR=1.81, 95% CI: 1.42-2.31, P<0.001), intraoperative bleeding >50 mL (OR=1.29,95%CI: 1.01-1.63, P=0.038), and distal gastrectomy compared with total gastrectomy (OR=0.65,95%CI: 0.51-0.83, P<0.001); and (2) the following independent risk factors for postoperative complications in patients in the colorectal cancer group: female (OR=0.60, 95%CI: 0.44-0.80, P<0.001), preoperative comorbidities (OR=2.73, 95%CI: 1.25-5.99, P=0.030), neoadjuvant therapy (OR=1.83, 95%CI:1.23-2.72, P=0.008), laparoscopic surgery (OR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.30-0.72, P=0.022), and abdominoperineal resection compared with low anterior resection (OR=2.74, 95%CI: 1.71-4.41, P<0.001). Conclusion: Postoperative complications associated with various types of infection were the most frequent complications in patients with gastric or colorectal cancer. Although the risk factors for postoperative complications differed between patients with gastric cancer and those with colorectal cancer, the presence of preoperative comorbidities, administration of neoadjuvant therapy, and extent of surgical resection, were the commonest factors associated with postoperative complications in patients of both categories.

[Patient-reported outcomes of locally advanced gastric cancer undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy: a randomized controlled study].

Objective: To compare the patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer. Methods: This single-center prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery,Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University from October 2020 to August 2022. Patients with locally advanced gastric cancer who were to undergo radical gastrectomy were selected and randomly divided into two groups according to 1∶1, and received robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery, respectively. Patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcomes (including postoperative complications, surgical quality and postoperative short-term recovery) were compared between the two groups by t test, Mann-Whitney U test, repeated ANOVA, generalized estimating equation, χ2 test and Fisher's exact test. Results: A total of 237 patients were enrolled for modified intention-to-treat analysis (120 patients in the robotic group, 117 patients in the laparoscopic group). There were 180 males and 59 females, aged (63.0±10.2) years (range: 30 to 85 years). The incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the robotic group and laparoscopic group (16.7% (20/120) vs. 15.4% (18/117), χ2=0.072, P=0.788). The robotic group had higher patient-reported outcomes scores in general health status, emotional, and social domains compared to the laparoscopic group, differences in time effect, intervention effect, and interaction effect were statistically significant (general health status: χ2 value were 275.68, 3.91, 6.38, P value were <0.01, 0.048, 0.041; emotional: χ2 value were 77.79, 6.04, 6.15, P value were <0.01, 0.014, 0.046; social: χ2 value were 148.00, 7.57, 5.98, P value were <0.01, 0.006, 0.048). However, the financial burden of the robotic group was higher, the differences in time effect, intervention effect and interaction effect were statistically significant (χ2 value were 156.24, 4.08, 36.56, P value were<0.01, 0.043,<0.01). Conclusion: Compared to the laparoscopic group, the robotic group could more effectively relieve postoperative negative emotions and improve recovery of social function in patients.

[The effects of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted radical right hemicolectomy on short-term outcome and long-term prognosis based on propensity score matching].

Objective: To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted radical right hemicolectomy in patients with adenocarcinoma of the right colon. Methods: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database identified 288 right colon cancer patients who underwent either robotic-assisted (n=57) or laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy (n=231) between October 2014 and October 2020 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University. There were 161 males and 127 females, aging (60.3±12.8) years (range: 17 to 86 years). After propensity score matching as 1∶4 between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy, there were 56 cases in robotic group and 176 cases in laparoscipic group. Perioperative outcomes and overall survival were compared between the two groups using t test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, χ2 test, Fisher exact test, Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test, respectively. Results: The total operative time was similar between the robotic and laparoscopic group ((206.9±60.7) minutes vs. (219.9±56.3) minutes, t=-1.477, P=0.141). Intraoperative bleeding was less in the robotic group (50 (20) ml vs. 50 (50) ml, Z=-4.591, P<0.01), while the number of lymph nodes retrieved was significantly higher (36.0±10.0 vs. 29.0±10.1, t=4.491, P<0.01). Patients in robotic group experienced significantly shorter hospital stay, shorter time to first flatus, and defecation (t: -2.888, -2.946, -2.328, all P<0.05). Moreover, the overall peri-operative complication rate was similar between robotic and laparoscopic group (17.9% vs. 22.7%, χ²=0.596,P=0.465). The 3-year overall survival were 92.9% and 87.9% respectively and the 3-year disease-free survival rates were 83.1% and 82.6% with no statistical significance between the robotic and laparoscopic group (P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared to laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy, robot-assisted right hemicolectomy could improve some short-term clinical outcomes. The two procedures are both achieving comparable survival.

[The effect of perioperative ERAS pathway management on short-and long-term outcomes of gastric cancer patients].

Objective: To compare postoperative short-term outcomes and long-term prognosis between perioperative Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) and conventional pathways protocols in gastric cancer patients. Methods: This is a single institute retrospective cohort study, all patients were pathologically proved to be gastric adenocarcinoma, underwent standard radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy during the period of 2007-2012. Total 2124 cases were eligible to be analysed and divided into ERAS groups and Non-ERAS group according to the different perioperative pathway protocol. Propensity score matching method (in SPSS, 24.0 version, IBM Company) was used to balance the baseline characteristics. Two groups were matched in a 1∶1 ratio. There were 521 cases per group after matched. The short-term clinical outcomes (postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, blood loss, 30-day re-admission rate, etc.) and overall 5-year survival rates were compared between the two groups. Results: The incidence of overall postoperative complications was similar between the two groups (ERAS group=18.4%, non-ERAS group=19.4%, P=0.69), including anastomotic leakage, abdominal hemorrhage, etc. But the incidence of SSI, atelectasis, and thromboembolic disease in ERAS group was significant lower than that in Non-ERAS group. The number of lymph node harvested, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital and cost in ERAS group were better than those in non-ERAS group. There were no significant differences in unplanned reoperation (ERAS group=3.1%, non-ERAS group=2.1%, P=0.33), 30 day readmission rate of discharge (ERAS group=6.1%, non-ERAS group=5.6%, P=0.69) and postoperative mortality (ERAS group=0.4%, non-ERAS group=0.2%, P=0.56) between the two groups. The 5-year overall survival rates of non-ERAS group and ERAS group were 66.2% and 72.8% respectively (P=0.007). The subgroup analysis found that 5-year OS rates of stage I were 93.4% and 92.7% (P=0.73), these of stage Ⅱ and Ⅲ were 82.2% vs 75.2% (P=0.007) and 47.6% vs 35.7% (P=0.02) in ERAS group and non-ERAS group respectively. Conclusions: Perioperative ERAS pathway management is safe and feasible for patients with gastric cancer, without increasing the incidence of complications and 30-day readmission rate. This protocol can improve the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer.

Cancer classification based on gene expression using neural networks.

Based on gene expression, we have classified 53 colon cancer patients with UICC II into two groups: relapse and no relapse. Samples were taken from each patient, and gene information was extracted. Of the 53 samples examined, 500 genes were considered proper through analyses by S-Kohonen, BP, and SVM neural networks. Classification accuracy obtained by S-Kohonen neural network reaches 91%, which was more accurate than classification by BP and SVM neural networks. The results show that S-Kohonen neural network is more plausible for classification and has a certain feasibility and validity as compared with BP and SVM neural networks.

Positive association of up-regulated Cripto-1 and down-regulated E-cadherin with tumour progression and poor prognosis in gastric cancer.

AIMS: Cripto-1 may be capable of up-regulating signalling molecules associated with epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), an important event characterized by loss of E-cadherin during malignant tumour progression and metastasis. The aim was to investigate the expression of Cripto-1 and E-cadherin in relation to clinicopathological features and patient prognosis of gastric cancer. METHODS AND RESULTS: The expression of Cripto-1 and E-cadherin was studied by immunohistochemistry in 118 gastric cancer cases. Up-regulated Cripto-1 (CR+) was found in 54% (64/118) of cases, whereas down-regulated E-cadherin (E-cad-) was found in 70% (83/118) of cases. Either CR+ or E-cad- was associated with lymph node metastasis, liver metastasis and late TNM stage (P < 0.05). Patients with either CR- or E-cad+ showed higher 5-year survival rates than those with CR+ or E-cad- (P = 0.0012 and P = 0.0017, respectively). When combined, evaluation of these two proteins, simultaneous CR+ and E-cad- (CR+/E-cad-) in cancer was strongly associated with the above three aggressive clinicopathological features (P < 0.001) and indicated the worst patient survival (P = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that CR+/E-cad- was an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Combined analysis of Cripto-1 and E-cadherin has significant value in evaluating the metastatic potential of gastric cancer and predicting patient prognosis.