Two Cases of Laparoscopic Resection of Siewert Type II Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction Using a Transhiatal Approach and Complicated by Hemopericardium.

BACKGROUND Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction is located at the boundary of the distal esophagus and gastric cardia, and surgical resection is currently performed using open or laparoscopic methods. This report presents 2 cases of laparoscopic resection of Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction using a transhiatal approach, complicated by hemopericardium. CASE REPORT We present 2 patients diagnosed with Siewert type II esophagogastric junction cancer. A 67-year-old man had intermittent dull pain in the epigastrium without apparent cause for 10 months. A 69-year-old man had persistent dull pain in the middle and upper abdomen for more than 3 months and acid reflux after eating. Gastroscopy with pathological examination confirmed the diagnoses. The patients underwent laparoscopic transhiatal total gastrectomy according to the Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2018 (5th edition). Pathological analysis classified the cancers as T3N1M0 and T2N0M0, respectively. The patients' cases were complicated with hemopericardium 18 h and 23 h after surgery, respectively. The shared clinical symptoms of the patients included tachycardia and low blood pressure. Cardiovascular color Doppler ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) were used to identify the hemopericardium. Following emergent ultrasound-guided pericardiocentesis and drainage, the vital signs of the patients improved. Both patients recovered well, and no other complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS Hemopericardium is a life-threatening complication for patients with esophageal-gastric junction cancer who undergo transhiatal laparoscopic surgery. Quick detection and intervention for postoperative hemopericardium following laparoscopic transhiatal total gastrectomy are important. Ultrasound-guided pericardiocentesis and drainage is effective for the treatment of postoperative hemopericardium.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for hiatal hernia repair: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

The number of robotic hiatal hernia repairs (RHHR) is increasing. However, the superiority of this minimally invasive approach remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the available literature reporting on outcomes of RHHR compared with laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair (LHHR) in adult patients. The design of this systematic review was developed using the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Web of Science, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Identified publications were reviewed independently by two authors. High heterogeneity was further explored through sensitivity analysis. The primary endpoint was the development of postoperative complications. Secondary endpoints included operation time, intraoperative complications, 30 day readmission rates and length of stay. The analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 software. A total of 7 studies totaling 10078 patients met the inclusion criteria. Five studies included postoperative complications. The postoperative complications rate was 4.25% (302/7111) in the LHHR group, and 3.49% (38/1088) in the RHHR group. Postoperative complications significantly decreased after RHHR compared with LHHR (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.75, P = 0.000). Three studies involving 2176 patients reported length of hospital stay. In the three studies, the mean Length of hospital stay was 3.2 days in the RHHR group, and 4.2 days in the LHHR group. Length of hospital stay was decreased by a mean of 0.68 days for RHHR compared with LHHR (WMD, - 0.68 days; 95% CI - 1.32 to - 0.03, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the RHHR group and the LHHR group regarding operative time, intraoperative complications, and 30 day readmission (P > 0.05). Our research shows that RHHR may be the better option, as the approach decreases postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.

A Novel Intraoperative Leak Test Procedure (GAM Procedure) to Prevent Postoperative Anastomotic Leakage in Gastric Cancer Patients Who Underwent Gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage following a radical gastrectomy is a serious complication of gastric cancer and esophagogastric junction cancer. The benefit of intraoperative leak testing for the prevention of postoperative anastomotic leakage has been controversial. We introduce a new procedure, which combines the techniques of gastroscopy, air, and methylene blue (GAM) for intraoperative leakage testing. Our objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the GAM procedure for intraoperative leak testing and to compare the surgical complications of gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy with and without intraoperative leak testing using the GAM procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 210 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups: the intraoperative leak testing group using the GAM procedure (IOLT), and the group for which no intraoperative leak testing was done (NIOLT). Clinical and pathologic characteristics, the incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage, and other surgical complications were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were 82 patients in the IOLT group and 82 patients in the NIOLT group after propensity score matching. In the IOLT group, 4 (4.9%) patients were found to have anastomotic discontinuity during the operation; we repaired these anastomotic discontinuities intraoperatively. The incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage was higher in the NIOLT group compared with the IOLT group, 6 (7.3%) versus 0 (0%), respectively ( P =0.01). The average time of the GAM procedure was 4.99±1.75 minutes. The surgical time was prolonged by 30 minutes in the IOLT group compared with the NIOLT group, 302.2±79.9 versus 272.1±85.2, respectively ( P =0.02). The length of hospital stay, 15.80±4.55 versus 17.00±6.20 ( P =0.16) was reduced in the IOLT group compared with the NIOLT group. The logistic regression model suggested that IOLT, sex, age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, cT stage, tumor diameter, pT stage, pN stage, and Lauren classification were not risk factors for postoperative complication. CONCLUSIONS: The GAM procedure of intraoperative leakage testing can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy.

Efficacy and safety of anastomotic leak testing in gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anastomosis-related complications such as bleeding, leakage, and strictures, continue to be serious complications of gastric cancer surgery. Presently, these complications have yet to be reliably prevented. Here we design a comprehensive leak testing procedure which combines gastroscopy, air, and methylene blue (GAM) leak testing. We aimed to evaluated the efficacy and safety of the GAM procedure in patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients aged 18-85 years without an unresectable factor as confirmed via CT were enrolled in a prospective randomized clinical trial at a tertiary referral teaching hospital and were randomly assigned to two groups: intraoperative leak testing group (IOLT) and no intraoperative leak testing group (NIOLT). The primary endpoint was the incidence of postoperative anastomosis-related complications in the two groups. RESULTS: 148 patients were initially randomly assigned to the IOLT group (n = 74) and to the NIOLT group (n = 74) between September 2018 and September 2022. After exclusions, 70 remained in the IOLT group and 68 in the NIOLT group. In the IOLT group, 5 patients (7.1%) were found to have anastomotic defects intraoperatively, which included anastomotic discontinuity, bleeding, and strictures. The NIOLT group had a higher incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage compared to the IOLT group: 4 patients (5.8%) vs 0 patients (0%), respectively. No GAM-related complications were observed. CONCLUSION: The GAM procedure is an intraoperative leak test that can be performed safely and efficiently after a laparoscopic total gastrectomy. GAM anastomotic leak testing may effectively prevent technical defect-related anastomotic complications in patients with gastric cancer who undergo a gastrectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT04292496.