Minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A national perspective on oncologic outcomes and overall survival.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive (MI) gastrectomy has become increasingly common as a resection technique for gastric cancer; however, data are limited regarding peri-operative morbidity, oncologic outcomes and long-term survival, particularly in the Western patient population. STUDY DESIGN: The 2010-2012 National Cancer Data Base was queried for adult patients who underwent gastrectomy for localized, intestinal-type gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients were classified by surgical approach (MI vs. open gastrectomy) on an intent-to-treat basis. Groups were propensity score matched using a 1:1 nearest neighbor algorithm, and outcomes were compared. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Among 5420 patients, 1423 (26%) underwent MI gastrectomy. Following adjustment with propensity matching, all baseline characteristics were highly similar between 1175 patients in each treatment group. Between propensity-matched groups, MI gastrectomy patients had similar rates of margin-negative resections (91 vs. 90%, p = 0.447), median lymph node harvest (16 vs. 15, p = 0.104), and utilization of adjuvant therapies (28 vs. 28%, p = 0.748). MI gastrectomy was associated with shorter hospital stay (8 vs. 9 days, p < 0.001) without an increase in unplanned readmissions (7 vs. 6%, p = 0.456) or 30-day mortality (2 vs. 3%, p = 0.655). There was no difference in 3-year overall survival (50 vs. 55%, p = 0.359). CONCLUSIONS: On a national level, MI gastrectomy for gastric cancer appears to be associated with similar perioperative and long-term outcomes compared to the traditional open approach. While prospective studies remain essential, these data provide greater equipoise for ongoing trials and institutional efforts to further implement and evaluate this technique.

Surgical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oesophageal adenocarcinoma: what is the optimal timing?

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal timing of surgical resection of oesophageal adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). METHODS: nCRT before resection of oesophageal adenocarcinoma yields improved overall and progression-free survival. Despite the wide acceptance of tri-modal therapy, the optimal timing of surgical resection after nCRT is not well defined and existing studies are limited. Adults with Stage II/III oesophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing nCRT before surgery were identified from the National Cancer Database. Multivariable analysis using restricted cubic splines was used to identify an inflection point in clinical outcomes as a function of time between nCRT and surgery, dividing the cohort into short- and long-interval treatment groups, which were then compared. Adjusted rates of survival and margin status were compared between groups using multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Among 2444 patients, restricted cubic splines identified an inflection point at 56 days, dividing our cohort into 1533 short-interval and 911 long-interval patients. Long-interval patients had a higher adjusted incidence of pathologic downstaging (odds ratio 1.38, confidence interval 1.02-1.85, P = 0.04) but no difference in margin positivity compared with short-interval patients (odds ratio 0.91, confidence interval 0.56-1.47, P = 0.69). Worse overall survival was noted in the long-interval subgroup (hazard ratio 1.44, confidence interval 1.22-1.71, P < 0.001), but 30-day postoperative mortality was not statistically different (odds ratio 1.56, confidence interval 0.9-2.72, P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Restricted cubic splines provides an objective mechanism to more accurately delineate optimum timing between nCRT and surgical resection. A time interval of 56 days represents an interval where increased pathologic downstaging is balanced by decreased overall survival.

Use and Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Lobectomy for Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have raised concerns that video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) lobectomy may compromise nodal evaluation. The advantages or limitations of robotic lobectomy have not been thoroughly evaluated. METHODS: Perioperative outcomes and survival of patients who underwent open versus minimally-invasive surgery (MIS [VATS and robotic]) lobectomy and VATS versus robotic lobectomy for clinical T1-2, N0 non-small cell lung cancer from 2010 to 2012 in the National Cancer Data Base were evaluated using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of 30,040 lobectomies, 7,824 were VATS and 2,025 were robotic. After propensity score matching, when compared with the open approach (n = 9,390), MIS (n = 9,390) was found to have increased 30-day readmission rates (5% versus 4%, p < 0.01), shorter median hospital length of stay (5 versus 6 days, p < 0.01), and improved 2-year survival (87% versus 86%, p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in nodal upstaging and 30-day mortality between the two groups. After propensity score matching, when compared with the robotic group (n = 1,938), VATS (n = 1,938) was not significantly different from robotics with regard to nodal upstaging, 30-day mortality, and 2-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based analysis, MIS (VATS and robotic) lobectomy was used in the minority of patients for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. MIS lobectomy was associated with shorter length of hospital stay and was not associated with increased perioperative mortality, compromised nodal evaluation, or reduced short-term survival when compared with the open approach. These results suggest the need for broader implementation of MIS techniques.