Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy in Combination with Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) in Patients with Gastric Cancer at High Risk of Recurrence-The PIPAC-OPC4 Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) are at high risk of peritoneal recurrence despite perioperative chemotherapy and radical resection. This study evaluated feasibility and safety of laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy in combination with pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). METHODS: This was a prospective, controlled bi-institutional study in patients with GAC at high risk of recurrence treated with PIPAC with cisplatin and doxorubicin (PIPAC C/D) after laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy. High risk was defined as a poorly cohesive subtype with predominance of signet-ring cells, clinical stage ≥ T3 and/or ≥ N2, or positive peritoneal cytology. Peritoneal lavage fluid was collected before and after resection. Cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2) and doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2) were aerosolized after anastomosis (flow 0.5-0.8 ml/s, maximum pressure 300 PSI). Treatment was feasible and safe if ≤ 20% had Dindo-Clavien ≥ 3b surgical complications or CTCAE ≥ 4 medical adverse events within 30 days. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), peritoneal lavage cytology, and completion of postoperative systemic chemotherapy. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were treated with a D2 gastrectomy and PIPAC C/D. The median age was 61 years (range 24-76), there were eleven female patients, and 20 patients had preoperative chemotherapy. There was no mortality. Two patients had grade 3b complications that were potentially related to PIPAC C/D (one anastomotic leakage, and one late duodenal blow-out). One patient had severe neutropenia, and nine patients had moderate pain. The LOS was 6 days (4-26). One patient had positive peritoneal lavage cytology before resection, and none were positive after. Fifteen patients had postoperative chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy in combination with PIPAC C/D is feasible and safe.

Relevant issues in tumor regression grading of histopathological response to neoadjuvant treatment in adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Multimodality treatment combining surgery and oncologic treatment has become widely applied in curative treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. There is a need for a standardized tumor regression grade scoring system for clinically relevant effects of neoadjuvant treatment effects. There are numerous tumor regression grading systems in use and there is no international standardization. This review has found nine different international systems currently in use. These systems all differ in detail, which inhibits valid comparisons of results between studies. Tumor regression grading in esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma needs to be improved and standardized. To achieve this goal, we have invited a significant group of international esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma pathology experts to perform a structured review in the form of a Delphi process. The aims of the Delphi include specifying the details for the disposal of the surgical specimen and defining the details of, and the reporting from, the agreed histological tumor regression grade system including resected lymph nodes. The second step will be to perform a validation study of the agreed tumor regression grading system to ensure a scientifically robust inter- and intra-observer variability and to incorporate the consented tumor regression grading system in clinical studies to assess its predictive and prognostic role in treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas. The ultimate aim of the project is to improve survival in esophageal and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma by increasing the quality of tumor regression grading, which is a key component in treatment evaluation and future studies of individualized treatment of esophageal cancer.

Long-term functional outcomes after replacement of the esophagus with gastric, colonic, or jejunal conduits: a systematic literature review.

It is generally recognized that in patients with an intact stomach diagnosed with esophageal cancer, gastric tubulization and pull-up shall always be the preferred technique for reconstruction after an esophageal resection. However, in cases with extensive gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer with aboral spread and after previous gastric surgery, alternative methods for reconstruction have to be pursued. Moreover, in benign cases as well as in those with early neoplastic lesions of the esophagus and the GEJ that are associated with long survival, it is basically unclear which conduit should be recommended. The aim of this study is to determine the long-term functional outcomes of different conduits used for esophageal replacement, based on a comprehensive literature review. Eligible were all clinical studies reporting outcomes after esophagectomy, which contained information on at least three years of follow-up after the operation in patients who were older than 18 years of age at the time of the operation. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A systematic web-based search using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases was performed, reviewing medical literature published between January 2006 and December 2015. The scientific quality of the data was generally low, which allowed us to incorporate only 16 full text articles for the final analyses. After a gastric pull-up, the proportion of patients who suffered from dysphagia varied substantially but seemed to decrease over time with a mild dysphagia remaining during long-term follow-up. When reflux-related symptoms and complications were addressed, roughly two third of patients experienced mild to moderate reflux symptoms a long time after the resection. Following an isoperistaltic colonic graft, the functional long-term outcomes regarding swallowing difficulties were sparsely reported, while three studies reported reflux/regurgitation symptoms in the range of 5% to 16%, one of which reported the symptom severity as being mild. Only one report was available after the use of a long jejunal segment, which contained only six patients, who scored the severity of dysphagia and reflux as mild. Very few if any data were available on a structured assessment of dumping and disturbed bowel functions. Few high-quality data are available on the long-term functional outcomes after esophageal replacement irrespective of the use of a gastric tube, the right or left colon or a long jejunal segment. No firm conclusions regarding the advantages of one graft over the other can presently be drawn.