Survey of Information Acquisition and Satisfaction after Bariatric Surgery at a Tertiary Hospital in Korea.

Background: To determine how patients who underwent bariatric surgery at a tertiary hospital in Korea first considered and then decided to get the surgery and identify information gaps among patients and healthcare professionals. Methods: This study included 21 patients who underwent bariatric surgery to treat morbid obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥35 or ≥30 kg/m2 together with obesity-related comorbidities) between August 2020 and February 2022. A telephone interview was conducted with the patients after at least 6 months had elapsed since the surgery. We asked how the patients decided to undergo bariatric surgery. We also inquired about their satisfaction with and concerns about the surgery. Results: Seventy-one percent of the patients were introduced to bariatric surgery following a recommendation from healthcare professionals, acquaintances, or social media. Most of the patients (52%) decided to undergo bariatric surgery based on recommendations from healthcare professionals in non-surgical departments. Satisfaction with the information provided differed among the patients. Post-surgical concerns were related to postoperative symptoms, weight regain, and psychological illness. Conclusion: Efforts are needed to raise awareness about bariatric surgery among healthcare professionals and the public. Tailored pre- and postoperative consultation may improve quality of life after bariatric surgery.

Does total omentectomy prevent peritoneal seeding for advanced gastric cancer with serosal invasion?

BACKGROUND: Radical gastrectomy is composed of gastrectomy, lymph node dissection, and omentectomy. Total omentectomy (TO) is expected to reduce the incidence of peritoneal recurrence. We aimed to investigate the necessity of TO for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) with serosal invasion. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 310 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy with TO and 93 patients who underwent partial omentectomy (PO) for gastric cancer with serosal invasion between August, 2005 and December, 2017. Finally, 91 patients in the PO group and 91 in the TO group were enrolled based on a 1:1 propensity-score matching analysis. We evaluated surgical and oncological outcomes, including 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in postoperative complications. Recurrence sites showed similar patterns in both groups, including peritoneal recurrence (PO vs. TO, 18.7% vs. 28.6%; p = 0.188). Five-year overall survival was better in the PO group (p = 0.018), while 5-year recurrence-free survival was similar in both groups (p = 0.066). CONCLUSION: TO might not be an essential part of preventing peritoneal recurrence for AGC with serosal invasion. PO could be considered a radical gastrectomy for T4a gastric cancer.

Analysis of risk factors affecting long-term survival in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Factors predicting postoperative complications after gastrectomy for elderly patients with gastric cancer have been analyzed in several previous studies. However, there is limited research available on risk factors related to long-term survival. AIMS: This study aimed to analyze factors affecting long-term survival after curative gastrectomy in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: This study included patients aged > 75 years with histologically confirmed advanced gastric cancer stage II or greater. Before analysis, risk factors were categorized into four groups: baseline characteristics, underlying diseases, surgical and pathologic factors, and nutritional factors. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration was 71.0 months. The 5-year overall survival and disease-specific survival rates were 51.5% and 58.3%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves showed that patients who were female and overweight had significantly longer survival rates than those who were male and underweight. Elderly patients who underwent a total gastrectomy had poorer survival rates than those who underwent a distal gastrectomy. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that tumor stage, extent of gastrectomy, overweight status and overall complication were independent risk factors for overall survival. DISCUSSION: Our study show that the overweight patients, the extent of gastrectomy, tumor stage and overall complications are significant risk factors affecting long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, surgeons may be cautious in performing total gastrectomy in elderly gastric cancer patients. Additionally, it is important to focus on improving nutritional status and mitigating overall complications.

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Gastrectomy for Patients With Gastric Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study Based on the Korean Gastric Cancer Association Nationwide Survey.

PURPOSE: Despite scientific evidence regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for advanced gastric cancer treatment, its application in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains uncertain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used the 2019 Korean Gastric Cancer Association nationwide survey database to extract data from 489 patients with primary gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After propensity score matching analysis, we compared the surgical outcomes of 97 patients who underwent LG and 97 patients who underwent open gastrectomy (OG). We investigated the risk factors for postoperative complications using multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly shorter in the OG group. Patients in the LG group had significantly less blood loss than those in the OG group. Hospital stay and overall postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications in the LG group was comparable with that in the OG group (1.03% vs. 4.12%, P=0.215). No statistically significant difference was observed in the number of harvested lymph nodes between the two groups (38.60 vs. 35.79, P=0.182). Multivariate analysis identified body mass index (odds ratio [OR], 1.824; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.029-3.234; P=0.040) and extent of resection (OR, 3.154; 95% CI, 1.084-9.174; P=0.035) as independent risk factors for overall postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Using a large nationwide multicenter survey database, we demonstrated that LG and OG had comparable short-term outcomes in patients with gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Factors Associated With Loss to Follow-up After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.

Purpose: After bariatric surgery, postoperative follow-up is important for evaluating long-term outcomes, such as successful weight loss and improvement of metabolic parameters. However, many patients are lost to follow-up within 1 year. This study aimed to identify the follow-up rate of bariatric surgery and predictive factors of loss to follow-up (LTF). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the data of 61 patients receiving bariatric surgery for obesity (laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; LSG group) and 872 for early gastric cancer (EGC group) from November 2018 to July 2020 in a single center. After 1:1 matching, we compared the LTF rate. In the LSG group, we analyzed the factors associated with LTF. Additionally, we collected weight data in the LTF group by a telephone survey. Results: By 1:1 matching, 47 patients for each group were identified. The LTF rates of the LSG and EGC groups were 34.0% (16 patients) and 2.1% (one patient), respectively (P=0.0003). In the LSG group, the LTF rate increased over the postoperative month. Of the patients, 29.5% who missed a scheduled appointment within one year comprised the LTF group. In the analysis, no significant factors associated with LTF were identified. The only factor with borderline significance was dyslipidemia with medication (P=0.094). Conclusion: The LSG group demonstrated a high LTF rate, although adherence to follow-up was closely related to postoperative outcomes. Therefore, educating patients on the significance of follow-up is important. Particularly, continuous efforts to identify the associated factors and develop a multidisciplinary management protocol after bariatric surgery are necessary.

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.

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.

Does total regression of primary rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy represent "no tumor" status?

PURPOSE: Insistence that total regression of primary tumor would not represent long-term oncologic outcomes has been raised. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of these patients after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) and radical surgery and to evaluate the associated risk factors. METHODS: We included 189 patients with rectal cancer who showed total regression of the primary tumor after PCRT, followed by radical resection, between 2001 and 2012. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the results were compared with 77 patients with Tis rectal cancer who received only radical resection. Factors associated with RFS were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Sphincter-saving resection was performed for 146 patients (77.2%). Adjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 168 patients (88.9%). During the follow-up period, recurrence occurred in 17 patients (9%). The 5-year RFS was 91.3%, which was significantly lower than that of patients with Tis rectal cancer without PCRT (P = 0.005). In univariate analysis, preoperative CEA and histologic differentiation were associated with RFS. However, no factors were found to be associated with RFS. CONCLUSION: RFS was lower in patients with total regression of primary rectal cancer after PCRT than in those with Tis rectal cancer without PCRT, and it would not be considered as the same entity with early rectal cancer or "disappeared tumor" status.