The effect of aging on short- and long-term results after esophagectomy: an international multicenter retrospective analysis.

The optimal treatment for esophageal cancer in elderly patients is still debated and data on postoperative results are limited. This retrospective international study aims to clarify the impact of age on clinical and oncological outcomes after esophagectomy. All patients that underwent esophagectomy for cancer between 2007 and 2016 at two European high-volume Centers have been included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups according to their age: young-age group (YAG) (18-69), middle-age group (70-74) and old-age group (>74). Primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS), while secondary outcomes considered were 5-year disease free survival and disease related survival, 90-day morbidity and mortality, readmission rate and radicality. A total of 575 patients were included. No differences emerged in terms of morbidity and length of stay, while mortality increased with aging from 2% in YAG to 4.8% in old-aged (P = 0.003). Old-age patients had less neoadjuvant treatment (P < 0.001), a less aggressive mediastinal lymphadenectomy and presented a more advanced pathological stage. As expected, OS decreased significantly for older patients compared with the other two age groups (P = 0.044) but, on the other hand, disease free and disease related survival were comparable between the groups. Age itself should not be considered a contraindication to esophagectomy. Although in patients older than 75 years postoperative mortality is significantly increased, esophagectomy could be still an option in selected patients, favoring the use of minimally invasive techniques and enhanced recovery protocols.

The "Weekday Effect" on Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol for Gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: While enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol demonstrated to improve outcomes after gastrectomy, some papers evidenced a detrimental effect on postoperative morbidity related to the "weekday effect." We aimed to understand whether the day of gastrectomy could affect postoperative outcomes and compliance with ERAS items. METHODS: We included all patients that underwent gastrectomy for cancer between January 2017 and September 2021. Cohort was divided considering the day of surgery: Early group (Monday-Wednesday) and Late group (Thursday-Friday). Compliance with protocol and postoperative outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven patients were included in Early group, while 154 were in Late group. The groups were comparable in preoperative characteristics. No significant difference in pre/intraoperative and postoperative ERAS items' compliance was apparent between Early and Late groups, with most items exceeding the 70% threshold. Median length of stay was 6.5 days and 6 days in Early and Late groups (p = 0.616), respectively. Morbidity was 50% in both groups, with severe complications that occurred in 13% of Early patients and 15% of Late patients. Ninety-day mortality was 2%, and it was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a center with a standardized ERAS protocol, the weekday of gastrectomy has no significant impact on the success of each ERAS item and on postoperative surgical and oncological outcomes.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery can Improve Patient Outcomes and Reduce Hospital Cost of Gastrectomy for Cancer in the West: A Propensity-Score-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data on ERAS for gastrectomy are scarce, and the majority of the studies come from Eastern countries. Patients in the West are older and suffer from more advanced tumors that impair their clinical condition and often require neoadjuvant treatment. This retrospective study assessed the feasibility and safety of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol for gastrectomy in a Western center. METHODS: We conducted a single-center study of 351 patients operated for gastric cancer: 103, operated from January 2015 to December 2016, followed the standard pathway, while 248, operated from January 2017 to December 2019, followed the ERAS program. The primary outcomes considered were length of hospital stay (LOS) and direct costs. Secondary outcomes were 90-day morbidity and mortality, readmission rate, and compliance with ERAS items. A propensity score (PS) was built on confounding variables. RESULTS: Compliance with ERAS items after the program was ≥ 70%. Univariable analysis evidenced a 2-day median reduction in LOS and a median cost reduction of €826 per patient in the ERAS group. PS-based multivariable analysis confirmed a significant, 2-day decrease in median LOS and a €1097 saving after ERAS introduction. Ninety-day mortality decreased slightly in ERAS group, while complications and readmissions did not change significantly. When complications were included in the multivariable analysis, ERAS retained its significance, although the effects on LOS and cost were blunted to a median reduction of 1 day and €775, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS for gastrectomy improved patients' recovery and reduced hospital costs without changes in morbidity, mortality, or readmission.

Association Between Compliance to an Enhanced Recovery Protocol and Outcome After Elective Surgery for Gastric Cancer. Results from a Western Population-Based Prospective Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The association between compliance to an enhanced recovery protocol (ERAS) and outcome after surgery for gastric cancer has been poorly investigated, particularly in Western patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the rate of adherence to the ERAS program was correlated with outcome and time of discharge. METHODS: A prospective, observational, multicenter study was designed to be performed at Italian referral centers for gastric surgery. The protocol was discussed and approved by the Italian Research Group on Gastric Cancer. Twenty-three ERAS domains were applied. A multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between ERAS compliance and overall and major complication rates. The Poisson regression model (measured as mean ratios) was used to assess the association of ERAS compliance rate and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Eight centers participated and 290 subjects with a median age of 73 years were enrolled. The overall rates of adherence to pre-, intra-, and postoperative ERAS items were 69.8%, 60.3%, and 82.5%, respectively. At the multivariate model, there was an association between overall rate of morbidity and an overall ERAS compliance rate greater than 70% (OR 0.413; 95% CI 0.235-0.7240; P 0.002). A similar association was found for major complications (OR 0.328; 95% CI 0.151-0.709; P 0.005). The Poisson regression showed that in patients with ERAS compliance rate >70%, LOS was reduced of approximately 20% (mean ratio 0.812; 95% CI 0.694-0.950; P 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a moderate compliance to an ERAS program and a significant association between adherence and outcomes.

Multicenter Study of Presentation, Management, and Postoperative and Long-Term Outcomes of Septegenerians and Octogenerians Undergoing Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for elderly patients with gastric cancer is still controversial. This study aimed to assess the impact of age on short- and long-term outcomes after treatment for primary gastric cancer. METHODS: From January 2004 to December 2014, a total of 507 patients underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma at two high-volume upper gastrointestinal (GI) centers. The patients were classified into three groups as follows: group A (patients ≤ 69 years old, n = 266), group B (patients 70-79 years old, n = 166), and group C (patients ≥ 80 years old, n = 75). Clinicopathologic characteristics as well as, short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the groups. RESULTS: The patients in groups B and C had more comorbidities, whereas the younger subjects (group A) had more advanced tumor stages. Less extensive surgery was performed in the groups B and C. Older patients (age ≥ 70 years) had more postoperative medical complications. Moreover, group C had a higher postoperative mortality rate (8.1%) than group A (1.8%) or group B (1.9%). In the multivariable analysis, age older than 80 years (group C) was a negative independent factor for overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR], 2.36) compared with group A, whereas group B seemed to have a comparable risk (HR, 1.37). Notably, the three groups did not show significant differences in disease-related survival (DRS). CONCLUSION: The data suggest that patients 70-79 years of age show a risk of postoperative death comparable with that of younger subjects. However, patients older than 80 years should be carefully selected for surgical treatment due to the increased risk of postoperative mortality.

Current practice on the use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy in Italy: the Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy (ADiGe) survey.

Evidence against the use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy are increasing and ERAS guidelines suggest the benefit of drain avoidance. Nevertheless, it is unclear whether this practice is still widespread. We conducted a survey among Italian surgeons through the Italian Gastric Cancer Research Group and the Polispecialistic Society of Young Surgeons, aiming to understand the current use of prophylactic drain. A 28-item questionnaire-based survey was developed to analyze the current practice and the individual opinion about the use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy. Groups based on age, experience and unit volume were separately analyzed. Response of 104 surgeons from 73 surgical units were collected. A standardized ERAS protocol for gastrectomy was applied by 42% of the respondents. Most of the surgeons, regardless of age, experience, or unit volume, declared to routinely place one or more drain after gastrectomy. Only 2 (1.9%) and 7 surgeons (6.7%) belonging to high volume units, do not routinely place drains after total and subtotal gastrectomy, respectively. More than 60% of the participants remove the drain on postoperative day 4-6 after performing an assessment of the anastomosis integrity. Interestingly, less than half of the surgeons believe that drain is the main tool for leak management, and this percentage further drops among younger surgeons. On the other hand, drain's role seems to be more defined for duodenal stump leak treatment, with almost 50% of the surgeons recognizing its importance. Routine use of prophylactic drain after gastrectomy is still a widespread practice even if younger surgeons are more persuaded that it could not be advantageous.

Effectiveness of endoscopic vacuum therapy as rescue treatment in refractory leaks after gastro-esophageal surgery.

The treatment of leak after esophageal and gastric surgery is a major challenge. Over the last few years, endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC) has gained popularity in the management of this life-threatening complication. We reported our initial experience on E-VAC therapy as rescue treatment in refractory anastomotic leak and perforation after gastro-esophageal surgery. From September 2017 to December 2019, a total of 8 E-VAC therapies were placed as secondary treatment in 7 patients. Six for anastomotic leak (3 cervical, 1 thoracic, 2 abdominal) and 1 for perforation of the gastric conduit. In 6 cases, E-VAC was placed intracavitary; while in the remaining 2, the sponge was positioned intraluminal (one patient was treated with both approaches). A total of 60 sponges were used in the whole cohort. The median number of sponge insertions was 10 (range: 5-14) with a median treatment duration of 41 days (range: 19-49). A complete healing was achieved in 4 intracavitary (67%) and in 1 intraluminal (50%) E-VAC. We observed only one E-VAC-related complication: a bleeding successfully managed endoscopically. E-VAC therapy seems to be a safe and effective tool in the management of leaks and perforations after upper GI surgery, although with longer healing time when it is used as secondary treatment.

Gastric conduit perforation after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy successfully treated with endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC): a case report.

Gastric conduit perforation is a life-threatening complication after esophagectomy and currently there is no consensus about its optimal management. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC) is a promising technique for the treatment of leaks and perforations after upper gastro-intestinal surgery. We report the case of a 65 years-old male patient who underwent an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma. He referred to our Emergency Department for septic shock and right hydropneumothorax. We performed an emergency thoracoscopy with intraoperative esophagogastroduodenoscopy which showed a pre-pyloric perforation of the gastric conduit. The perforation was initially treated with unsuccessful primary surgical closure and subsequently by means of E-VAC, firstly placed intraluminal and then intracavitary. With the latter technique, we assisted to a progressive clinical improvement until the definitive healing of the perforation. To our knowledge, this is the first case of a gastric tube perforation after esophagectomy successfully treated with E-VAC.

Should we still use prophylactic drain in gastrectomy for cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Prophylactic drain in gastrectomy for cancer is still widely used, although some evidence has disputed this practice and spreading enhanced recovery protocol has been pushing towards surgical simplification. This study aimed at assessing the impact of drain placement on important clinical outcomes, evaluating the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or cohort studies whenever information provided by the former was scarce. PubMed, PMC, Cochrane Library, CNKI and Wanfang databases were searched from January 1990 to February 2019, both for RCTs and cohort studies comparing use or avoidance of prophylactic drain in gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy. All RCTs and cohort studies were rated according to Jadad score and Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale, respectively. Meta-analysis was separately performed on RCTs and cohort studies. The following clinical outcomes were considered: anastomotic leak, reoperation rate, additional drain procedure, length of stay, postoperative morbidity, postoperative mortality, readmission rate and drain related complications. Overall, 3 RCTs (330 patients) and 7 cohort studies (2897 patients) were included. Seven studies came from Eastern Countries. Meta-analysis on RCTs evidenced that drain avoidance halves overall morbidity (RR = 0.47, 95%CI 0.26-0.86, p = 0.014) and slightly reduces length of stay (SMD -0.24, 95%CI -0.51-0.03, p = 0.083). Only one postoperative death occurred in the drain group. The other outcomes were either not reported or reported just by one RCT each. Meta-analysis on cohort studies, despite higher statistical power, did not highlight any significant difference. This meta-analysis showed that prophylactic drain avoidance can reduce morbidity and length of stay, while not significantly affecting other major surgical outcomes.

Feasibility and safety of an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) for upper GI surgery in elderly patients (≥ 75 years) in a high-volume surgical center.

Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) have demonstrated their efficacy after esophagectomy and gastrectomy but little is known about their feasibility and safety in elderly patients. Patients submitted to Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy or gastrectomy for cancer between January 2016 and June 2019 were divided into three age groups: young-age group, YG (≤ 65 years, n = 130); middle-age group, MG (66-74 years, n = 101); old-age group, OG (≥ 75 years, n = 74). The groups were compared for adherence to our ERP, morbidity and mortality rates. After esophagectomy, adherence to ERP was comparable between the three groups, overall morbidity was higher in OG, without statistically significant difference, while the incidence of cardiac complications was significantly higher in OG (p = 0.02). After gastrectomy, OG presented a lower adherence to urinary catheter removal and to early mobilization. No difference in overall morbidity rate was observed (p = 0.13). The median length of stay was comparable both after esophagectomy (p = 0.075) and gastrectomy (p = 0.07). Multivariable analysis showed that age ≥ 75 years was not associated with a higher risk of ERP failure either after esophagectomy (p = 0.59) or after gastrectomy (p = 0.83). After esophagectomy, the risk of failure of the ERP program was higher for patients with ASA grade 3-4 (p = 0.03) and for those with postoperative complications (p < 0.001) while after gastrectomy only postoperative complications were associated to higher risk of ERP failure (p < 0.001). In our series, adherence to ERP protocol of patients ≥ 75 years old was similar to that of younger patients after esophagectomy and gastrectomy, without a significant increase in morbi-mortality rates.

18F-FDG PET/CT Metrics Are Correlated to the Pathological Response in Esophageal Cancer Patients Treated With Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Neoadjuvant Chemo-Radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the ability of Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) to provide functional information useful in predicting pathological response to an intensive neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT) protocol for both esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (ADC) patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Esophageal carcinoma (EC) patients, treated in our Center between 2014 and 2018, were retrospectively reviewed. The nCRT protocol schedule consisted of an induction phase of weekly administered docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (TCF) for 3 weeks, followed by a concomitant phase of weekly TCF for 5 weeks with concurrent radiotherapy (50-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions). Three 18F-FDG PET/CT scans were performed: before (PET1) and after (PET2) induction chemotherapy (IC), and prior to surgery (PET3). Correlation between PET parameters [maximum and mean standardized uptake value (SUVmax and SUVmean), metabolic tumor volume (MTV), and total lesion glycolysis (TLG)], radiomic features and tumor regression grade (TGR) was investigated. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients (35 ADC, 19 SCC; 48 cT3/4; 52 cN+) were eligible for the analysis. Pathological response to nCRT was classified as major (TRG1-2, 41/54, 75.9%) or non-response (TRG3-4, 13/54, 24.1%). A major response was statistically correlated with SCC subtype (p = 0.02) and smaller tumor length (p = 0.03). MTV and TLG measured prior to IC (PET1) were correlated to TRG1-2 response (p = 0.02 and p = 0.02, respectively). After IC (PET2), SUVmean and TLG correlated with major response (p = 0.03 and p = 0.04, respectively). No significance was detected when relative changes of metabolic parameters between PET1 and PET2 were evaluated. At textural quantitative analysis, three independent radiomic features extracted from PET1 images ([JointEnergy and InverseDifferenceNormalized of GLCM and LowGrayLevelZoneEmphasis of GLSZM) were statistically correlated with major response (p < 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: 18F-FDG PET/CT traditional metrics and textural features seem to predict pathologic response (TRG) in EC patients treated with induction chemotherapy followed by neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy. Further investigations are necessary in order to obtain a reliable predictive model to be used in the clinical practice.

Long-Term Outcomes of Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Chemo-Radiotherapy as Intensive Neoadjuvant Protocol in Patients with Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: A phase II intensive neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT) protocol for esophageal cancer (EC) was previously tested at our Center with promising results. We here present an observational study to evaluate the efficacy of the protocol also in "real life" patients. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 122 ECs (45.1% squamous cell (SCC) and 54.9% adenocarcinoma (ADC)) treated with induction docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (TCF), followed by concomitant TCF and radiotherapy (50-50.4 Gy/25-28 fractions), between 2008 and 2017. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS) and pathological complete response (pCR). RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 62.1 months (95% CI 50-67.6 months), 5-year OS and EFS rates were 54.8% (95% CI 44.7-63.9) and 42.7% (95% CI 33.1-51.9), respectively. A pCR was observed in 71.1% of SCC and 37.1% of ADC patients (p = 0.001). At multivariate analysis, ypN+ was a significant prognostic factor for OS (Hazard Ratios (HR) 4.39 [95% CI 2.36-8.18]; p < 0.0001), while pCR was a strong predictor of EFS (HR 0.38 [95% CI 0.22-0.67]; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The nCRT protocol achieved considerable long-term survival and pCR rates also in "real life" patients. Further research is necessary to evaluate this protocol in a watch-and-wait approach.

Preoperative or Perioperative Docetaxel, Oxaliplatin, and Capecitabine (GASTRODOC Regimen) in Patients with Locally-Advanced Resectable Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Phase-II Trial.

Docetaxel associated with oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil (FLOT) has been reported as the best perioperative treatment for gastric cancer. However, there is still some debate about the most appropriate number and timing of chemotherapy cycles. In this randomized multicenter phase II study, patients with resectable gastric cancer were staged through laparoscopy and peritoneal lavage cytology, and randomly assigned (1:1) to either four cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arm A) or two preoperative + two postoperative cycles of docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine (DOC) chemotherapy (arm B). The primary endpoint was to assess the percentage of patients receiving all the planned preoperative or perioperative chemotherapeutic cycles. Ninety-one patients were enrolled between September 2010 and August 2016. The treatment was well tolerated in both arms. Thirty-three (71.7%) and 24 (53.3%) patients completed the planned cycles in arms A and B, respectively (p = 0.066), reporting an odds ratio for early interruption of treatment of 0.45 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18-1.07). Resection was curative in 39 (88.6%) arm A patients and 35 (83.3%) arm B patients. Five-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 51.2% (95% CI: 34.2-65.8) in arm A and 40.3% (95% CI: 28.9-55.2) in arm B (p = 0.300). Five-year survival was 58.5% (95% CI: 41.3-72.2) and 53.9% (95% CI: 35.5-69.3) (p = 0.883) in arms A and B, respectively. The planned treatment was more frequently completed and was more active, albeit not significantly, in the neoadjuvant arm than in the perioperative group.

Is There Any Role for Super-Extended Limphadenectomy in Advanced Gastric Cancer? Results of an Observational Study from a Western High Volume Center.

BACKGROUND: Although the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) 9501 trial did not find that prophylactic D3 lymphadenectomy led to any survival advantage over D2 lymphadenectomy, it did find that the prognosis of subserosal and N0 gastric cancer patients improved. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to compare survival after D2 or D3 lymphadenectomy in different patient subgroups. METHODS: The study considered all of the patients who underwent D2 or D3 lymphadenectomy at a high-volume center in Verona (Italy) between 1992 and 2011. After excluding patients with Bormann IV or neuroendocrine tumors, early gastric cancers, or non-curative resections, the analysis involved 301 R0 patients: 100 who underwent D2, and 201 who underwent D3 lymphadenectomy. Post-operative deaths and deaths due to recurrences were considered as terminal events in the survival analysis. RESULTS: The D2 patients were significantly older than the D3 patients at baseline (69.8 ± 2.3 vs. 62.2 ± 10.7 years). The median number of retrieved nodes was 29 (interquartile range: 24.5-39) after D2, and 43 (34-52) after D3. The five-year disease-related survival rate was similar after D2 (44%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 34-54%) and D3 (41%, 34-48%) (p = 0.766). A Cox model controlling for sex, age, tumor site, Laurén histology, and T and N stages showed that the risk of cancer-related death after D3 was similar to that recorded after D2 (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.67-1.42). There was a significant interaction between the T status and the extension of the lymphadenectomy (p = 0.012), with the prognosis being better after D2 in T2 and T4b patients, and after D3 in T3 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that D3 lymphadenectomy is not routinely indicated for patients with advanced gastric cancer, although differences in survival after D3 across T tiers deserve further consideration.

A Comprehensive PDX Gastric Cancer Collection Captures Cancer Cell-Intrinsic Transcriptional MSI Traits.

Gastric cancer is the world's third leading cause of cancer mortality. In spite of significant therapeutic improvements, the clinical outcome for patients with advanced gastric cancer is poor; thus, the identification and validation of novel targets is extremely important from a clinical point of view. We generated a wide, multilevel platform of gastric cancer models, comprising 100 patient-derived xenografts (PDX), primary cell lines, and organoids. Samples were classified according to their histology, microsatellite stability, Epstein-Barr virus status, and molecular profile. This PDX platform is the widest in an academic institution, and it includes all the gastric cancer histologic and molecular types identified by The Cancer Genome Atlas. PDX histopathologic features were consistent with those of patients' primary tumors and were maintained throughout passages in mice. Factors modulating grafting rate were histology, TNM stage, copy number gain of tyrosine kinases/KRAS genes, and microsatellite stability status. PDX and PDX-derived cells/organoids demonstrated potential usefulness to study targeted therapy response. Finally, PDX transcriptomic analysis identified a cancer cell-intrinsic microsatellite instability (MSI) signature, which was efficiently exported to gastric cancer, allowing the identification, among microsatellite stable (MSS) patients, of a subset of MSI-like tumors with common molecular aspects and significant better prognosis. In conclusion, we generated a wide gastric cancer PDX platform, whose exploitation will help identify and validate novel "druggable" targets and optimize therapeutic strategies. Moreover, transcriptomic analysis of gastric cancer PDXs allowed the identification of a cancer cell-intrinsic MSI signature, recognizing a subset of MSS patients with MSI transcriptional traits, endowed with better prognosis. SIGNIFICANCE: This study reports a multilevel platform of gastric cancer PDXs and identifies a MSI gastric signature that could contribute to the advancement of precision medicine in gastric cancer.

Do all the European surgeons perform the same D2? The need of D2 audit in Europe.

Although D2 lymphadenectomy is the standard of care for radical intent surgical treatment of gastric cancer, the real compliance with D2 dissection in Europe is still unknown. The aim of the present study is to analyze the variation in lymph-node harvesting reported after D2 dissection in European series and to present a European project aiming at evaluating the real compliance with D2 lymphadenectomy. A PubMed search for papers using the key words "D2 lymphadenectomy" and "gastric cancer" from 2008 to 2017 was undertaken. Only studies by European authors in English language reporting the number of retrieved lymph nodes after D2 lymphadenectomy were included. The results of literature review were descriptively reported. The literature survey yielded 16 studies: 2 RCTs, 3 observational multicentre studies, and 11 observational monocentric studies. A large variability was found in the number of retrieved nodes, which, overall, was the lowest in the surgical series from Eastern Europe (16.6 and 19.9 in the Lithuanian and Hungarian series, respectively) and the highest in an Italian RCT. The within-study variability was also quite high, especially in multicentre RCTs and observational studies. Sample size tended to have a larger effect on the variability of lymph nodes retrieved than on its actual value. However, in both cases, the relation was not significant, due to the low number of studies considered. There is a large variability in the number of retrieved nodes after D2 dissection in European series. This reflects, at least partly, different approaches to D2 lymphadenectomy by European surgeons and may be responsible of the different outcomes observed in patients with gastric cancer across Europe. Therefore, there is the need to standardize the practice of D2 gastrectomy in Europe and to define possible variations of D2 procedures according to tumour's characteristics.

Para-aortic lymphadenectomy in surgery for gastric cancer: current indications and future perspectives.

Involvement of para-aortic nodes (PAN) has been detected at pathological examination in 10-25% of locally advanced gastric cancer. Based on these data of nodal diffusion, the lymphadenectomy of para-aortic stations would be desirable in locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the debate on the oncological benefit of para-aortic nodes dissection is still not solved. A review of the literature was performed and papers reporting either the rate of para-aortic nodal metastases or the long-term survival outcomes after D2+ para-aortic nodes dissection (PAND) or D3 lymphadenectomy were descriptively reported. The literature survey yielded 14 studies. Most of the papers show the outcome of series of advanced gastric cancer treated with surgery alone, while starting from 2012, 3 articles report the outcomes of D2 + PAND or D3 lymphadenectomy after preoperative chemotherapy. The rate of PAN metastases ranges between 8.5 and 28% in surgical series. Survival outcomes largely improved in series of patients treated with multimodal approach compared to those of surgery alone. In patients with clinically detected para-aortic nodal metastases, preoperative chemotherapy followed by PAND is indicated. More data are needed to clarify the indication to prophylactic PAND in the era of multimodal treatment, anyway super-extended lymphadenectomies have to be performed by experienced surgeons in dedicated centres.

Clinical pathways in gastric cancer care.

The diagnostic-therapeutic pathways (DTPs) are emerging as useful instruments for clinical management of complex diseases as gastric cancer, whose treatment is challenging and requires a multidisciplinary approach. However, the DPTs of patients with gastric cancer are still not defined yet. The aim of this study was to define the optimal DPT to be applied for patients with gastric cancer in the Veneto region. Rather than defining the ideal DTPs a priori, we conducted a preliminary research by analyzing the differences in the actual DPTs for patients with gastric cancer among different hospitals (hub and spokes) in Veneto. Then, the final DPT was elaborated based on the current available best clinical evidences; however, also the areas of homogeneity among the actual DPTs of the included centers as well as the critical issues that had emerged by our preliminary analysis were taken into account for pathway design. High heterogeneity in actual DTPs of patients with gastric cancer was observed among the analyzed centres. Moreover, some of the major criticisms have been found at crucial points of the current pathways. Based on these data, a reference path that is applicable to the whole-regional health network was constructed. The reference DTP is focused on multidisciplinary team management of patients with gastric cancer. Clinical pathways are essential tools to properly manage complex diseases such as gastric cancer. As such, more efforts should be done to implement their use.

Management of critically ill surgical patients Case reports.

The acute abdomen (AA) still remains a challenging situation for surgeons. New pathological conditions have been imposed to our attention in this field in recent years. The definition of abdominal compartmental syndrome (ACS) in surgical practice and the introduction of new biological matrices, with the concepts of tension-free (TS) repair of incisional hernias, prompted us to set up new therapeutic strategies for the treatment of patients with AA. Thus we reviewed the cases of AA that we observed in recent years in which we performed a laparostomy in order to prevent or to treat an ACS. They are all cases of acute abdomen (AA), but from different origin, including chronic diseases, as in the course of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and acute pancreatitis. In all the cases, the open abdominal cavity was covered with a polyethylene sheet. The edges of the wound were sutured to the plastic sheet, and a traction exerted by a device that causes a negative pressure was added. This method was adopted in several cases without randomization, and resulted in excellent patient's outcomes. KEY WORDS: Abdominal compartmental syndrome, Acute abdomen, Laparostomy.