RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Perioperative chemotherapy has become the standard of care for locally advanced gastric cancer. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), including both chemotherapy and chemoradiation, is utilized in other gastrointestinal malignancies. We determined survival in a contemporary cohort of gastric cancer patients treated with TNT. METHODS: Using a prospective institutional database, patients diagnosed with cT2-4 or cN+ gastric adenocarcinoma (January 2012 to June 2022) who underwent staging laparoscopy, received TNT, and underwent gastrectomy were identified. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were determined using standard statistical methods. RESULTS: The study included 203 patients. The most common TNT sequence was induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (n = 186 [91.6%]). A total of 195 (96.1%) patients completed planned neoadjuvant treatments. Surgery included total gastrectomy in 108 (53.2%), extended (D1+/D2) lymphadenectomy in 193 (95.1%), and adjacent organ resection in 19 (9.4%) patients. Pathologic complete response (pCR) was achieved in 32 (15.8%) patients. The 5-year OS rate was 65.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 57.8-73.5%), and the 5-year DSS rate was 70.8% (95% CI 63.6-78.9%) in the study cohort. Among patients with pCR, the 5-year OS rate was 89.1% (95% CI 78.1-100.0%), and the 5-year DSS rate was 96.9% (95% CI 91-100%). Posttreatment pathologic N and M stages were the strongest prognostic indicators associated with both OS and DSS. CONCLUSIONS: Total neoadjuvant therapy for resectable gastric cancer is associated with a high rate of treatment completion and promising survival outcomes. Prospective comparisons with perioperative treatment are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from TNT.
RESUMO
Objective: To determine the magnitude of the perioperative costs associated with robotic gastrectomy (RG). Background: A robotic surgery platform has a high implementation cost and requires maintenance costs; however, whether the overall cost of RG, including all perioperative costs, is higher than conventional open gastrectomy (OG) remains unknown. Methods: Patients who underwent a major gastrectomy during February 2018 through December 2021 were retrospectively identified. We calculated the perioperative costs of RG and OG and compared them overall as well as in different phases, including intraoperative costs and 30-day postsurgery inpatient and outpatient costs. We investigated factors potentially associated with high cost and estimated the likelihood of RG to reduce overall cost under a Bayesian framework. All cost data were converted to ratios to the average cost of all operations performed at our center in year FY2021. Results: We identified 119 patients who underwent gastrectomy. The incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo >IIIa; RG, 10% vs OG, 13%) did not significantly differ between approaches. The median length of stay was 3 days shorter for RG versus OG (4 vs 7 days, P < 0.001). Intraoperative cost ratios were significantly higher for RG (RG, 2.6 vs OG, 1.7; P < 0.001). However, postoperative hospitalization cost ratios were significantly lower for RG (RG, 2.8 vs OG, 3.9; P < 0.001). Total perioperative cost ratios were similar between groups (RG, 6.1 vs OG, 6.4; P = 0.534). The multiple Bayesian generalized linear analysis showed RG had 76.5% posterior probability of overall perioperative cost reduction (adjusted risk ratio of 0.95; 95% credible interval, 0.85-1.07). Conclusions: Despite increased intraoperative costs, total perioperative costs in the RG group were similar to those in the OG group because of reduced postoperative hospitalization costs.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients with pancreatic and gastroesophageal (PGE) cancers experience high symptom burden, but patient experience throughout multimodality treatment remains unclear. We aimed to delineate the experience and symptom burden of patients throughout their perioperative course. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were performed with 17 surgical patients with PGE cancer. Interview transcripts were analyzed and symptoms were ranked by frequency. An expert panel assessed the relevance of these symptom inventory items. RESULTS: Of the 17 patients included, 35% (n = 6) underwent gastrectomy, 30% (n = 5) underwent esophagectomy, and 35% (n = 6) underwent pancreatectomy; 76% (n = 13) received neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation. Overall, 32 symptoms were reported, and 19 were reported by over 20% of patients. An expert panel rated nine symptoms to be relevant or very relevant to PGE surgical patients. These symptoms (difficulty swallowing, heartburn/reflux, diarrhea, constipation, flushing/sweating, stomach feeling full, malaise, dizziness, or feeling cold) were added to the core MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI) if they were commonly reported or reached a threshold relevancy score. CONCLUSIONS: In this qualitative study, we developed a provisional symptom inventory for patients undergoing surgery for PGE cancer. This symptom inventory module of the MDASI for PGE surgical patients will be psychometrically tested for validity and reliability.
Assuntos
Esofagectomia , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/terapia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/psicologia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/psicologia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Gastrectomia , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/terapia , Neoplasias Gástricas/psicologia , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Adulto , Entrevistas como Assunto , Pancreatectomia , PrognósticoAssuntos
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Junção Esofagogástrica , Cuidados Paliativos , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Junção Esofagogástrica/patologia , Junção Esofagogástrica/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patologia , Prognóstico , Taxa de Sobrevida , Estudos Observacionais como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Few studies have focused on palliative surgery in patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) or gastric cancer. We sought to evaluate clinical observational outcomes following palliative surgery in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with GEJ or gastric cancer who underwent palliative surgery (1/2010-11/2022) were identified. The primary outcomes were symptom improvement, ability to tolerate an oral diet, discharge to home, 30 "good days" without hospitalization, and receipt of systemic treatment. Postoperative outcomes and survival were secondarily evaluated. RESULTS: Among 93 patients, the median age was 59 (IQR 47-68) years, and the median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) was 1 (range 0-3). The most frequent indication for palliative surgery was primary tumor obstruction [75 (81%) patients]. The most common procedures were feeding tube placement in 60 (65%) and intestinal bypass in 15 (16%) patients. A total of 75 (81%) patients experienced symptom improvement. Of these, 19 (25%) developed recurrent and 49 (65%) developed new symptoms. ECOG-PS was significantly associated with symptom-free time. Among those who underwent a bypass, resection, or ostomy creation for malignant obstruction, 16 (80%) tolerated an oral diet. Postoperatively, 87 (94%) were discharged home, 72 (77%) had 30 good days, and 64 (69%) received systemic treatment. Postoperative complications occurred in 35 (38%) patients, and 7 (8%) died within 30 days. The median survival time was 7.7 (95% CI 6.4-10.40) months. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with incurable GEJ or gastric cancer can benefit from palliative surgery. Prognosis and performance status should inform goals-of-care discussions and patient selection for surgical palliation.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Junção Esofagogástrica , Cuidados Paliativos , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Junção Esofagogástrica/patologia , Junção Esofagogástrica/cirurgia , Masculino , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Feminino , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Idoso , Taxa de Sobrevida , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patologia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidade , Prognóstico , Seguimentos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Gastrectomia/mortalidadeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Financial toxicity (FT) refers to the adverse impact of cancer treatment costs on patients' experiences, potentially leading to poor adherence to treatment and outcomes. However, the prevalence of FT among patients undergoing major upper gastrointestinal cancer operations, as well as factors associated with FT, remain unclear. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study by sending the Comprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) survey and Surgery-Q (a survey specifically developed for this study) to patients who underwent gastrectomy or pancreatectomy for malignant disease at our institution in 2019-2021. RESULTS: We sent the surveys to 627 patients and received responses from 101 (16%) patients. The FT prevalence (COST score <26) was 48 (48%). Patients likely to experience FT were younger than 50 years of age, of non-White race, earned an annual income <$75,000, and had credit scores <740 (all p < 0.05). Additionally, longer hospital stay (p = 0.041), extended time off work for surgery (p = 0.011), and extended time off work for caregivers (p = 0.005) were associated with FT. Procedure type was not associated with FT; however, patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) had a lower FT probability (p = 0.042). In a multivariable analysis, age <50 years (p = 0.031) and credit score <740 (p < 0.001) were associated with high FT risk, while MIS was associated with low FT risk (p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer have a major risk of FT. In addition to predicting the FT risk before surgery, facilitating quicker functional recovery with the appropriate use of MIS is considered important to reducing the FT risk.
Assuntos
Gastrectomia , Pancreatectomia , Humanos , Pancreatectomia/efeitos adversos , Pancreatectomia/economia , Feminino , Masculino , Gastrectomia/efeitos adversos , Gastrectomia/economia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Transversais , Prevalência , Seguimentos , Idoso , Prognóstico , Estresse Financeiro/epidemiologia , Estresse Financeiro/etiologia , Adulto , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Tempo de Internação/economia , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Custos de Cuidados de SaúdeRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Whereas current guidelines recommend staging laparoscopy for most patients with potentially resectable gastric cancer, such a recommendation for patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (AEG) is lacking. This study sought to identify baseline clinicopathologic characteristics associated with peritoneal metastasis (PM) among patients with Siewert II AEG. METHODS: Trimodality therapy-eligible patients with Siewert II AEG (2000-2015, single institution) were retrospectively identified. A composite PM outcome was defined as follows: (1) PM at staging laparoscopy; (2) PM diagnosed during neoadjuvant chemoradiation; or (3) PM ≤6 months postoperatively. Logistic regression was used to identify features associated with PM; bootstrapped analysis (Youden J) identified the distal tumor extension that best discriminated the composite outcome. RESULTS: Of 188 patients, a composite PM outcome was observed in 26 of 188 (13.8%); 12 of 26 had positive staging laparoscopy, 10 of 26 experienced PM during chemoradiation, and 4 of 26 had PM ≤6 months postoperatively. Tumor extension below the GEJ was greater in patients with PM (median, 4.0 cm [interquartile range, 3.0-5.0] vs 3.0 cm [interquartile range, 2.0-3.0]; P < .001). All patients with PM had cT3 to cT4 tumors. Among patients with cT3 to cT4 tumors (n = 168 of 188; 89.4%), distal tumor extent (odds ratio, 1.67/cm; 95% CI, 1.23-2.28; P = .001) was independently associated with increased odds of PM. Gastric tumor extension ≥4 cm remained independently associated with PM (OR, 5.14; 95% CI, 2.11-12.53; P < .001) after adjustment for signet ring cell status. CONCLUSIONS: Distal tumor extent beyond the GEJ is independently associated with increased odds of PM in patients with Siewert II AEG. Patients with extensive gastric involvement should therefore be considered for staging laparoscopy before trimodality therapy.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Neoplasias Peritoneais , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Peritoneais/terapia , Gastrectomia , Adenocarcinoma/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Junção Esofagogástrica/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Estadiamento de NeoplasiasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is little data describing symptom burden before or after gastrectomy for patients with cancer. We aimed to examine the perioperative patterns of symptom severity in patients undergoing gastrectomy. METHODS: In this single-institution prospective cohort study, patients scheduled to undergo gastrectomy for cancer completed serial symptom measurement questionnaires preoperatively, at postoperative day (POD) 1-3, and POD 4-7. The percent of patients with moderate to severe scores was calculated at each time point. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients completed 94 surveys. Preoperatively, 46% reported at least one moderate/severe symptom. This increased to 88% during POD 1-3 and 79% during POD 4-7. During the preoperative period, 25% of patients reported moderate to severe interference in at least one aspect of daily life. This increased to 73% of patients at both POD 1-3 and POD 4-7. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing gastrectomy for cancer frequently experience symptoms that interfere with daily life. A better understanding of these symptoms may improve patients' experiences with, and recovery from, gastrectomy.
Assuntos
Neoplasias Gástricas , Carga de Sintomas , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , Gastrectomia/efeitos adversos , Período Pós-OperatórioRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Most patients with resectable gastric cancer present with locally advanced disease and warrant neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on level 1 evidence. However, the incremental benefit of adding radiation to chemotherapy as a neoadjuvant treatment strategy for these patients is less clear. METHODS: While awaiting the results of two ongoing randomized clinical trials attempting to specifically address this question (TOPGEAR and CRITICS-II), this article presents the debate between two gastric cancer surgery experts supporting each side of the argument on the use or omission of neoadjuvant radiation in this setting. RESULTS: On the one hand, neoadjuvant radiation may be better tolerated compared with modern triplet chemotherapy and may be associated with higher rates of major pathologic response. Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that radiation may offer a survival benefit when the tumor is located at the gastroesophageal junction or there is concern for a margin-positive resection. However, in the setting of adequate surgery, no survival benefit has been demonstrated by adding radiation to modern chemotherapy, likely reflecting the fact that death from gastric cancer is a result of distant recurrence, which is not addressed by local treatment such as radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: While awaiting the results of the TOPGEAR and CRITICS-II trials, this discussion of current evidence can facilitate the refinement of an optimal neoadjuvant therapy strategy in patients with resectable gastric cancer.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Quimiorradioterapia , Quimioterapia Adjuvante , Terapia Neoadjuvante , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and efficiency of laparoscopic transverse abdominis plane block (Lap-TAP) in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy and gastrectomy compared to those of ultrasound-guided TAP (US-TAP). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients who underwent open or minimally invasive (MIS) pancreatoduodenectomy and major gastrectomy with the use of Lap-TAP or US-TAP at our institution between November 1, 2018, and September 30, 2021. We compared the estimated time and cost associated with Lap-TAP and US-TAP. We also compared postoperative opioid use and pain scores between patients who underwent open laparotomy with these TAPs. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were included. Overall, 114 patients (59%) underwent pancreatectomy, and 80 patients (41%) underwent gastrectomy. Additionally, 138 patients (71%) underwent an open procedure, and 56 patients (29%) underwent MIS. A total of 102 patients (53%) underwent US-TAP, and 92 (47%) underwent Lap-TAP. The median time to skin incision was significantly shorter in the Lap-TAP group (US-TAP, 59 min vs. Lap-TAP, 45 min; P < 0.001), resulting in an estimated reduction in operation cost by $602. Pain scores and postoperative opioid use were similar between Lap-TAP and US-TAP among open surgery patients, indicating equivalent pain control between Lap-TAP and US-TAP. CONCLUSION: Lap-TAP was equally effective in pain control as US-TAP after pancreatectomy and gastrectomy, and Lap-TAP can reduce operation time and cost. Lap-TAP is considered the preferred approach for MIS pancreatectomy and gastrectomy, which occasionally needs conversion to laparotomy.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Laparoscopia , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Gastrectomia , Dor , Estudos Retrospectivos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Minimamente Invasivos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia , Músculos AbdominaisRESUMO
In gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma cases, a prognosis based on ypTNM staging could be affected by preoperative therapy. Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma and gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent preoperative therapy followed by surgical resection from 2006 through 2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database. To enable stage-by-stage OS comparisons, tumors were classified into four gross ypTNM groups: ypT1/2, N-negative; ypT1/2, N-positive; ypT3/4, N-negative; and ypT3/4, N-positive. Prognostic factors were examined, and an OS prediction nomogram was developed for patients with abdominal/lower esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma, representing GEJ cancers. We examined 25,463 patient records. When compared by gross ypTNM group, the abdominal/lower esophageal and gastric cardia adenocarcinoma groups had similar OS rates, differing from those of other esophageal or gastric cancers. Cox regression analysis of patients with GEJ cancers showed that preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with shorter OS than preoperative chemotherapy after adjustment for the ypTNM group (hazard ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.24-1.39, p < 0.001), likely owing to downstaging effects. The nomogram had a concordance index of 0.833 and a time-dependent area under the curve of 0.669. OS prediction in GEJ adenocarcinoma cases should include preoperative therapy regimens. Our OS prediction nomogram provided reasonable OS prediction for patients with GEJ adenocarcinoma, and future validation is needed.
RESUMO
Gastric cancer (GCa) is an aggressive malignancy, representing the third leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide. The poor prognosis of GCa can be associated with the prevalence of peritoneal metastasis (PM). Current international and national GCa treatment guidelines only recommend palliative treatment options for patients with PM. Since the 1980s there have been multiple single arm trials, randomized controlled trials, and metanalysis investigating the use of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in patients with advanced GCa, with or without PM. Results from these studies have been encouraging, with some large-volume centers even incorporating HIPEC into their treatment algorithms for patients with advanced GCa. Additionally, there are several ongoing trials that, when completed, will increase our understanding of the efficacy of CRS & HIPEC in patients with GCa metastatic to the peritoneum. Herein we review the current evidence, ongoing trials, consensus guidelines, and future considerations regarding the use of CRS & HIPEC in patients suffering from GCa with PM.
RESUMO
Background: Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been increasingly used for treatment of gastric cancer in the United States. However, it is unknown if there has been a nationwide improvement of short-term safety outcomes and oncological quality metrics over time. Methods: We used the National Cancer Database to identify patients who underwent major gastrectomy from 2010 through 2018. The short-term safety outcomes and oncological metrics were compared between cases of open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), and RG. We also compared the indications and outcomes of RG between the three periods (2010 - 2012, 2013 - 2015, and 2016 - 2018). Results: Of the 22,445 patients included, 1,867 (8%) underwent RG. Number of RG continued to increase from only 37 cases performed in 2010 to 412 cases performed in 2018. The number of lymph nodes (LNs) examined (OG, 16; LG, 17; and RG, 19) and the R0 rate (OG, 88%; LG, 92%; and RG 94%) were better for RG than for OG or LG (P < 0.001). In the RG group, the number of LNs examined (first period, 15; third period, 18; P < 0.001), R0 rate (first period, 88.6%; third period, 91.1%; P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (first period, 9 days; third period, 8 days; P < 0.001), 30-day readmission rate (first period, 10.1%; third period, 7.9%; P < 0.001), and 90-day mortality (first period, 7.3%; third period, 6.0%; P = 0.003) continued to improve cohort over time. The ratio of the robotic cases performed in academic institutions gradually increased (first period, 48.6%; third period, 54.3%; P < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, RG was associated with more than 15 LNs being examined (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34 - 1.65; P < 0.001). The indications for RG appeared expanding to include more advanced stage, high comorbidity, and patients who underwent preoperative therapy. Conclusions: RG has been increasingly performed in the past decade. Although its indication was expanded to include more advanced tumors, we found that the oncological quality metrics and safety outcomes of RG have improved over time and were better than those of OG or LG.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The current standard operation for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction (P/GEJ) cancers with limited esophageal extension is total gastrectomy (TG). TG is associated with impaired appetite and weight loss due to the loss of gastric functions such as production of ghrelin and with anemia due to intrinsic factor loss and vitamin B12 malabsorption. Theoretically, proximal gastrectomy (PG) can mitigate these problems by preserving gastric function. However, PG with direct esophagogastric reconstruction is associated with severe postoperative reflux, delayed gastric emptying, and poor quality of life (QoL). Minimally invasive PG (MIPG) with antireflux techniques has been increasingly performed by experts but is technically demanding owing to its complexity. Moreover, the actual advantages of MIPG over minimally invasive TG (MITG) with regards to postoperative QoL are unknown. Our overall objective of this study is to determine the short-term QoL benefits of MIPG. Our central hypotheses are that MIPG is safe and that patients have improved appetite after MIPG with effective antireflux techniques, which leads to an overall QoL improvement when compared with MITG. METHODS: Enrollment of a total of 60 patients in this prospective survey-collection study is expected. Procedures (MITG versus MIPG, antireflux techniques for MIPG [double-tract reconstruction versus the double-flap technique]) will be chosen based on surgeon and/or patient preference. Randomization is not considered feasible because patients often have strong preferences regarding MITG and MIPG. The primary outcome is appetite level (reported on a 0-10 scale) at 3 months after surgery. With an expected 30 patients per cohort (MITG versus MIPG), this study will have 80% power to detect a one-point difference in appetite level. Patient-reported outcomes will be longitudinally collected (including questions about appetite and reflux), and specific QoL items, body weight, body mass index and ghrelin, albumin, and hemoglobin levels will be compared. DISCUSSION: Surgeons from the US, Japan, and South Korea formed this collaboration with the agreement that the surgical approach to P/GEJ cancers is an internationally important but controversial topic that requires immediate action. At the completion of the proposed research, our expected outcome is the establishment of the benefit and safety of MIPG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with Clinical Trials Reporting Program Registration under the registration number NCI-2022-00267 on January 11, 2022, as well as with ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05205343 on January 11, 2022.
Assuntos
Grelina , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Estudos Prospectivos , Junção Esofagogástrica/cirurgia , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirurgia , GastrectomiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Microscopically positive (R1) surgical margins after gastrectomy increase gastric cancer recurrence risk, but optimal management after R1 gastrectomy is controversial. We sought to identify the impact of R1 margins on recurrence patterns and survival in the era of preoperative therapy for gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma during 1998-2017 at a major cancer center were enrolled. Clinicopathologic factors associated with positive margins were examined, and incidence, sites, and timing of recurrence and survival outcomes were compared between patients with positive and negative margins. RESULTS: Of 688 patients, 432 (63%) received preoperative therapy. Thirty-four patients (5%) had R1 margins. Compared with patients with negative margins, patients with R1 margins more frequently had aggressive clinicopathologic features, such as linitis plastica (odds ratio [OR] 7.79, p < 0.001) and failure to achieve cT downstaging with preoperative treatment (OR 5.20, p = 0.005). The 5 year overall survival (OS) rate was lower in patients with R1 margins (6% vs 60%; p < 0.001), and R1 margins independently predicted worse OS (hazard ratio 2.37, 95% CI 1.51-3.75, p < 0.001). Most patients with R1 margins (58%) experienced peritoneal recurrence, and locoregional recurrence was relatively rare in this group (14%). Median time to recurrence was 8.5 months for peritoneal dissemination and 15.7 months for locoregional recurrence. CONCLUSION: R1 margins after gastrectomy were associated with aggressive tumor biology, high incidence of peritoneal recurrence after a short interval, and poor OS. In patients with R1 margins, re-resection to achieve microscopically negative margins has to be considered with caution.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma , Neoplasias Peritoneais , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Margens de Excisão , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Adenocarcinoma/cirurgia , Adenocarcinoma/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida , PrognósticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Whether gastric cancer patients derive greater benefit from robotic gastrectomy (RG), or open gastrectomy (OG) is unknown. We initiated a RG program in 2018, with prospective short-term outcome monitoring to ensure safety. We hypothesized that the RG program for gastric cancer can be safely implemented with equivalent safety and oncological textbook outcomes (TOs) to conventional open gastrectomy (OG). METHODS: The study included patients who underwent curative-intent OG or RG for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2018 and December 2021. TO metrics were negative surgical margins, ≥ 15 lymph nodes examined, no severe (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa) postoperative complications, no reinterventions within 90 days after surgery, no ICU admission, no prolonged length of stay (LOS; > 10 days), no 90-day postoperative mortality, and no readmission within 90 days after surgery. Overall TO was achieved when all these metrics were met. RESULTS: Of 161 patients, 120 underwent OG, and 41 underwent RG. The two groups' demographic and disease characteristics did not differ significantly. Compared with OG patients, RG patients had a longer median surgery time (348 vs. 282 min), smaller median blood loss volume (50 vs. 150 mL), lower mean prescribed opioid dose at discharge (12 vs. 45 mg), and shorter median LOS (4 vs. 7 days; all p < 0.001). The groups' postoperative complication rates (10% vs. 17%) did not differ significantly (p = 0.283). The overall TO rate of the RG group (73%) was higher than that of the OG group (60%), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.131). CONCLUSION: We were able to implement the RG program safely, without compromising safety or oncological outcomes.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Neoplasias Gástricas/patologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Gastrectomia/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patients with advanced cancer prefer surgeons to use the best case/worst case (BC/WC) communication framework over the traditional risk/benefit (R/B) framework in the context of palliative surgical scenarios. BACKGROUND: Identifying the patient's preferred communication frameworks may improve satisfaction and outcome measures during difficult clinical decision-making. METHODS: In a video-vignette-based randomized, double-blinded study from November 2020 to May 2021, patients with advanced cancer viewed 2 videos depicting a physician-patient encounter in a palliative surgical scenario, in which the surgeon uses either the BC/WC or the R/B framework to discuss treatment options. The primary outcome was the patients' preferred video surgeon. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five patients were approached to participate; 66 were randomized and 58 completed the study (mean age 55.8 ± 13.8 years, 60.3% males). 22 patients (37.9%, 95% CI: 25.4%-50.4%) preferred the surgeon using the BC/WC framework, 21 (36.2%, 95% CI: 23.8%-48.6%) preferred the surgeon using the R/B framework, and 15 (25.9%, 95% CI: 14.6%-37.2%) indicated no preference. High trust in the medical profession was inversely associated with a preference for the surgeon using BC/WC framework (odds ratio: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.98, P = 0.03). The BC/WC framework rated higher for perceived surgeon's listening (4.6 ± 0.7 vs 4.3±0.9, P = 0.03) and confidence in the surgeon's trustworthiness (4.3 ± 0.8 vs 4.0 ± 0.9, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeon use of the BC/WC communication framework was not universally preferred but was as acceptable to patients as the traditional R/B framework and rated higher in certain aspects of communication. A preference for a surgeon using BC/WC was associated with lower trust in the medical profession. Surgeons should consider the BC/WC framework to individualize their approach to challenging clinical discussions.