Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in older patients with gastric cancer undergoing surgery: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In trials evaluating perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer, which serve as the basis for treatment guidelines, patients are selected. The generalizability of these trial findings to older patients is uncertain. METHODS: This population-based retrospective cohort study compared the survival outcomes of patients ≥ 75 years with gastric adenocarcinoma treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2015 and 2019. Additionally, the percentage of patients < 75 years and ≥ 75 years who did not proceeded to surgery after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were examined. RESULTS: A total of 1995 patients, of whom 1249 aged < 75 years and 746 aged ≥ 75 years, were included. In the group of patients ≥ 75 years, 275 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 471 patients were directly scheduled for gastrectomy. Patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy differed significantly from one and another in characteristics. Overall survival of patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not significantly different (median 34.9 vs. 32.3 months; P = 0.506), also after adjusting for potential confounders (HR 0.87; P = 0.263). Of patients ≥ 75 years who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 43 (15.6%) did not proceed to surgery compared to 111 (8.9%) patients < 75 years (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without chemotherapy were highly selected, and overall survival was not significantly different between both groups. Nonetheless, the proportion of patients who did not proceed to surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was higher in patients ≥ 75 years compared to patients < 75 years. Therefore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered with more caution in patients ≥ 75 years, while identifying those who may benefit.

Omentectomy as Part of Radical Surgery for Gastric Cancer: 5-Year Follow-Up Results of a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Curative therapy for gastric cancer usually consists of perioperative chemotherapy combined with a radical (R0) gastrectomy. In addition to a modified D2 lymphadenectomy, a complete omentectomy is recommended. However, there is little evidence for a survival benefit of omentectomy. This study presents the follow-up data of the OMEGA study. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 100 consecutive patients with gastric cancer undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy with complete en bloc omentectomy and modified D2 lymphadenectomy. Primary outcome of the current study was 5-year overall survival. Patients with or without omental metastases were compared. Pathological factors associated with locoregional recurrence and/or metastases were tested with multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 100 included patients, five had metastases in the greater omentum. Five-year overall survival was 0.0% in patients with omental metastases and 44.2% in patients without omental metastases (p = 0.001). Median overall survival time for patients with or without omental metastases was 7 months and 53 months. A (y)pT3-4 stage tumor and vasoinvasive growth were associated with locoregional recurrence and/or metastases in patients without omental metastases. CONCLUSION: The presence of omental metastases in gastric cancer patients who underwent potentially curative surgery was associated with impaired overall survival. Omentectomy as part of radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer might not contribute to a survival benefit in case of undetected omental metastases.

Safety of Esophageal Cancer Surgery During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Europe: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Many hospitals postponed elective surgical care during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Some centers continued elective surgery, including esophageal cancer surgery, with the use of preoperative screening methods; however, there is no evidence supporting the safety of this strategy as postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic have not yet been investigated. METHODS: This multicenter study in four European tertiary esophageal cancer referral centers included consecutive adult patients undergoing elective esophageal cancer surgery from a prospectively maintained database in a COVID-19 pandemic cohort (1 March 2020-31 May 2020) and a control cohort (1 October 2019-29 February 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: The COVID-19 cohort consisted of 139 patients, versus 168 patients in the control cohort. There was no difference in the rate of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (13.7% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.127) and number of pulmonary complications (32.4% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.646) between the COVID-19 cohort and the control cohort. Overall, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were comparable between both cohorts. History taking and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were used as preoperative screening methods to detect a possible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in all centers. No patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 pre- or postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Esophageal cancer surgery during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with an increase in pulmonary complications as no patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. Esophageal cancer surgery can be performed safely with the use of adequate preoperative SARS-CoV-2 screening methods.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on incidence and severity of acute appendicitis: a comparison between 2019 and 2020.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a decrease in the number of patients presenting with acute appendicitis was observed. It is unclear whether this caused a shift towards more complicated cases of acute appendicitis. We compared a cohort of patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic with a 2019 control cohort. METHODS: We retrospectively included consecutive adult patients in 21 hospitals presenting with acute appendicitis in a COVID-19 pandemic cohort (March 15 - April 30, 2020) and a control cohort (March 15 - April 30, 2019). Primary outcome was the proportion of complicated appendicitis. Secondary outcomes included prehospital delay, appendicitis severity, and postoperative complication rates. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic cohort comprised 607 patients vs. 642 patients in the control cohort. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a higher proportion of complicated appendicitis was seen (46.9% vs. 38.5%; p = 0.003). More patients had symptoms exceeding 24 h (61.1% vs. 56.2%, respectively, p = 0.048). After correction for prehospital delay, presentation during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was still associated with a higher rate of complicated appendicitis. Patients presenting > 24 h after onset of symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic were older (median 45 vs. 37 years; p = 0.001) and had more postoperative complications (15.3% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of acute appendicitis was slightly lower during the first wave of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, more patients presented with a delay and with complicated appendicitis than in a corresponding period in 2019. Spontaneous resolution of mild appendicitis may have contributed to the increased proportion of patients with complicated appendicitis. Late presenting patients were older and experienced more postoperative complications compared to the control cohort.

Yield of Screening for COVID-19 in Asymptomatic Patients Before Elective or Emergency Surgery Using Chest CT and RT-PCR (SCOUT): Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the yield of preoperative screening for COVID-19 with chest CT and RT-PCR in patients without COVID-19 symptoms. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Many centers are currently screening surgical patients for COVID-19 using either chest CT, RT-PCR or both, due to the risk for worsened surgical outcomes and nosocomial spread. The optimal design and yield of such a strategy are currently unknown. METHODS: This multicenter study included consecutive adult patients without COVID-19 symptoms who underwent preoperative screening using chest CT and RT-PCR before elective or emergency surgery under general anesthesia. RESULTS: A total of 2093 patients without COVID-19 symptoms were included in 14 participating centers; 1224 were screened by CT and RT-PCR and 869 by chest CT only. The positive yield of screening using a combination of chest CT and RT-PCR was 1.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.8-2.1]. Individual yields were 0.7% (95% CI: 0.2-1.1) for chest CT and 1.1% (95% CI: 0.6-1.7) for RT-PCR; the incremental yield of chest CT was 0.4%. In relation to COVID-19 community prevalence, up to ∼6% positive RT-PCR was found for a daily hospital admission rate >1.5 per 100,000 inhabitants, and around 1.0% for lower prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: One in every 100 patients without COVID-19 symptoms tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 with RT-PCR; this yield increased in conjunction with community prevalence. The added value of chest CT was limited. Preoperative screening allowed us to take adequate precautions for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in a surgical population, whereas negative patients needed only routine procedures.

Impact of positive microscopic resection margins (R1) after gastrectomy in diffuse-type gastric cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Diffuse-type gastric cancer (DTGC) is associated with poor outcome. Surgical resection margin status (R) is an important prognostic factor, but its exact impact on DTGC patients remains unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of microscopically positive margins (R1) after gastrectomy on survival and tumour recurrence in DTGC patients. METHODS: All consecutive DTGC patients from two tertiary centers who underwent curative oncologic gastrectomy from 2005 to 2018 were analyzed. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) for R0 versus R1 patients. Secondary endpoints included disease-free survival (DFS), recurrence patterns as well as the overall survival benefit of chemotherapy in this DTGC patient cohort. RESULTS: Overall, 108 patients were analysed, 88 with R0 and 20 with R1 resection. Patients with negative lymph nodes and negative margins (pN0R0) had the best OS (median 102 months, 95% CI 1-207), whereas pN + R0 patients had better median OS than pN + R1 patients (36 months 95% CI 13-59, versus 7 months, 95% CI 1-13, p < 0.001). Similar findings were observed for DFS. Perioperative chemotherapy offered a median OS of 46 months (95% CI 24-68) versus 9 months (95% CI 1-25) after upfront surgery (p = 0.022). R1 patients presented more often early recurrence (< 12 postoperative months, 30% vs 8%, p = 0.002), however, no differences were observed in recurrence location. CONCLUSION: DTGC patients with microscopically positive margins (R1) presented poorer OS and DFS, and early tumour recurrence in the present series. R0 resection should be obtained whenever possible, even if other adverse biological features are present.

Staging laparoscopy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: A single center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Most studies exploring the role of staging laparoscopy in gastric cancer are limited by low sample size and are predominantly conducted in Asian countries. This study sets out to determine the value of staging laparoscopy in patients with advanced gastric cancer in a Western population. METHODS: All patients with gastric cancer from a tertiary referral center without definite evidence of non-curable disease after initial staging, and who underwent staging laparoscopy between 2013 and 2020, were identified from a prospectively maintained database. The proportion of patients in whom metastases or locoregional non-resectability was detected during staging laparoscopy was established. Secondary outcomes included the avoidable surgery rate (detection of non-curable disease during gastrectomy with curative intent) and diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, negative and positive predictive value). RESULTS: A total of 216 patients were included. Staging laparoscopy revealed metastatic disease in 46 (21.3 %) patients and a non-resectable tumor in three (1.4 %) patients. During intended gastrectomy, non-curable disease was revealed in 13 (8.6 %) patients. Overall sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy were 76.6 %, 100 % and 92.6 %, respectively. The positive predictive value was 100 % and the negative predictive value was 90.3 %. CONCLUSION: Staging laparoscopy is valuable in the staging process of gastric cancer with a high accuracy in detecting non-curable disease, thereby preventing futile treatment and its associated burden.

Staging laparoscopy in gastric cancer surgery. A population-based cohort study in patients undergoing gastrectomy with curative intent.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the value of a staging laparoscopy in detecting metastases in gastric cancer patients show great variation. This study investigates the avoidable surgery rate in patients with and without a staging laparoscopy scheduled for surgery with curative intent. METHODS: This population-based cohort study included all patients with an intentional resection for a potentially curable gastric adenocarcinoma, between 2011 and 2016, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer audit. Patients with and without a staging laparoscopy were compared. The primary outcome was the avoidable surgery rate (detection of metastases and/or locoregional non-resectable tumor during intentional gastrectomy). Secondary outcomes were the negative predictive value, postoperative morbidity and pathology parameters. RESULTS: 2849 patients who underwent an intentional gastrectomy were included. 414 of 2849 (14.5%) patients underwent a staging laparoscopy before initiation of treatment. The avoidable surgery rate was 16.2% in the staging laparoscopy group, compared to 8.5% in the non-staging group (P < 0.001), resulting in a negative predictive value of 83.8%. The avoidable surgery rate remained significantly different after correction for possible confounders. The main reason for not executing the gastrectomy was the presence of distant metastasis in both groups. cT and cN stage were significantly higher in patients who underwent a staging laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: The staging laparoscopy group had a higher cTN and pTN stage, implicating selection of patients with more advanced disease for a staging laparoscopy. Despite the staging laparoscopy, a higher rate of avoidable surgery was found, suggesting a low sensitivity for detecting metastases or locoregional non-resectability in this patient group.