The outcomes of laparoscopic omentum-preserving gastrectomy compared to open surgery with omentectomy in gastric cancer patients: a propensity score matched study of 249 UICC stage 0-IV gastric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: We performed a propensity score matched study comparing patients' short- and long-term results after laparoscopic omentum-preserving gastrectomy and open surgery with omentectomy with UICC stages 0-IV. METHODS: Between 2015 and 2022, 311 patients with gastric cancer underwent surgery at the University Clinical Centre Maribor. Of these, 249 met the inclusion criteria and 198 were included in the study group after PSM. RESULTS: Patients in both groups were well-balanced in demographic and pathological characteristics after PSM. There was no significant difference in the 5-year survival between groups (LAP: 62.2% vs. OPN: 54.4%; p = 0.950). The Cox regression model identified UICC stage and age as significant predictors for survival. In both groups, peritoneal dissemination was the most common site of recurrence. The multivariate analysis identified the UICC stage as a significant predictor for peritoneal recurrence, while omental preservation was not associated with a higher risk of peritoneal dissemination. Omentum preservation was not associated with more intestinal obstruction. Patients in the LAP group had significantly shorter hospital stays (LAP: 9(6) vs. OPN: 10(5); p = 0.009), less postoperative morbidity (LAP: 17% vs. OPN: 23.4%; p = 0.009), and significantly more extracted LNs per operation compared to open surgery (LAP: 31 ± 11 LNs vs. OPN: 25 ± 12 LNs; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Based on our results, we recommend the use of laparoscopic omentum-preserving gastrectomy in patients with early and advanced gastric cancer.

The short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastrium excision for lymph node-negative gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with T1-3N0M0 gastric cancer (GC) who undergo radical gastrectomy maintain a high recurrence rate. The free cancer cells in the mesogastric adipose connective tissue (Metastasis V) maybe the reason for recurrence in these individuals. We aimed to evaluate whether D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastrium excision (D2 + CME) was superior to D2 lymphadenectomy with regard to safety and oncological efficacy for T1-3N0M0 GC. METHODS: Patients with T1-3N0M0 GC who underwent radical resection from January 2014 to July 2018 were retrospectively analyzed; there were 323 patients, of whom 185 were in the D2 + CME group and 138 in the D2 group. The primary endpoint was 5-year disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary endpoints include the 5-year overall survival (OS), recurrence pattern, morbidity, mortality, and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: D2 + CME was associated with less intraoperative bleeding loss, a greater number of lymph nodes harvested, and less time to first postoperative flatus, but the postoperative morbidity was similar. The 5-year DFS was 95.6% (95% CI 92.7-98.5%) and 90.4% (95% CI 85.5-95.3%) in the D2 + CME group and the D2 group, respectively, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.455 (95% CI 0.188-1.097; p = 0.071). In terms of recurrence patterns, local recurrence was more prone to occur in the D2 group (p = 0.031). Subgroup analysis indicated that for patients with T1b-3N0M0 GC, the 5-year DFS in the D2 + CME group was considerably greater than that in the D2 group (95.3% [95% CI 91.6-99.0%] vs. 87.6% [95% CI 80.7-94.5%], HR 0.369, 95% CI 0.138-0.983; log-rank p = 0.043). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic D2 + CME for T1-3N0M0 GC is safe and feasible. Furthermore, it not only reduces the local recurrence rate but also improves the 5-year DFS in cases of T1b-3N0M0 GC.

Surgery Matters: Progress in Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer.

OPINION STATEMENT: The surgical treatment of gastric carcinoma has progressed significantly in the past few decades. A major milestone was the establishment of multimodal therapies for locally advanced tumours. Improvements in the technique of endoscopic resection have supplanted surgery in the early stages of many cases of gastric cancer. In cases in which an endoscopic resection is not possible, surgical limited resection procedures for the early stages of carcinoma are an equal alternative to gastrectomy in the field of oncology. Proximal gastrectomy is extensively discussed in this context. Whether proximal gastrectomy leads to a better quality of life and better nutritional well-being than total gastrectomy depends on the reconstruction chosen. The outcome cannot be conclusively assessed at present. For locally advanced stages, total or subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is now the global standard. A subtotal gastrectomy requires sufficiently long tumour-free proximal resection margins. Recent data indicate that proximal margins of at least 3 cm for tumours with an expansive growth pattern and at least 5 cm for those with an infiltrative growth pattern are sufficient. The most frequently performed reconstruction worldwide following gastrectomy is the Roux-en-Y reconstruction. However, there is evidence that pouch reconstruction is superior in terms of quality of life and nutritional well-being. Oncological gastric surgery is increasingly being performed laparoscopically. The safety and oncological equivalency were first demonstrated for early carcinomas and then for locally advanced tumours, by cohort studies and RCTs. Some studies suggest that laparoscopic procedures may be advantageous in early postoperative recovery. Robotic gastrectomy is also increasing in use. Preliminary results suggest that robotic gastrectomy may have added value in lymphadenectomy and in the early postoperative course. However, further studies are needed to substantiate these results. There is an ongoing debate about the best treatment option for gastric cancer with oligometastatic disease. Preliminary results indicate that certain patient groups could benefit from resection of the primary tumour and metastases following chemotherapy. However, the exact conditions in which patients may benefit have yet to be confirmed by ongoing trials.

The short- and long-term effect of membrane anatomy-guided laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus regional complete mesogastrium excision for locally advanced gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Retrospectively analyzed the short- and long-term efficacy between laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus regional complete mesogastrium excision (D2 + rCME) and traditional laparoscopic D2 in the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC), in order to obtain more evidence for D2 + rCME gastrectomy. METHODS: A total of 599 LAGC patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted radical gastrectomy from January 2014 to December 2019, including 367 cases in the D2 + rCME group and 232 cases in the D2 group. Intraoperative and postoperative clinicopathological parameters, postoperative complications and long-term survival in the two groups were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: No significant differences in the positive rate of mesogastric tumor deposits, the number of positive lymph nodes and postoperative length of stay were found between the two groups (P > 0.05). In the D2 + rCME group, intraoperative blood loss was significantly reduced (84.20 ± 57.64 ml vs. 148.47 ± 76.97 ml, P < 0.001), the time to first postoperative flatus and first liquid diet intake were significantly shortened (3[2-3] days vs. 3[3-3] days, P < 0.001; 7[7-8] days vs. 8[7-8] days, P < 0.001), and the number of lymph nodes dissected was greater (43.57 ± 16.52 pieces vs. 36.72 ± 13.83 pieces, P < 0.001). The incidence of complications did not significantly differ between the D2 + rCME group (20.7%) and D2 group (19.4%) (P > 0.05). Although there was no statistically difference in 3-year OS and DFS between the two groups. However, the trend was better in D2 + rCME group. In subgroup analysis, patients with positive tumor deposits (TDs) in the D2 + rCME group had significantly better 3-year DFS compared With D2 group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic D2 + rCME is safe and feasible for the treatment of LAGC and is characterized by less bleeding, greater lymph node dissection and rapid recovery, without increasing postoperative complications. D2 + rCME group showed a better trend of long-term efficacy, especially significant beneficial for LAGC patients who with positive TDs.

Prognostic significance of common hepatic artery lymph node metastasis in gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: The number of lymph nodes is used to determine the prognosis in patients with gastric cancer undergoing D2 lymph node dissection. However, a group of extraperigastric lymph nodes, including lymph node 8a, are also considered to be effective in prognosis. In our clinical experience, in most patients during D2 lymph node dissection, the lymph nodes are removed en-bloc with the specimen and are not marked separately. The aim was to analyze the importance and prognostic impact of 8a lymph node metastasis in patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients who underwent gastrectomy and D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer between 2015 and 2022 were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups based on metastasis to the 8a lymph node: metastatic and nonmetastatic. The effect of clinicopathologic features and the prevalence of lymph node metastasis on the prognosis of the two groups were analyzed. RESULTS: The present study included 78 patients. The mean number of dissected lymph nodes was 27 (IQR, 15-62). There were 22 (28.2%) patients in the 8a lymph node metastatic group. Patients with 8a lymph node metastatic disease had shorter overall survival and shorter disease-free survival. Those with metastatic 8a lymph nodes among pathologic N2/3 patients had shorter overall and disease-free survival rates (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, we believe that anterior common hepatic artery (8a) LN metastasis is a key factor that negatively affects both disease-free and overall survival in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

Open vs robotic gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis on 1469 patients from the IMIGASTRIC prospective database.

BACKGROUND: Comparative data on D2-robotic gastrectomy (RG) vs D2-open gastrectomy (OG) are lacking in the Literature. Aim of this paper is to compare RG to OG with a focus on D2-lymphadenectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Data of patients undergoing D2-OG or RG for gastric cancer were retrieved from the international IMIGASTRIC prospective database and compared. RESULTS: A total of 1469 patients were selected for inclusion in the study. After 1:1 propensity score matching, a total of 580 patients were matched and included in the final analysis, 290 in each group, RG vs OG. RG had longer operation time (210 vs 330 min, p < 0.0001), reduced intraoperative blood loss (155 vs 119.7 ml, p < 0.0001), time to liquid diet (4.4 vs 3 days, p < 0.0001) and to peristalsis (2.4 vs 2 days, p < 0.0001), and length of postoperative stay (11 vs 8 days, p < 0.0001). Morbidity rate was higher in OG (24.1% vs 16.2%, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: RG significantly expedites recovery and reduces the risk of complications compared to OG. However, long-term survival is similar.

Splenectomy Does Not Increase Early Morbidity in Patients Undergoing Total Gastrectomy: A Case-Control Study with Propensity Score Analysis.

AIM: In gastric cancer (GC), D2 lymph node dissection is, alongside negative-margins gastrectomy, of paramount importance. There is a debate between Western and Eastern scientific communities concerning the risk-benefit balance with respect to splenectomy, as Western countries are inclined to perform spleen-preserving gastrectomy due to an increased risk for postoperative complications. In Eastern countries (such as Japan) this is not the case. Our study aimed to determine whether or not spleen-sacrificing total gastrectomy for GC was associated with a higher rate of early postoperative morbidity or mortality. METHOD: We performed a retrospective case-control study in which we included patients who underwent total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for GC (stages I-III) with curative intent, in a single high-volume tertiary oncologic centre. We divided the cases into two groups: spleenpreserving (SP) and spleen-sacrificing (SS) and evaluated the early complications rate following surgery. Afterwards, we performed propensity score matching (PSM) and analysis of the two groups. Results: We included 74 patients, 29 in the SS group and 45 in the SP group. Fifteen cases (20.2%) developed early postoperative complications and the complication rate was 53% (n=8) in the SS group and 46% (n=7) in the SP group. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 2.7%. Conclusions: Splenectomy is not associated with increased early morbidity following total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy if performed by an experienced surgeon.

Short-term outcomes of D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

BACKGROUND: Our previous study has demonstrated the surgical advantages of D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision (D2 + CME) in gastric cancer surgery. To further verify the safety of D2 + CME procedure, we conducted this large-scale, observational cohort study and applied propensity score matching (PSM) approach to compare D2 + CME with conventional D2 in terms of short-term outcomes in gastric cancer patients. METHODS: Data on 855 patients from Tongji Hospital who underwent laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with R0 resection (496 in the conventional D2 cohort and 359 in the D2 + CME cohort) between Dec 12, 2013 and Dec 28, 2017 were retrieved from prospectively maintained clinical database. After PSM analysis at a 1:1 ratio, each cohort included 219-matched patients. Short-term outcomes, including surgical results, morbidity, and mortality within 30 days after the operation, were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: In this large-scale, observational cohort study based on PSM analysis, the D2 + CME procedure showed less intra-laparoscopic blood loss, more lymph node harvest, and faster postoperative flatus than the conventional D2 procedure. However, both the overall and severe postoperative adverse events (Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ III a) seemed comparable between two cohorts. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that D2 + CME was associated with better short-term outcomes than conventional D2 dissection for patients with resectable gastric cancer.

Surgical technique of suprapancreatic D2 lymphadenectomy focusing on the posterior hepatic plexus for advanced gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: Although D2 lymphadenectomy is currently considered a standard procedure for advanced gastric cancer (GC) worldwide, there is room for discussion about the appropriate range of suprapancreatic D2 lymphadenectomy. Focusing on the posterior hepatic plexus (PHP), which is not well recognized, we developed a surgical technique of suprapancreatic D2 lymphadenectomy, which we have called PHP-D2, and its short-term and long-term efficacies were evaluated in comparison with non-PHP-D2. METHODS: GC patients who underwent distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy between July 2006 and May 2013 were enrolled, from which patients who had peritoneal metastasis and/or were peritoneal cytology-positive during surgery were excluded. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Ninety-two patients (non-PHP-D2: 48, PHP-D2: 44) were enrolled. Shorter operation time (330 min vs 275 min, p < 0.0001) and less blood loss (290 mL vs 125 mL, p < 0.0001) were observed in PHP-D2, and no pancreatic fistulas were observed in PHP-D2. More lymph nodes of #11p (1 vs 1.5, p = 0.0328) and #12a lymph nodes (0 vs 1, p = 0.0034) were retrieved in PHP-D2, with no significant differences in #8a and #9 lymph nodes. Lymphatic recurrence was significantly less in PHP-D2 (p = 0.0166), and univariate and multivariate analyses showed that non-PHP-D2 was a significant risk factor for lymphatic recurrence (p = 0.0158), although there were no significant differences between non-PHP-D2 and PHP-D2 in 5-year overall survival and 5-year relapse-free survival. CONCLUSION: PHP-D2 was a safe and feasible procedure that had the potential to reduce lymphatic recurrence, and it can be a standard procedure of D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced GC.

D3 Versus D2 Lymphadenectomy in Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: D3 lymphadenectomy for right colon cancer improves oncological outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to compare operation data, histopathological characteristics, perioperative conditions, and long-term survival after D3 and D2 lymphadenectomy in right hemicolectomy. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for relevant articles (up to March 31, 2020). Random-effects and fixed-effects meta-analysis models were used. Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.3 and Stata version 15.1 were used for pooled estimates. RESULTS: After screening 714 articles, 7 articles with a total of 1368 patients were eligible for inclusion. Compared with D2, D3 lymphadenectomy improves results in terms of blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -20.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] -28.19 to -13.16, P < .01), harvested lymph nodes (WMD = 8.86, 95% CI 7.74 to 9.98, P < .01), 3-year overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.03, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.43, P < .01), 5-year OS (HR = 2.22, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.30, P = .02), and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (HR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.90, P = .01). There was no significant difference regarding operation time, anastomosis leakage, wound infection, overall morbidity, postoperative hospital stay, mortality, length of dissected colon, and 3-year DFS (P >= .05). CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested in this review that D3 lymphadenectomy is superior to D2 lymphadenectomy in terms of blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, 3-year OS, 5-year OS, and 5-year DFS. The conclusion must be drawn with caution due to the limited number of included studies. Further RCTs are needed for stronger evidence.

Central lymph node metastasis is predictive of survival in advanced gastric cancer patients treated with D2 lymphadenectomy.

BACKGROUND: The number of positive lymph nodes, which was defined as "N stage", is mostly used to predict the survival of D2-resected gastric cancer patients, not the location. A "central lymph node" (CnLN) was defined by Ikoma et al., included common hepatic, celiac and proximal splenic artery LNs. CnLNs located in the extraperigastric area are included in the D2 LN station for gastric cancer. We speculate that CnLNs can be regarded as a predictor of survival. METHODS: Eligible advanced gastric cancer patients who underwent curative resection and D2 lymph node dissection between 2004 and 2012 at our institution were identified. The frequency of CnLN metastases and risk factors affecting DFS were examined. Survival differences were assessed by log-rank tests and Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: The study identified 1178 patients who underwent curative surgery or D2 or more extensive lymphadenectomy. A total of 342 patients had been proven to have CnLN metastasis. Larger tumor size (P < 0.001), more frequent lymphatic vessel invasion (P < 0.001), signet ring cell histology (P = 0.014), and more advanced pathological T stage (P = 0.013) were significantly related to CnLNs metastasis. The patients with CnLN metastasis had a poor prognosis (HR for DFS of 1.366, 95%CI = 1.138-1.640, P = 0.001). For the pN2/3 patients, CnLN metastasis was associated with shorter 5-year DFS (for pN2 patients: 25.9% vs 39.3%, P = 0.017; for pN3 patients: 11.5% vs 23.4%, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Gastric cancer patients with CnLN metastasis who underwent D2 resection had a poor prognosis. With the same N stage, the patients with positive CnLNs had shorter survival. CnLNs metastasis could be a supplement to N stage and a predictor of survival in gastric cancer patients. Large sample, multicenter, randomized clinical trials are still needed in the future.

Isolated brachioradialis metastasis of gastric adenocarcinoma after R0 resection.

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer is the fifth most common cancer worldwide, with an incidence of 6.72 per 100,000 people. Thirty-two percent of gastric cancer patients will live 5 years after diagnosis. Single-site metastasis is noted in 26% of patients with gastric cancer, most commonly in the liver (48%), peritoneum (32%), lung (15%), and bone (12%). Here, a case is presented in which a single skeletal muscle metastasis appeared after appropriate resection and treatment. CASE PRESENTATION: A 63-year-old man underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and a multivisceral en bloc R0 resection. Final pathology showed no evidence of lymph node metastasis with 31 negative lymph nodes. Four months postoperatively, the patient was found to have a rapidly growing biopsy-proven extremity soft tissue gastric metastasis within the brachioradialis muscle. He subsequently underwent metastasectomy and immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: This case is a rare example of an isolated extremity metastasis of gastric adenocarcinoma in the setting of an R0 resection of the primary tumor and negative nodal disease on final pathology, suggestive of hematogenous spread. We review the biology, workup, and management of gastric cancer and highlight new advancements in the treatment of this aggressive cancer.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy is as effective as open surgery in terms of long-term survival: a single-institution study on gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery has been widely accepted to treat early-stage gastric cancer. However, it is still controversial to perform laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer. We performed the present study to compare the long-term outcomes of patients after laparoscopic or open gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy. METHODS: The clinicopathological data of 182 gastric cancer patients receiving gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy between January 2011 and December 2015 at Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital were retrospectively retrieved. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of these 182 patients were compared. Then, the prognostic significance of positive lymph node ratio (LNR) was assessed. RESULTS: As a whole, OS (P = 0.789) and DFS (P = 0.672) of patients receiving laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy were not significantly different from those of patients receiving open surgery. For stage I patients, laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy was not significantly different from open surgery in terms of OS (P = 0.573) and DFS (P = 0.157). Similarly, for stage II patients, laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy was not significantly different from open surgery in terms of OS (P = 0.567) and DFS (P = 0.830). For stage III patients, laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy was not significantly different from open surgery in terms of OS (P = 0.773) and DFS (P = 0.404). Laparoscopic or open gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy was not proven by Cox regression analysis to be an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS. High LNR was significantly associated with worse OS (P < 0.001) and DFS (P < 0.001). Surgical type did not significantly affect prognosis of patients with low LNR or survival of patients with high LNR. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with gastric cancer, laparoscopic gastrectomy plus D2 lymphadenectomy was not inferior to open surgery in terms of long-term outcomes. LNR is a useful prognostic marker for GC patients.

The effect of preoperative treatments on lymph node counts after total gastrectomy in esophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to explore the effects of preoperative treatments on lymph nodes (LNs) counts after total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for 446 patients with locally advanced esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. The patients were divided into three groups: surgery first (SF), preoperative chemotherapy (PCT), and preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT). Clinical-pathological data were analyzed. RESULTS: The case number in SF, PCT, and PCRT groups was 281, 109, and 56, respectively, and the median total LNs count was 32.0 (10.0-102.0), 31.0 (12.0-62.0), and 25.5 (10.0-50.0), respectively, (P < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated the total LNs count was lower in PCRT than SF/PCT (P < 0.001), and had no correlation with tumor regression grades (TRGs). Subgroup comparison showed radiation target LNs count was lower in PCRT than SF/PCT (P < 0.001), and peritarget LNs count was lower in PCRT than SF (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: For esophagogastric adenocarcinoma, PCRT reduced total LNs count after total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy, whereas PCT did not. In the PCRT group, LNs count was lower in both radiation target and peritarget areas than in the SF group but only in radiation target area than in the PCT group. The correlation between TRGs and total LNs count remained unclear.

A comparison of the operative outcomes of D1 and D2 gastrectomy performed at a single Western center with multiple surgeons: a retrospective analysis with propensity score matching.

BACKGROUND: There has been worldwide debate on lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer, with increasing consensus on performing an extended (D2) resection. There is a paucity of data in Australia. Our aim is to compare overall outcomes between a D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer in a single specialist unit. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on patients who underwent a curative primary gastric resection for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 1996 and April 2016, primary outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to balance covariates between D1/D1+ and D2 groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves of D1/D1+ versus D2 were constructed and evaluated using the log-rank test with subgroup analyses for pathological node (pN) status. Multiple Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine predictors of overall survival. RESULTS: Two hundred four patients underwent a gastrectomy, 54 had D1/D1+, and 150 had a D2 lymphadenectomy. After PSM, there were 39 patients in each group, the 10-year OS for D1/D1+ was 52.1 and 76.2% for D2 (p = 0.008), and 10-year DFS was 35% for D1 and 58.1% for D2 (p = 0.058). Subgroup analysis showed that node-negative (N0) patients had improved 5-year OS for D2 (90.9%), compared to D1/D1+ (76.4%) (p = 0.028). There was no difference in operative mortality between the groups (D1 vs D2: 2 vs 0%, p = 0.314), nor in post-operative complications (p = 0.227). Multiple Cox analysis showed advanced tumor stage (stages III and IV), and lymphadenectomy type (D1) and the presence of postoperative complications were independent predictors of poor overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: D2 lymphadenectomy with spleen and pancreas preservation can be performed safely on patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Significant improvement in overall survival is observed in patients with N0 disease who underwent D2 lymphadenectomy without increasing operative morbidity or mortality. This paper supports the notion of a global consensus for a D2 lymphadenectomy, particularly in the Western context.

Evolution in the surgical management of gastric cancer: is extended lymph node dissection back in vogue in the USA?

BACKGROUND: Gastric cancer remains a formidable treatment challenge. For decades, treatment consisted mostly of surgical intervention for this deadly disease. With improvements in the multi-disciplinary management of solid organ malignancies, the approach to this disease is being stepwise refined. MAIN BODY: One of the prevalent controversies in the surgical management of gastric cancer rests on the need for adequate harvesting of lymph nodes. For decades, lymph node dissection is regarded as a staging technique useful in only upstaging the disease. The adoption of D2 lymphadenectomy has been particularly slow to mature. But with prevailing data from Asia consistently demonstrating a survival benefit from lymphadenectomy, it calls into question the notion of lymphadenectomy as being solely a staging procedure. CONCLUSIONS: As gastric resection techniques are being better defined in western countries and surgical morbidities lowered on its execution, D2 lymphadenectomy is becoming more accepted as the new standard in the management of gastric cancer.

Satisfactory surgical outcome of T2 gastric cancer after modified D2 lymphadenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Though D2 lymphadenectomy has been increasingly regarded as standard surgical procedure for advanced gastric cancer (GC), the modified D2 (D1 + 7, 8a and 9) lymphadenectomy may be more suitable than D2 dissection for T2 stage GC. The purpose of this study is to elucidate whether the surgical outcome of modified D2 lymphadenectomy was comparable to that of standard D2 dissection in T2 stage GC patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study with 77 cases and 77 controls matched for baseline characteristics was conducted. Patients were categorized into two groups according to the extent of lymphadenectomy: the modified D2 group (mD2) and the standard D2 group (D2). Surgical outcome and recurrence date were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was 71.4% for patients accepted mD2 lymphadenectomy and 70.1% for those accepted standard D2, respectively, and the difference was not statistically significant. Multivariate survival analysis revealed that curability, tumor size, TNM stage and postoperative complications were independently prognostic factors for T2 stage GC patients. Patients in the mD2 group tended to have less intraoperative blood loss (P=0.001) and shorter operation time (P<0.001) than those in the D2 group. While there were no significant differences in recurrence rate and types, especially lymph node recurrence, between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcome of mD2 lymphadenectomy was equal to that of standard D2, and the use of mD2 instead of standard D2 can be a better option for T2 stage GC.

Optimal extent of lymphadenectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: A 7-institution study of the U.S. gastric cancer collaborative.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The optimal extent of lymphadenectomy in the treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma is debated. We compared gastrectomy outcomes following limited (D1) or extended (D2) lymphadenectomy. METHODS: Using the multi-institutional US Gastric Cancer Collaborative database, we reviewed the morbidity, mortality, recurrence, and overall survival (OS) of patients receiving D1 or D2 lymphadenectomies. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2012, 266 and 461 patients received a D1 and D2 lymphadenectomy, respectively. ASA class, mean number of comorbidities, grade, and stage were similar between groups. While major morbidity was similar (P = 0.85), mortality was worse for those receiving a D1 lymphadenectomy (4.9% vs. 1.3%, P = 0.004). D2 lymphadenectomy was associated with improved median OS in stage I (4.7 years for D1 vs. not reached for D2, P = 0.003), stage II (3.6 years for D1 vs. 6.3 for D2, P = 0.42), and stage III patients (1.3 years for D1 vs. 2.1 for D2, P = 0.01). After adjusting for predictors of OS, D2 lymphadenectomy remained a significant predictor of improved survival (HR 1.5, 95%CI 1.1-2.0, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: D2 lymphadenectomy can be performed without increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Additionally, D2 lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival especially in early stages, and should be considered for gastric adenocarcinoma patients. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:750-755. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy with complete mesogastrium excision for advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: D2 lymphadenectomy has been widely accepted as a standard procedure of surgical treatment for local advanced gastric cancer [1, 2]. However, neither the dissection boundary nor the extent of the excision for perigastric soft tissues has been described [3-7]. Our previous researches demonstrate the existence of disseminated cancer cells in the mesogastrium [8, 9] and present an understandable mesogastrium model for gastrectomy [10]. Hence, the D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastrium excision (D2 + CME) is firstly proposed in this study, aiming to assess the safety, feasibility and corresponding short-term surgical outcomes. METHODS: All of these patients underwent laparoscopy assisted D2 + CME radical gastrectomy with a curative R0 resection, and all the operations were performed by Prof. Jianping Gong, chief of GI surgery of Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology. All participants provided informed written consent to participate in the study. This study was approved by the Tongji Hospital Ethics Committee. The standard surgical procedures in the video are described as follows. Dissect along the gastrocolic ligament and then toward the left colic flexture with special made gauze. Bluntly separate the adipose tissues to find fascia plane. Expose along the plane toward the splenic inferior polar area. Precede to the origins of left gastroepiploic vessels (LGEVs), clip and cut. All the mobilized adipose tissues in this area are defined as left gastroepiploic mesentery (LGEM) [10]. Next, turn to infra-pyloric area. Dissect the fascia plane between right gastroepiploic mesentery (RGEM) and transverse mesocolon. Turn to the pancreas head, remove the covering adipose tissues, identify the superior mesentery vein and expose the origins of right gastroepiploic vessels (RGEVs). Clip and cut. All the surrounding mobilized adipose tissues are defined as RGEM [10]. Move to the superior boarder of pancreas with the stomach reflected cephalad, incise the serosa and bluntly mobilize through the plane with gauze. Turn to the common hepatic artery (CHA), remove the adherent adipose tissue. Expose the root of left gastric vein, clip and cut. Dissect the thick sheath of left gastric artery, expose at the root, trip clip and cut. All mobilized lateral adipose tissues and dorsal parts are defined as left gastric mesentery (LGM) [10]. Toward right, dissect follow the CHA and hepatic portal vein (HPV). Next, move toward the left side of LGM and dissect along the splenic artery until reaching the posterior gastric wall. Move to the anterior area of stomach and divide the lesser omentum. Clean up the adipose tissue and nerves along the lesser curvature up to the gastroesophageal junction. Expose and cut the right gastric vessels (RGVs) where the mobilized adipose tissues are defined as right gastric mesentery (RGM) [10]. Reconstruction of the alimentary tract was done by extracorporeal anastomosis. Standard recovery protocols were followed in postoperative treatments. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients between September 2014 and March 2015 have been recruited with informed consent and underwent laparoscopic D2 + CME by a single surgeon. The mean number of retrieved regional lymph nodes was 35.04 ± 10.70 (range 14-55). The mean volume of blood loss was 12.44 ± 22.89 ml (range 5-100). The mean laparoscopic surgery time was 127.82 ± 17.63 min (range 110-165). The mean hospitalization time was 11.09 ± 4.28 days (range 8-28). No operative complication was observed during the hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The anatomical boundary of mesogastrium is well described and dissected within D2 + CME surgical process. It proves to be safely feasible and repeatable with less blood lost, qualified lymph nodes retrieval results and other improved short-term surgical outcomes in advanced gastric cancer. Meanwhile, potential disseminated cancer cells fall into the mesogastrium can be eradicated by D2 + CME.

Role of frailty and nutritional status in predicting complications following total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: This study was performed to determine the association of frailty and nutritional status with postoperative complications after total gastrectomy (TG) with D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with gastric cancer. METHODS: Patients undergoing TG with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer between August 2014 and February 2016 were enrolled. Frailty was evaluated by sarcopenia which was diagnosed by a combination of third lumbar vertebra muscle index (L3 MI), handgrip strength, and 6-m usual gait speed. Nutritional status was evaluated by the nutritional risk screening 2002 (NRS 2002) score. Univariate and multivariate analyses evaluating the risk factors for postoperative complications were performed. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were analyzed, and 27.2 % developed complications within 30 days of surgery. One patient died within 30 days of the operation. In the univariate analyses, NRS 2002 score ≥3 (OR = 2.468, P = 0.012), sarcopenia (OR = 2.764, P = 0.008), and tumor located at the cardia (OR = 2.072, P = 0.046) were associated with the postoperative complications. Multivariable analysis revealed that sarcopenia (OR = 3.084, P = 0.005) and tumor located at the cardia (OR = 2.347, P = 0.026) were independent predictors of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed a significant relationship between postoperative complications and geriatric frailty using sarcopenia in patients with gastric cancer after TG with D2 lymphadenectomy. Frailty should be integrated into preoperative risk assessment and may have implications in preoperative decisionmaking.