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

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

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

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

Clinicopathologic features and prognostic value of claudin 18.2 overexpression in patients with resectable gastric cancer.

Claudin 18.2 has emerged as a promising therapeutic target in gastric cancer based on phase 3 studies. However, clinicopathologic features associated with claudin 18.2 overexpression have not been comprehensively studied specifically for patients with resectable gastric cancer. This retrospective study included 299 patients with stage I-III resectable gastric cancer who underwent curative surgical resection. Possible associations between claudin 18.2 overexpression (moderate-to-strong expression in ≥ 75% by the 43-14A clone) and clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes were analyzed. There were 90 (30.1%), 96 (32.1%), and 113 (37.8%) patients with stage I, II, and III disease, respectively. Claudin 18.2 overexpression was noted in 139 out of 299 patients (46.5%). Claudin 18.2 overexpression was associated with a younger age, a lower invasion depth limited to the mucosa/submucosa, and less frequent lymphovascular invasion. Claudin 18.2 overexpression was also associated with Borrmann type 4 among patients with advanced gastric cancer and the diffuse histological type. Claudin 18.2 overexpression was not an independent factor for survival outcomes. In conclusion, claudin 18.2 was overexpressed in almost half of resectable gastric cancer patients. Claudin 18.2 overexpression was associated with some clinicopathological characteristics, but was not an independent prognostic factor in a localized setting.

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

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

Artificial Intelligence in Gastric Cancer Imaging With Emphasis on Diagnostic Imaging and Body Morphometry.

Gastric cancer remains a significant global health concern, coercing the need for advancements in imaging techniques for ensuring accurate diagnosis and effective treatment planning. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a potent tool for gastric-cancer imaging, particularly for diagnostic imaging and body morphometry. This review article offers a comprehensive overview of the recent developments and applications of AI in gastric cancer imaging. We investigated the role of AI imaging in gastric cancer diagnosis and staging, showcasing its potential to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of these crucial aspects of patient management. Additionally, we explored the application of AI body morphometry specifically for assessing the clinical impact of gastrectomy. This aspect of AI utilization holds significant promise for understanding postoperative changes and optimizing patient outcomes. Furthermore, we examine the current state of AI techniques for the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer. These prognostic models leverage AI algorithms to predict long-term survival outcomes and assist clinicians in making informed treatment decisions. However, the implementation of AI techniques for gastric cancer imaging has several limitations. As AI continues to evolve, we hope to witness the translation of cutting-edge technologies into routine clinical practice, ultimately improving patient care and outcomes in the fight against gastric cancer.

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

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

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

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

Safety evaluation of curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients who underwent liver transplantation: a comparative study with conventional gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the technical and oncological safety of curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients who underwent liver transplantation. METHODS: In this study, we compared the surgical and oncological outcomes of two groups. The first group consisted of 32 consecutive patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer after liver transplantation (LT), while the other group consisted of 127 patients who underwent conventional gastrectomy (CG). In addition, a subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of the background differences and the surgical outcomes on the involvement of a specialized liver transplant surgery team. RESULTS: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LT group (p < 0.05). Furthermore, there were more frequent cases of postoperative transfusion in the LT group compared to the CG group (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the overall complications between the groups (25.00 vs 23.62%, p = 0.874). The 5-year overall survival rates of the LT and CG groups were 76.7% and 90.1%, respectively (p < 0.05). The results of the subgroup analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in various early surgical outcomes, such as time to transfusion during surgery, first flatus, time to first soft diet, postoperative complications, hospital stay after surgery, and the number of harvested lymph nodes except for operation time. CONCLUSIONS: Despite one's medical history of undergoing LT, our study demonstrated that curative gastrectomy could be a surgically safe treatment for gastric cancer. However, further study should be conducted to identify the reason gastric cancer patients who underwent liver transplant surgery have lower overall survival rate.

Prognostic artificial intelligence model to predict 5 year survival at 1 year after gastric cancer surgery based on nutrition and body morphometry.

BACKGROUND: Personalized survival prediction is important in gastric cancer patients after gastrectomy based on large datasets with many variables including time-varying factors in nutrition and body morphometry. One year after gastrectomy might be the optimal timing to predict long-term survival because most patients experience significant nutritional change, muscle loss, and postoperative changes in the first year after gastrectomy. We aimed to develop a personalized prognostic artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict 5 year survival at 1 year after gastrectomy. METHODS: From a prospectively built gastric surgery registry from a tertiary hospital, 4025 gastric cancer patients (mean age 56.1 ± 10.9, 36.2% females) treated gastrectomy and survived more than a year were selected. Eighty-nine variables including clinical and derived time-varying variables were used as input variables. We proposed a multi-tree extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithm, an ensemble AI algorithm based on 100 datasets derived from repeated five-fold cross-validation. Internal validation was performed in split datasets (n = 1121) by comparing our proposed model and six other AI algorithms. External validation was performed in 590 patients from other hospitals (mean age 55.9 ± 11.2, 37.3% females). We performed a sensitivity analysis to analyse the effect of the nutritional and fat/muscle indices using a leave-one-out method. RESULTS: In the internal validation, our proposed model showed AUROC of 0.8237, which outperformed the other AI algorithms (0.7988-0.8165), 80.00% sensitivity, 72.34% specificity, and 76.17% balanced accuracy. In the external validation, our model showed AUROC of 0.8903, 86.96% sensitivity, 74.60% specificity, and 80.78% balanced accuracy. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the nutritional and fat/muscle indices influenced the balanced accuracy by 0.31% and 6.29% in the internal and external validation set, respectively. Our developed AI model was published on a website for personalized survival prediction. CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed AI model provides substantially good performance in predicting 5 year survival at 1 year after gastric cancer surgery. The nutritional and fat/muscle indices contributed to increase the prediction performance of our AI model.

Clinical Significance of Epstein-Barr Virus and Helicobacter pylori Infection in Gastric Carcinoma.

Background/Aims: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and Helicobacter pylori (HP) coinfection may synergistically induce severe inflammatory responses in the stomach tissue, increasing the risk of developing gastric cancer. We aimed to analyze the effect of EBV and HP coinfection on the clinicopathologic features and prognosis of gastric cancer, as well as to evaluate the role of EBV infection in non-gastric carcinoma with lymphoid stroma (non-GCLS). Methods: Overall, 956 patients who underwent surgery for gastric cancer between September 2014 and August 2015 were eligible and divided into groups, according to GCLS morphology, EBV infection, and HP infection. Clinicopathologic characteristics and oncologic outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: EBV and HP coinfection was significantly associated with male sex, proximal location, GCLS morphology, and equivocal p53 expression (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that EBV infection alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.362; 95% CI, 0.131 to 0.996; p=0.049) and lower third location (HR, 0.624; 95% CI, 0.413 to 0.943; p=0.025) were inversely correlated with overall survival. During median follow-up period of 72 months, overall survival rate was not significantly different between the EBV and HP coinfection group and others (97.6% vs 86.8%; log-rank p=0.144). In non-GCLS patients (n=920), overall survival rate was not significantly different between the EBV infection group and others (96.9% vs 86.4%; log-rank p=0.126). Conclusions: EBV and HP coinfection is not an independent prognostic factor for gastric cancer. EBV infection status, regardless of HP infection, affects the clinicopathologic features of all types of gastric cancer. However, it does not lead to a significant difference in overall survival of non-GCLS patients.

Comparing surgical and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer with serosal invasion: A retrospective study with propensity score matching.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has gradually increased for treating advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, there is a lack of evidence on oncologic safety for AGC, especially with serosal invasion. This study evaluates the surgical and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer with serosal invasion. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 256 patients who underwent OG and 147 patients who underwent LG for gastric cancer with serosal invasion between August 2005 and December 2017. Finally, 124 patients in the LG group and 124 in the OG group were enrolled according to one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. We evaluated surgical and oncological outcomes, including overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in hospital stay and major complications between the two groups. The retrieved lymph nodes of the LG group were similar to those of OG (40 ± 16.23 vs. 38 ± 14.42, p = 0.306), and it showed a similar operation time compared with the other (164 ± 43.86 vs. 156 ± 37.66, p = 0.063). There was no statistical difference in OS (p = 0.761) and RFS (p = 0.121) for survival analysis between the two groups. CONCLUSION: LG for gastric cancer with serosal invasion is feasible and could be considered as a standard treatment.

Short-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy With Double-Tract Reconstruction Versus Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Upper Early Gastric Cancer: A KLASS 05 Randomized Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (LPG-DTR) is a function-preserving procedure performed for treating upper early gastric cancer (EGC). However, few studies have compared the outcomes of LPG-DTR with those of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). This study aimed at comparing the short-term outcomes of LPG-DTR between LTG and upper EGC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For upper-third EGC, a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial was performed to compare those who underwent LPG-DTR with those who underwent LTG. Short-term outcomes, including clinicopathologic results, morbidity, mortality, and postoperative courses, were evaluated using a full analysis set based on the intention-to-treat principle and the per-protocol set. RESULTS: Of the patients, 138 who fulfilled the criteria were randomized to each group. One patient in the LPG-DTR group withdrew consent. Sixty-eight patients underwent LPG-DTR and 69 underwent LTG. The operative time (LPG-DTR=219.4 minutes; LTG=201.8 minutes; P=0.085), estimated blood loss (LPG-DTR=76.0 mL; LTG=66.1 mL; P=0.413), and the morbidity rate (LPG-DTR=23.5%; LTG=17.4%; P=0.373) between the groups were not significantly different. No mortality occurred in either of the study groups. Two weeks post operation, the Visick scores for postprandial symptoms, including reflux symptoms, were not significantly different between the groups (P=0.749). Laboratory findings on postoperative day 5 were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term outcomes of LPG-DTR for upper EGC were comparable to those of LTG. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02892643.

Larger Remaining Stomach Volume Is Associated With Better Nutrition and Muscle Preservation in Patients With Gastric Cancer Receiving Distal Gastrectomy With Gastroduodenostomy.

PURPOSE: Weight loss and deterioration in body composition are observed in patients with gastric cancer (GC) following gastrectomy. This study aimed to investigate the impact of residual stomach volume (RSV) on the nutritional status and body composition of patients with GC treated with distal gastrectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In total, 227 patients who underwent minimally invasive distal gastrectomy with Billroth 1 anastomosis for stage I GC between February 2015 and May 2018 were enrolled. Clinicodemographic and laboratory data were collected from the GC registry. The RSV, abdominal muscle area, and subcutaneous/visceral fat areas were measured using computed tomography data. RESULTS: A larger RSV was associated with a lower decrease in the nutritional risk index (P=0.004) and hemoglobin level (P=0.003) during the first 3 months after surgery, and better recovery at 12 months. A larger RSV demonstrated an advantage in the preservation of abdominal muscle area (P=0.02) and visceral fat (P=0.04) after surgery, as well as less reduction in weight (P=0.02) and body mass index (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Larger RSV was associated with improved nutritional status and better preservation of muscle and fat after distal gastrectomy.

Reevaluation of the expanded indications in undifferentiated early gastric cancer for endoscopic submucosal dissection.

BACKGROUND: Although the criteria for the indication of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for undifferentiated early gastric cancer (UD-EGC) have been recently proposed, accumulating reports on the non-negligible rate of lymph node metastasis (LNM) after indicated ESD raise questions on the reliability of the current criteria. AIM: To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of LNM in UD-EGC cases meeting the expanded indication for ESD. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 4780 UD-EGC cases that underwent surgical resection between January 2008 and February 2019 at Asan Medical Center, a tertiary university hospital in Korea. To identify the risk factors of LNM of UD-EGC meeting the expanded criteria for ESD, we performed a case-control study by matching the cases with LNM to those without at a ratio of 1:4. We reviewed the clinical, endoscopic, and histologic features of the cases to identify features with a significant difference according to the presence of LNM. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the odds ratios (ORs). RESULTS: Of the 4780 UD-EGC cases, 1240 (25.9%) were identified to meet the expanded indication for ESD. Of the 1240 cases, 14 (1.1%) cases had LNM. Among the various clinical, endoscopic, and histopathological features that were evaluated, mixed histology (tumors consisting of 10%-90% of signet ring cells) had a marginally significant association (P = 0.059) with the risk of LNM. Moreover, diffuse blurring of the muscularis mucosae (MM) underneath the tumorous epithelium, a previously unrecognized histologic feature, had a significant association with the absence of LNM (P = 0.028). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the blurring of MM was the only explanatory variable significantly associated with a reduced risk of LNM (OR: 0.12, 95%CI: 0.02-0.95; P = 0.045). CONCLUSION: The risk of LNM is higher than expected when using the current expanded indication for UD-EGC. Histological evaluation could provide useful clues for reducing the risk of LNM.

Scoring Model Based on Nodal Metastasis Prediction Suggesting an Alternative Treatment to Total Gastrectomy in Proximal Early Gastric Cancer.

Purpose: Total gastrectomy (TG) with lymph node (LN) dissection is recommended for early gastric cancer (EGC) but is not indicated for endoscopic resection (ER). We aimed to identify patients who could avoid TG by establishing a scoring system for predicting lymph node metastasis (LNM) in proximal EGCs. Materials and Methods: Between January 2003 and December 2017, a total of 1,025 proximal EGC patients who underwent TG with LN dissection were enrolled. Patients who met the absolute ER criteria based on pathological examination were excluded. The pathological risk factors for LNM were determined using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. A scoring system for predicting LNM was developed and applied to the validation group. Results: Of the 1,025 cases, 100 (9.8%) showed positive LNM. Multivariate analysis confirmed the following independent risk factors for LNM: tumor size >2 cm, submucosal invasion, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and perineural invasion (PNI). A scoring system was created using the four aforementioned variables, and the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves in both the training (0.85) and validation (0.84) groups indicated excellent discrimination. The probability of LNM in mucosal cancers without LVI or PNI, regardless of size, was <2.9%. Conclusions: Our scoring system involving four variables can predict the probability of LNM in proximal EGC and might be helpful in determining additional treatment plans after ER, functioning as a good indicator of the adequacy of treatments other than TG in high surgical risk patients.

Comparison of Standard D2 and Limited Lymph Node Dissection in Elderly Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge on the optimal extent of lymphadenectomy among elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer is limited. This study was designed to compare standard D2 and limited lymphadenectomy for evaluating the appropriate extent of lymphadenectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patient's data based on a prospectively collected gastric cancer registry. The inclusion criteria were age above 75 years and histologically confirmed stage II or more advanced gastric cancer. In this study, 103 patients who underwent limited lymph node dissection and 134 patients who underwent standard D2 lymph node dissection were included to evaluate surgical and oncological outcomes using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. RESULTS: The mean age after PSM was approximately 78 years in both groups. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was 5.81 ± 0.87 and 5.75 ± 0.76, respectively, and 12.5% of the patients in both groups had American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of more than 3. The limited lymphadenectomy group showed a shorter operation time and fewer retrieved lymph. However, other surgical outcomes and pathological data were not significantly different between the groups. No postoperative mortality within 30 days was observed. There were no significant differences in overall complications between the groups. The 3-year overall survival rates of the limited and standard lymphadenectomy groups were 58.3% and 73.6%, respectively. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate of the limited lymphadenectomy group was lower than that of the standard lymphadenectomy group; however, the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Standard D2 lymphadenectomy has better oncological outcomes in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Extremely well-differentiated adenocarcinoma of the stomach: diagnostic pitfalls in endoscopic biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Extremely well-differentiated adenocarcinoma (EWDA) is a deceptively bland-looking adenocarcinoma of the stomach. It often causes diagnostic problems, especially in endoscopic biopsy samples. To better recognize this deceptively bland lesion, we carefully reviewed a series of EWDAs treated at our institution. METHODS: A total of 55 specimens from 19 patients were obtained. Endoscopic, gross and microscopic features defining EWDA were described and documented. For comparison, hyperplastic polyp specimens were randomly selected and analyzed. RESULTS: Most cases (18 of 19, 94.7%) were advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and primarily located in the body of the stomach (15 of 19, 79.0%). The majority of AGCs were non-ulcerated (11 of 18, 61.1%) with an undermining growth pattern and a relatively small mucosal involvement. Specific histologic features included an irregular glandular shape, an undulating apical cytoplasmic border, disproportionately large glands, a variably distended mucinous cytoplasm. Classical features, such as small infiltrating glands or desmoplastic reactions, were barely observed. Identification of irregularly spaced nuclei and disruption of the foveolar epithelial structure, along with atypical features described above were helpful in making a diagnosis especially in gastric forceps biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of the histomorphologic characteristics described in this report would lead to timely diagnosis and prevent repeated endoscopic procedures.

A blood-based transcriptomic signature for noninvasive diagnosis of gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Delayed detection of tumours contributes to poor prognosis in patients with gastric cancer (GC). The invasive nature of endoscopy and the absence of an effective serum markers highlight the need to develop novel, noninvasive biomarkers. METHODS: We performed biomarker discovery and validation to identify candidate genes in three gene expression data sets. After validating the gene panel in clinical tissues, we translated the gene panel into serum samples by performing training and validation in 89 samples from GC patients and 54 from healthy donors in two independent cohorts. RESULTS: We identified a nine-gene panel in the discovery phase, with subsequent validation in tissue specimens. Using a serum training cohort, we developed a 5-gene risk prediction formulae for the diagnosis of GC; bootstrapped analysis exhibited an AUC of 0.896. We validated this 5-gene biomarker panel using an independent serum cohort, yielding an AUC of 0.947. This biomarker panel successfully identified GC, regardless of tumour histology. Notably, biomarker performance for detection of stage 1 and 2 GC displayed an AUC of 0.928 and 0.980 in both serum cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a novel 5-gene biomarker panel for noninvasive diagnosis of GC, which might serve as a potential diagnostic tool for early detection.

Impact of Esophagojejunal Reconstruction without Division of the Mesentery for Total Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic total gastrectomy without mesentery division (LTG without MD) and conventional total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (CLTG), as well as evaluate the appropriate method for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) reconstruction after total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 301 consecutive patients who underwent TLTG for upper or middle third gastric cancer between January 2016 and May 2019. After propensity score matching, 95 patients who underwent LTG without MD and 95 who underwent CLTG were assessed. Data on clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes, including operation time, length of postoperative hospital stay, pathological findings, and postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: The LTG without MD group showed a shorter time to first flatus (3.26±0.80 vs. 3.62±0.81 days, P=0.003) and a shorter time to soft diet (2.80±2.09 vs. 3.52±2.20 days, P=0.002). The total EJ-related complications in the LTG without MD group were comparable to those in the CLTG group (9.47% vs. 3.16%, P=0.083). EJ-related leakage (6.32% vs. 3.16%, P=0.317) and EJ-related stricture (3.16% vs. 1.05%, P=0.317) rates were not significantly different between the LTG without MD and CLTG groups. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of other early surgical outcomes such as early complications, late complications, hospital stay, and readmission rate. CONCLUSIONS: LTG without MD is a safe surgical treatment for upper or middle third gastric cancer. LTG without MD may be an alternative procedure for EJ anastomosis during TLTG.