Comparison of Short-term and Three-year Oncological Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer. BACKGROUND: The clinical outcomes of RG over LG have not yet been effectively demonstrated. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 3599 patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy at eight high-volume hospitals in China from January 2015 to June 2019. Propensity score matching was performed between patients who received RG and LG. The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity score matching, 1034 pairs of patients were enrolled in a balanced cohort for further analysis. The 3-year DFS in the RG and LG was 83.7% and 83.1% ( P =0.745), respectively, and the 3-year overall survival was 85.2% and 84.4%, respectively ( P =0.647). During 3 years of follow-up, 154 patients in the RG and LG groups relapsed (cumulative incidence of recurrence: 15.0% vs 15.0%, P =0.988). There was no significant difference in the recurrence sites between the 2 groups (all P >0.05). Sensitivity analysis showed that RG had comparable 3-year DFS (77.4% vs 76.7%, P =0.745) and overall survival (79.7% vs 78.4%, P =0.577) to LG in patients with advanced (pathologic T2-4a) disease, and the recurrence pattern within 3 years was also similar between the 2 groups (all P >0.05). RG had less intraoperative blood loss, lower conversion rate, and shorter hospital stays than LG (all P >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For resectable gastric cancer, including advanced cases, RG is a safe approach with comparable 3-year oncological outcomes to LG when performed by experienced surgeons.

Multifactor analysis of the technique in total laparoscopic gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal gastric anastomosis is a common surgical technique used to treat patients with gastric cancer who undergo total gastrectomy. However, using simple anastomosis techniques alone may not meet the needs of patients in some cases and can lead to complications such as anastomotic stenosis and ulceration. In order to overcome these issues and improve patient prognosis, muscle flap reconstruction technique has emerged. Muscle flap reconstruction is a method of improving gastric-esophageal anastomosis by transplanting muscle tissue. By covering the anastomotic site with muscle tissue, it not only enhances the stability of the anastomosis site but also increases blood supply, promoting healing and recovery of the anastomosis. Therefore, the use of muscle flap reconstruction technique in esophageal gastric anastomosis during total gastrectomy for gastric cancer is increasingly widely applied. AIM: To determine the effectiveness of esophagogastric anastomosis using the muscle flap reconstruction technology in total abdominal gastrectomy for gastric cancer and perform follow-up experiments to understand the factors affecting patients' prognosis. METHODS: The study subjects were 60 patients with gastric cancer who were admitted to our hospital between October 2018 and January 2022. All patients underwent esophagogastric anastomosis using the double muscle flap reconstruction technology in total abdominal gastrectomy. Perioperative indicators were determined, and patients were followed up for 1 year. Furthermore, patient outcomes were observed within 1 year, followed by patient classification based on different outcomes. Moreover, clinicopathological parameters were observed and relevant factors affecting patient prognosis were analyzed. RESULTS: The operation time was 318 ± 43 min, the formation time of esophageal double muscle flap anastomosis was 110 ± 13 min, the number of lymph node dissections was 26 ± 6, the incision length was 3 ± 0.6 cm, intraoperative bleeding volume was 48 ± 15 mL, first anal exhaust time was 5.3 ± 1.8 d, first meal time was 6.0 ± 1.6 d, length of hospital stay was 11.8 ± 2.5, and treatment cost was 5.8 ± 0.7 thousand yuan. The patient experienced three postoperative complications: 2 cases of pulmonary infection and 1 case of respiratory discomfort. During 1-year follow-up, 50 patients survived and 10 died. Univariate analysis revealed that histological types, tumor size, tumor-node-metastasis staging, vascular invasion, and postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy were the main factors affecting the prognosis of surviving patients. Furthermore, Cox regression analysis revealed that postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy were the main factors affecting patient prognosis. The survival time of the survival group was significantly higher than that of the death group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Esophagogastric anastomotic using muscle flap reconstruction exhibits good effects on patients who undergo total abdominal gastrectomy for cancer. Postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy are the main factors affecting patient prognosis.

High expression of NOLC1 as an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: As a phosphorylated protein, NOLC1 is mainly located in the nucleus and is highly expressed in a variety of tumors, participating in the regulation of cell proliferation and aging. This study further investigated the role of NOLC1 in colorectal cancer tumors, aiming to provide sufficient scientific evidence for the clinical treatment of colorectal cancer. METHODS: We used TCGA, GEO, TNMplot, GEPIA, and other databases to explore the expression level of NOLC1 in colorectal cancer patients, as well as the correlation between the clinical characteristics of colorectal cancer patients and their expression, and conducted the prognostic analysis. Immunohistofluorescence (IHF) staining verified the analytical results. Subsequently, KEGG and GO enrichment analysis was used to identify the potential molecular mechanism of NOLC1 promoting the occurrence and development of colorectal cancer. The influence of NOLC1 expression on the immune microenvironment of colorectal cancer patients was further investigated using the TIMER database. GDSC database analysis was used to screen out possible anti-colorectal cancer drugs against NOLC1. Finally, we demonstrated the effect of NOLC1 on the activity and migration of colorectal cancer cells by Edu Cell proliferation assay and Wound Healing assay in vitro. RESULTS: Our results suggest that NOLC1 is overexpressed in colorectal cancer, and that overexpression of NOLC1 is associated with relevant clinical features. NOLC1, as an independent risk factor affecting the prognosis of colorectal cancer patients, can lead to a poor prognosis of colorectal cancer. In addition, NOLC1 may be associated with MCM10, HELLS, NOC3L, and other genes through participating in Wnt signaling pathways and jointly regulate the occurrence and development of colorectal cancer under the influence of the tumor microenvironment and many other influencing factors. Related to NOLC1: Selumetinib, Imatinib, and targeted drugs such as Lapatinib have potential value in the clinical application of colorectal cancer. NOLC1 enhances the proliferation and migration of colorectal cancer cells. CONCLUSIONS: High expression of NOLC1 as an independent prognostic factor for survival in patients with colorectal cancer. NOLC1 enhances the proliferation and migration of colorectal cancer cells. Further studies and clinical trials are needed to confirm the role of NOLC1 in the development and progression of colorectal cancer.