Complete Mesogastric Excision Compared with Conventional D2 in Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Safety and Efficacy Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daxing Xie ◽  
Jie Shen ◽  
Liang Liu ◽  
Beibei Cao ◽  
Yatao Wang ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thales Paulo BATISTA ◽  
Mário Rino MARTINS ◽  
Euclides Dias MARTINS-FILHO ◽  
Rogerio Luiz dos SANTOS

Background The Extensive Intraoperative Peritoneal Lavage (EIPL) has been proposed as a practical prophylactic strategy to decrease the risk of peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer. Objective To explore the safety and efficacy of the EIPL in our locally advanced gastric cancer patients. Methods This study is an open-label, double-center, single-arm phase II clinical trial developed at two tertiary hospitals from Recife (Pernambuco, Brazil). Results The study protocol was prematurely closed due to slow accrual after only 16 patients had been recruited to participate. Eight of them were excluded of the protocol study during the laparotomy, whereas four cases were also excluded from the per-protocol analysis. Two patients had died in hospital before 30 days and six were alive with no evidence of cancer relapses after a follow-up ranging from five to 14,2 months (median of 10.6 months). In the intention-to-treat analysis, three of eight patients suffered of gastrointestinal leakages and two of them had died. On a per-protocol basis, two of four patients presented this type of postoperative complication and one of them had died. All deaths occurred as a somewhat consequence of gastrointestinal leakages. Conclusion We could not make any conclusion about the safety and efficacy of the EIPL, but the possibility of this approach might increase the rate of gastrointestinal leakage is highlighted.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. E. Khatkov ◽  
R. E. Izrailov ◽  
O. S. Vasnev ◽  
B. A. Pomortsev ◽  
N. E. Semenov ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 428-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua-Feng Pan ◽  
Gang Wang ◽  
Jiang Liu ◽  
Xin-Xin Liu ◽  
Kun Zhao ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lihang Liu ◽  
Feng Li ◽  
Shengtao Lin ◽  
Yi Liu ◽  
Changshun Yang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Limited researches focused on the application of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). In this study, we aimed at illustrating the surgical and survival outcome of LG in LAGC patients following NACT.Methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients with LAGC who received either LG following NACT or upfront LG at Fujian Provincial Hospital between March 2013 and October 2018. Perioperative parameters, short-term and long-term outcomes were compared. The Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to describe the survival curves, and the differences were examined by the log-rank test.Results: In total, 76 consecutive patients were enrolled into the NACT-LG (41 patients) and LG (35 patients) group, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups for baseline characteristics, including age, sex, BMI, Eastern Clinical Oncology Group performance status, tumor size, location, Borrmann type, Lauren type, differentiation, cT stage, and surgical type (all P>0.05). The surgical trauma in terms of incision length and blood loss, and postoperative recovery in terms of first aerofluxus time, first time on liquid diets, drainage duration, and hospital stays were similar between the two groups (all P>0.05). The operation time was significantly longer for NACT-LG than for LG (286.5 vs. 248.9 min, P=0.008). There was no significant difference in surgical morbidity (19.5% vs. 22.9%, P=0.721) between the two groups. No patient died of postoperative complications in the NACT-LG group, and one patient (1/35, 2.9%) died of postoperative complications in the LG group (P=0.461). After NACT, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher (95.1% vs. 77.1%, P=0.049), and metastatic lymph nodes were less for NACT-LG than for LG (1 vs. 8, P=0.001). Compared with the LG group, the NACT-LG group had a significantly better DFS (59.4% vs. 14.4%, P=0.034) and better OS (69.0% vs. 37.4%, P=0.009) at 3 years.Conclusions: NACT does not decrease safety of LG for patients with LAGC and offer higher R0 resection rate and better disease-free and overall survival. For patients with LAGC, LG following NACT should be the priority treatment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document