Search

Background: Suprapancreatic lymphadenectomy is the essence of D2 radical gastric cancer surgery. The present study aimed to describe clockwise modularized laparoscopic lymphadenectomy in the suprapancreatic area. Methods: The data from gastric cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment from September 2016 to December 2018 were collected. Patients were divided into clockwise modularized lymphadenectomy (CML) and traditional open gastrectomy (OG) groups according to the surgical treatment strategy. The propensity score matching method was utilized to balance the baseline characteristics between the two groups. Results: Finally, 551 gastric cancer patients were included in the present study. Following propensity score matching, 106 pairs of patients in the CML group and OG group were included in the final analysis. The CML group had more total examined lymph nodes (36, IQR 28–44.74 vs. 29, IQR 29–39.5, p?=?0.002) and no. 9 station nodes (2, IQR 1–5 vs. 2, IQR 1–3, p?=?0.007) than the OG group. There was less intraoperative blood loss (30, IQR 20–80 ml vs. 80, IQR 50–80 ml, p?<?0.001) and a longer surgical duration (262.5 min, IQR 220–303.25 min vs. 232, IQR 220–255 min, p?<?0.001) in the CML group than in the OG group. The incidence of postoperative complications (19.8% vs. 16.0%, p?=?0.591) and postoperative hospital stay (8, IQR 7–9 days vs. 8, IQR 7–9 days, p?=?0.452) were comparable between the CML and OG groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer surgery is technically demanding. Clockwise modularized laparoscopic lymphadenectomy in the suprapancreatic area can attain similar effects as traditional open surgery and without an increase in postoperative adverse events.

Background: Previous retrospective studies have shown that laparoscopic spleen-preserving D2 total gastrectomy (LSTG) for advanced upper third gastric cancer (AUTGC) is safe. However, all previous studies were underpowered. We therefore conducted a prospective, multicenter study to evaluate the technical safety and feasibility of LSTG for patients with AUTGC. Methods: Patients diagnosed with AUTGC (cT2-4a, N−/+, M0) underwent LSTG at 19 institutions between September 2016 and October 2017 were included. The number of No. 10 lymph node (LN) dissections, metastasis rates, intraoperative and postoperative complications were investigated. Results: A total of 251 patients were enrolled in the study, and 242 patients were eligible for the per protocol analysis. The average numbers of No. 10 LN dissections and metastases were 2.4 and 0.1, respectively. Eighteen patients (7.4%) had No. 10 LN metastases, and among patients with advanced gastric cancer, the rate of No. 10 LN metastasis was 8.1% (18/223). pN3 status was an independent risk factor for No. 10 LN metastasis. Intraoperative complications occurred in 7 patients, but no patients required conversion to open surgery or splenectomy. The overall postoperative complication rate was 13.6% (33/242). The major complication and mortality rates were 3.3% (8/242) and 0.4% (1/242), respectively. The number of retrieved No. 10 LNs, No. 10 LN metastasis and TNM stage had no significant influence on postoperative complication rates. Conclusion: LSTG for AUTGC was safe and effective when performed by very experienced surgeons, this technique could be used in patients who needed splenic hilar lymph node dissection.

The preoperative work-up has limitations on finding peritoneal dissemination (PD) in gastric cancer patients. Laparoscopic exploration (LE) can discover radiographically occult PD, obtain accurate stage and avert futile laparotomy. The aim of our study was to introduce “Four-Step Procedure” LE in West China Hospital and further evaluate its safety and feasibility. We conducted a retrospective analysis on 165 patients from July 2016 to December 2017 who underwent “Four-Step Procedure” LE in gastrointestinal surgery department of West China Hospital. All the patients were diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma without explicit distant metastasis through Computed Tomography and/or Gastrointestinal Ultrasonography. Peritoneal lavage cytological examination (CY) was routinely performed during LE in our research. The “Four-Step” technical process of LE was introduced comprehensively. The clinicopathologic features and the presence of PD or CY at LE were analyzed, and the stratified analysis by cT and cN stages on the proportion of P1 and/or CY1 was also reported in this study. Total of 165 patients accepted LE in our study, among these patients: 27 (16.4%) patients with P1 and/or CY1: 19 (11.5%) patients were found PD (P1), 17 (10.3%) patients with positive cytological examination (CY1) and 9 (3.6%) patients with P1Cy1. The stratified analysis by cT stage indicated that there was no P1 and/or Cy1 in cT1–cT2 stages, 1 (2.7%) patient with P1 and 1 (2.7%) with Cy1 in cT3 stage, 18 (20.0%) patients with P1 and 16 (17.8%) with Cy1 in cT4 stage. After LE, there were 74 (44.8%) patients underwent laparoscopic assistant gastrectomy, 25 (15.2%) patients with open gastrectomy, 50 (30.3%) patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 16 (9.7%) patients with palliative chemotherapy and/or conversion therapy. “Four-Step Procedure” LE is reliable and feasible for gastric cancer. From our study, LE has unique superiority on ascertaining PD and cytological examination and LE should be recommended in cT4 stage gastric cancer before resection.