Search

Background: Non-curative gastrectomy (nCG) for gastric cancer can be considered in selected cases to relieve symptoms. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients who underwent nCG and compare these results with an intended curative gastrectomy (CG). Materials and methods: All patients who underwent both nCG and CG in the Netherlands were included from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (2011–2016). In this population-based cohort study postoperative morbidity, mortality, readmissions and short-term oncological outcomes were appraised. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to create comparable groups of patients who underwent nCG versus CG, using patient and tumor characteristics. Results: Of the 2202 eligible patients, 115 patients underwent nCG and 2087 underwent CG. After PSM, 115 nCG-patients were matched to 227 CG-patients. More conversions from laparoscopic to open surgery occurred during nCG (10·4 versus 2·6%, p = 0·007). Although postoperative mortality was higher after nCG in the original cohort (9·6 versus 4·8%, p = 0·026), after PSM there was no difference between groups (9·6 versus 7·0%, p = 0·415). Postoperative morbidity, re-interventions and readmission rates did not differ significantly between groups. Resection of additional organs (30·4 versus 11·5%, p < 0·001) and R+ resections (65·2 versus 12·3%, p < 0·001) occurred more frequently during nCG. Conclusions: nCG does not lead to additional postoperative risks compared to CG in patients with similar characteristics, and may be considered in fit patients with advanced gastric cancer. However, randomized trials evaluating potential (survival) benefits of nCG should be awaited.

Background: Surgical resection is the cornerstone of curative treatment for gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate reasons for and patient- and tumor characteristics that are associated with refraining from surgical resection in patients with potentially curable gastric cancer. Materials and methods: Between 2015 and 2017, all patients with potentially curable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4a-x, cN0-3-x, cM0) were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patients were divided into a resection (RG) and a no-resection group (nRG). Reasons for not undergoing resection as registered by the NCR were evaluated. Using multivariable logistic regression analyses, patient and tumor characteristics associated with refraining from resection were assessed. Results: Of the 1679 analyzed patients with potentially curable disease, 1127 patients (67%) underwent resection, and 552 patients (33%) did not. Most common registered reasons for refraining from surgery were patient refusal (25%), low performance status (23%), comorbidity and extent of disease (both 10%). Factors associated with not undergoing resection were: age ≥80 years (OR 4.77, [95%CI 2.27–10.06], p < 0.001), low Social-Economic-Status (SES) (OR 2.68 [95%CI 1.31–5.46], p = 0.007), WHO performance status 3–4 (OR 10.48 [95%CI 2.41–45.73], p = 0.002) with several accompanying comorbidities, unclassified Lauren classification (OR 3.93 [95%CI 1.61–9.56], p = 0.003) and overlapping/diffuse tumors (OR 3.51, [95%CI 1.54–8.05], p = 0.003). Conclusion: A third of patients with potentially curable gastric cancer did not undergo resection. Most frequent registered reasons for refraining from surgery were patient refusal, performance status, comorbidity and extent of disease. Additionally, multivariable analyses identified higher age, lower SES, and poor tumor characteristics as associated factors.

Importance: The optimal staging for gastric cancer remains a matter of debate. Objective: To evaluate the value of 18F-fludeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography with computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and staging laparoscopy (SL) in addition to initial staging by means of gastroscopy and CT in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter prospective, observational cohort study included 394 patients with locally advanced, clinically curable gastric adenocarcinoma (=cT3 and/or N+, M0 category based on CT) between August 1, 2017, and February 1, 2020. Exposures: All patients underwent an FDG-PET/CT and/or SL in addition to initial staging. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of patients in whom the intent of treatment changed based on the results of these 2 investigations. Secondary outcomes included diagnostic performance, number of incidental findings on FDG-PET/CT, morbidity and mortality after SL, and diagnostic delay. Results: Of the 394 patients included, 256 (65%) were men and mean (SD) age was 67.6 (10.7) years. A total of 382 patients underwent FDG-PET/CT and 357 underwent SL. Treatment intent changed from curative to palliative in 65 patients (16%) based on the additional FDG-PET/CT and SL findings. FDG-PET/CT detected distant metastases in 12 patients (3%), and SL detected peritoneal or locally nonresectable disease in 73 patients (19%), with an overlap of 7 patients (2%). FDG-PET/CT had a sensitivity of 33% (95% CI, 17%-53%) and specificity of 97% (95% CI, 94%-99%) in detecting distant metastases. Secondary findings on FDG/PET were found in 83 of 382 patients (22%), which led to additional examinations in 65 of 394 patients (16%). Staging laparoscopy resulted in a complication requiring reintervention in 3 patients (0.8%) without postoperative mortality. The mean (SD) diagnostic delay was 19 (14) days. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings suggest an apparently limited additional value of FDG-PET/CT; however, SL added considerably to the staging process of locally advanced gastric cancer by detection of peritoneal and nonresectable disease. Therefore, it may be useful to include SL in guidelines for staging advanced gastric cancer, but not FDG-PET/CT..

Introduction: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) frequently present as a large exophytically growing mass in the stomach, for which open partial gastrectomy is standard of care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive gastric resection (MIG) of large (>5 cm) GIST. Methods: All patients who underwent MIG for a GIST in the University Medical Center Utrecht between 2011 and 2019 were included. Postoperative course and oncological outcomes were analyzed. Results: Twenty-two patients with gastric GIST, median size 53 mm [20–175 mm], underwent MIG. In 4 patients, preoperative imatinib was given, aiming for tumor regression. Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery occurred once (5%). An additional resection was performed in 3 patients (14%). In 2 patients (9%), an intraoperative complication occurred, consisting of tumor rupture in 1 patient (5%), and 6 patients (27%) developed postoperative complications. Median hospital stay was 5 days [3–7 days]. R0 resection was achieved in 96%. In 4 patients, adjuvant treatment was indicated. The median follow-up was 31 months, and 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival were 94, 74 and 74%, respectively. One patient presented with local recurrence 2 years after the index resection. Conclusion: MIG for large GIST up to 17.5 cm in diameter is safe, feasible, and oncologically sound, allowing for a controlled resection and reduced patient morbidity.

Aims: Congenital heart defects (CHD) affect almost 1% of all live born children and the number of adults with CHD is increasing. In families where CHD has occurred previously, estimates of recurrence risk, and the type of recurring malformation are important for counselling and clinical decision-making, but the recurrence patterns in families are poorly understood. We aimed to determine recurrence patterns, by investigating the co-occurrences of CHD in 1163 families with known malformations, comprising 3080 individuals with clinically confirmed diagnosis.Methods and results: We calculated rates of concordance and discordance for 41 specific types of malformations, observing a high variability in the rates of concordance and discordance. By calculating odds ratios for each of 1640 pairs of discordant lesions observed between affected family members, we were able to identify 178 pairs of malformations that co-occurred significantly more or less often than expected in families. The data show that distinct groups of cardiac malformations co-occur in families, suggesting influence from underlying developmental mechanisms. Analysis of human and mouse susceptibility genes showed that they were shared in 19% and 20% of pairs of co-occurring discordant malformations, respectively, but none of malformations that rarely co-occur, suggesting that a significant proportion of co-occurring lesions in families is caused by overlapping susceptibility genes.Conclusion: Familial CHD follow specific patterns of recurrence, suggesting a strong influence from genetically regulated developmental mechanisms. Co-occurrence of malformations in families is caused by shared susceptibility genes.

Introduction Computed tomography (CT) is used for restaging of gastric cancer patients during neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The treatment strategy could be altered after detection of distant interval metastases, possibly leading to a reduction in unnecessary chemotherapy cycles, its related toxicity, and surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the additive value of restaging-CT during NAC in guiding clinical decision making in gastric cancer. Materials and methods This retrospective, multicenter cohort study identified all patients with surgically resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1–4a-x, N0–3-x, M0-x), who started NAC with curative intent. Restaging-CT was performed after 2 out of 3 cycles of NAC. The primary outcome was treatment alterations made based on restaging-CT by a multidisciplinary tumor board. Confirmation of metastases was obtained by surgery or biopsy. Results Between 2007 and 2015, CT-restaging was performed in 122 out of 152 included patients and timed after 2 cycles (n = 76) or after 3 cycles (n = 46) of NAC. Restaging-CT revealed a metastasis in 1 out of 122 restaged patients (1%) after which surgical resection was omitted, whereas 4 patients (3%) with distant interval metastases were not identified by restaging-CT and underwent a futile laparotomy. In 5 out of 76 patients (7%) disease progression was detected while undergoing NAC, leading to omission of the 3rd cycle of chemotherapy. Conclusion The additive value of restaging-CT during NAC in gastric cancer is limited in guiding clinical decision making and therefore not recommended. Further studies may identify subgroups that may benefit of alternative diagnostic modalities.

Background Postoperative complications frequently occur after gastrectomy for gastric cancer and are associated with poor clinical outcomes, such as mortality and reoperations. The aim of study was to identify the clinically most relevant complications after gastrectomy, using the population-attributable fraction (PAF). Methods Between 2011 and 2017, all patients who underwent potentially curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were included from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. Postoperative outcomes (morbidity, mortality, recovery and hospitalization) were evaluated. The prevalence of postoperative complications (e.g., anastomotic leakage and pneumonia) and of the study outcomes were calculated. The adjusted relative risk and Confidence Interval (CI) for each complication-outcome pair were calculated. Subsequently, the PAF was calculated, which represents the percentage of a given outcome occurring in the population, caused by individual complications, taking both the relative risk and the frequency in which a complication occurs into account. Results In total, 2176 patients were analyzed. Anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications had the greatest overall impact on postoperative mortality (PAF 29.2% [95% CI 19.3–39.1] and 21.6% [95% CI 10.5–32.7], respectively) and prolonged hospitalization (PAF 12.9% [95% CI 9.7–16.0] and 14.7% [95% CI 11.0–18.8], respectively). Anastomotic leakage had the greatest overall impact on re-interventions (PAF 25.1% [95% CI 20.5–29.7]) and reoperations (PAF 30.3% [95% CI 24.3–36.3]). Intra-abdominal abscesses had the largest impact on readmissions (PAF 7.0% [95% CI 3.2–10.9]). Other complications only had a small effect on these outcomes. Conclusion Surgical improvement programs should focus on preventing or managing anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications, since these complications have the greatest overall impact on clinical outcomes after gastrectomy. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10120-019-00997-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive gastrectomy has been introduced in Western populations during the last decade. As minimally invasive distal gastrectomy (MIDG) versus total gastrectomy (MITG) are procedures with a different complexity, outcomes may differ. The aim of this population-based cohort study was to evaluate the safety of MIDG and MITG. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent potentially curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were included from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (2011-2016). Propensity score matching was applied to create comparable groups of patients receiving open distal gastrectomy (ODG) versus MIDG and open total gastrectomy (OTG) versus MITG, using patient and tumor characteristics. Postoperative outcomes and short-term oncological outcomes were appraised. RESULTS: Of the 1970 eligible patients, 1138 underwent distal gastrectomy and 832 underwent total gastrectomy. For distal gastrectomy, 390 ODG were matched to 288 MIDG patients. Although overall postoperative morbidity and mortality were similar, patients who underwent MIDG encountered less intra-abdominal abscesses (4% vs. 1%, p = 0.039) and wound complications (6% vs. 2%, p = 0.021). The median hospital stay was shorter after MIDGs (9 vs. 7 days, p < 0.001). For total gastrectomy, 323 OTG patients were matched to 258 MITG patients. Overall postoperative morbidity, mortality and hospital stay were similar, whereas the anastomotic leakage rate was higher after MITGs (11% vs. 17%, p = 0.030). Short-term oncological outcomes between both groups were equal for distal and total gastrectomy. CONCLUSION: Benefits of MIG during the early introduction were demonstrated for distal gastrectomy but not for total gastrectomy. An increased anastomotic leakage rate was encountered for MITG.