Minimal-invasive gastrectomy: what the west can learn from the east?

Minimal-invasive gastrectomy has been established as commonly used method for the early gastric cancer in Korea and Japan. From the first laparoscopic cancer gastrectomy in 1992 in Japan, numerous prospective randomized trials from these two countries have gained the evidence for non-inferiority or even specific benefits compared to open surgery. In Korea, the Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgical Study Group (KLASS group) founded, in 2004, successfully gained evidence not only in regards of oncological safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy, but also for the impact of different reconstruction methods and alternative extents of luminal resection on postoperative outcome and quality of life. Awaited results of latest studies from Korea, Japan, and China may suggest laparoscopic approaches as an option even in advanced gastric cancers. These studies could potentially be the starting point to find the role of laparoscopic gastrectomy in the west, where the incidence of gastric cancer is rather lower; the cancers are mostly diagnosed in advanced stages, and often, a perioperative chemotherapy is applied. Robotic (-assisted) gastrectomy was not shown to be superior to laparoscopic resection in Korea, but new technological developments should continuously be evaluated in clinical trials regarding a potentially favorable learning curve, which might play a key role in regards of the limited case load per center of gastric cancer in the west. This review summarizes the history of laparoscopic cancer gastrectomy in Asia and points out the important steps of establishing a nation-wide scientific network to support the surgical routine by the necessary evidence with a focus on Korea

Treatment of early gastric cancer in the Western World

The incidence rate of gastric cancer is much higher in Asia than in the Western industrial nations. According to the different screening programs in Japan and Korea about fifty percent of treated patients had an early tumor stage. In contrast, European and American patients with gastric cancer had an advanced tumor stage. Therefore, the experience for the various therapeutic options for gastric cancer may be different between these regions. In this review we tried to point out the treatment modalities in Western industrial countries for early gastric cancer. (C) 2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved

Pathohistological classification systems in gastric cancer: Diagnostic relevance and prognostic value

Several pathohistological classification systems exist for the diagnosis of gastric cancer. Many studies have investigated the correlation between the pathohistological characteristics in gastric cancer and patient characteristics, disease specific criteria and overall outcome. It is still controversial as to which classification system imparts the most reliable information, and therefore, the choice of system may vary in clinical routine. In addition to the most common classification systems, such as the Lauren and the World Health Organization (WHO) classifications, other authors have tried to characterize and classify gastric cancer based on the microscopic morphology and in reference to the clinical outcome of the patients. In more than 50 years of systematic classification of the pathohistological characteristics of gastric cancer, there is no sole classification system that is consistently used worldwide in diagnostics and research. However, several national guidelines for the treatment of gastric cancer refer to the Lauren or the WHO classifications regarding therapeutic decision-making, which underlines the importance of a reliable classification system for gastric cancer. The latest results from gastric cancer studies indicate that it might be useful to integrate DNA-and RNA-based features of gastric cancer into the classification systems to establish prognostic relevance. This article reviews the diagnostic relevance and the prognostic value of different pathohistological classification systems in gastric cancer. (C) 2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved

Oligometastatic Disease in Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer - How to Proceed?

Background: In the present study we review and discuss the current evidence and suggest how to proceed in the management of oligometastatic disease in upper gastrointestinal cancer. Methods: An electronic search of the PubMed database for relevant articles was performed. Results: Both the search for 'oligometastasis', 'oligometastases', 'oligometastatic', 'oligometastatic disease' as well as 'esophageal' and 'esophageal cancer' and the search for 'oligometastasis', 'oligometastases', 'oligometastatic', 'oligometastatic disease' as well as 'gastric', 'gastric cancer', 'stomach', and 'stomach cancer' yielded very few studies. Most data need to be extrapolated in general studies on oligometastatic diseases of different origins. No randomized controlled trial could be found. Conclusion: In the absence of data to formulate recommendations on how to proceed in the treatment of oligometastatic disease in upper gastrointestinal cancer, a more aggressive treatment of oligometastatic disease can be considered in patients whose tumors show a more favorable neoplastic behavior after the 'test of time'. The RENAISSANCE study will certainly deliver important data regarding this aspect. (C) 2017 S. Karger GmbH, Freibur

Propensity score-matched comparison between open and minimal invasive hybrid esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma

Background This study compared the outcome between patients who had an open and those who had a hybrid esophagectomy for T1 or T3 esophageal adenocarcinoma (eAC). No clear data are available concerning this question based on T-category. Methods Two groups of patients with esophagectomy and high intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy for eAC were analyzed: hybrid (laparoscopy + right thoracotomy) (n = 835) and open (laparotomy + right thoracotomy) (n = 188). Outcome criteria were 30- and 90-day mortality, R0-resection rate (R0), number of resected lymph nodes (rLNs), and 5-year survival rate (5y-SR). For each type of surgery, three patient groups were analyzed: pT1-carcinoma (group-1), cT3Nx and neoadjuvant chemoradiation (group-2), and pT3N0-3 without neoadjuvant therapy (group-3). The comparison was based on a propensity score matching in relation of 1:2 for open versus hybrid. Results In group-1 (38 open vs 76 hybrid) R0-resection (100%), 30-day mortality (0%), 90-day mortality (2.6% vs 0%), and rLNs (median 29.5 vs 28.5) were not significantly different. The pN0-rate was 76% in the open and 92% in the hybrid group (p = 0.036). Accordingly, the 5y-SR was 69% and 87% (p = 0.016), but the prognosis of the subgroups pT1pN0 or pT1pN+ was not significantly different between open or hybrid. In group-2 (68 open vs 135 hybrid) R0-resection (97%), 30-day (0% vs 0.7%) and 90-day (4%) mortality, rLNs (28.5 vs 26), and 5y-SR (36% vs 41%) were not significantly different. In group-3 (37 open vs 75 hybrid) R0, postoperative mortality, rLNs, and 5y-SR were not significantly different. Conclusion In a propensity score-matched comparison of patients with an open or hybrid esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma the quality of oncologic resection, postoperative mortality and prognosis are not different

Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer: The European Point of View

Objective. Multiple Asian studies have proved the feasibility of laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of gastric cancer. The difference between Asian and European patients could limit their application in Europe. We reviewed the literature for European studies comparing open gastrectomy with laparoscopic approach in the treatment of gastric cancer. Method. We searched the keywords gastric cancer and laparoscopy in MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included all studies published between 1990 and 2016 and conducted in Europe. Result. We found 1 randomized and 13 cohort studies which compared laparoscopic with open gastrectomy. We found no mean difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested between laparoscopic and open group (mean difference: -0.49; 95% CI: -2.42; 1.44, p=0.62) and no difference of short-term or long-term mortality (short-term odds ratio: 0.74, p=0.47; long-term odds ratio: 0.65, p=0.11). We found a longer operative time in the laparoscopic group (mean difference: 35.75 minutes, p<0.01) but lesser reoperation rate than the open group (odds ratio: 1.55 p=0.01). Conclusion. European based population studies found results comparable with their Asian counterpart. In the current state of evidence, minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is safe and can achieve the same oncological results

Medicaroid robotic assisted surgery system: A feasibility study

The hinotori™ surgical robotic system, by Medicaroid (Medicaroid Corporation, Kobe, Japan), is a new robotic system for minimally invasive surgery. We aimed at evaluating its usability and accessibility in a preclinical setting. This was a preclinical feasibility study. Two groups of surgeons, one with three experienced robotic surgeons (group 1) and one with three robotic-surgery naive participants (group 2), performed the following tasks using the hinotori™ system in a simulated preclinical setting: console setup, docking, instrument exchange, undocking, and suturing. Each participant repeated each task three times. The time required for performing each repetition and the count of failed repetitions were the primary outcomes of the study. The subjectively perceived workload in performing the tasks, as measured by the NASA-TLX score, was the secondary outcome. The improvement of participants within the three repetitions as well as a comparison between the performances of group 1 and 2 were evaluated. The time required to perform each task decreased with repetitions for both groups, so did the subjective workload score. The time measures required to perform the tasks and the mental effort scores were comparable between the two groups for the console setup, docking, instrument exchange, and undocking tasks. The NASA-TLX score was also comparable between the two groups for the console setup and the emergency undocking tasks and decreased significantly within all tasks after the third repetition. The incidence of failed repetitions was higher in group 2 for the suturing task, however the difference was not statistically significant. The results confirmed the usability of the hinotori™ system in a preclinical setting for both highly trained surgeons and nonexperienced operators and its accessibility for both long-time users of other systems and first-time users