Oral Nutrition as a Form of Pre-Operative Enhancement in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Colorectal Cancer:A Systematic Review

Background: Nutritional status has major impacts on the outcome of surgery, in particular in patients with cancer. The aim of this review was to assess the merit of oral pre-operative nutritional support as a part of prehabilitation in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Methods: A systematic literature search and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations in order to review all trials investigating the effect of oral pre-operative nutritional support in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. The primary outcome was overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes were incision infection rate, anastomotic leakage rate, and length of hospital stay. Results: Five randomized controlled trials and one controlled trial were included. The studies contained a total of 583 patients with an average age of 63y (range 23-88y), of whom 87% had colorectal cancer. Malnourishment rates ranged from 8%-68%. All investigators provided an oral protein supplement. Overall patient compliance rates ranged from 72%-100%. There was no significant reduction in the overall complication rate in the interventional groups (odds ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.52-1.25). Conclusion: Current studies are too heterogeneous to conclude that pre-operative oral nutritional support could enhance the condition of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Patients at risk have a relatively lean body mass deficit (sarcopenia) rather than an absolute malnourished status. Compliance is an important element of prehabilitation. Targeting patients at risk, combining protein supplements with strength training, and defining standardized patient-related outcomes will be essential to obtain satisfactory result

Surgical quality and prospective quality control of the D2-gastrectomy for gastric cancer in the multicenter randomized LOGICA-trial

Background: Quality of gastric cancer surgery is crucial for favorable prognosis. Generally, prospective trials lack quality control measures. This study assessed surgical quality and a novel D2-lymphadenectomy photo-scoring in the LOGICA-trial. Methods: The multicenter LOGICA-trial randomized laparoscopic versus open total/distal D2-gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer (cT1-4aN0-3M0) in 10 Dutch hospitals. During the trial, two reviewers prospectively analyzed intraoperative photographs of dissected nodal stations for quality control, and provided centers weekly feedback on their D2-lymphadenectomy, as continuous quality-enhancing incentive. After the trial, these photographs were reanalyzed to develop a photo-scoring for future trials, rating the D2-lymphadenectomy dissection quality (optimal-good-suboptimal-unevaluable). Interobserver variability was calculated (weighted kappa). Regression analyses related the photo-scoring to nodal yield, recurrence and 5-years survival. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 212 patients underwent total/distal D2-gastrectomy (n = 122/n = 90), and 158 (75%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. R0-resection rate was 95%. Rate of ≥15 retrieved lymph nodes was 95%. Moderate agreement was obtained in stations 8 + 9 (κ = 0.522), 11p/11d (κ = 0.446) and 12a (κ = 0.441). Consensus was reached for discordant cases (30%). Stations 8 + 9, 11p/11d and 12a were rated ‘optimal’ in 76%, 63% and 68%. Laparoscopic photographs could be rated better than open (2% versus 12% ‘unevaluable’; 73% versus 50% ‘optimal’; p = 0.042). The photo-scoring did not show associations with nodal yield (p = 0.214), recurrence (p = 0.406) and survival (p = 0.988). Conclusions: High radicality and nodal yield demonstrated good quality of D2-gastrectomy. The prospective quality control probably contributed to this. The photo-scoring did not show good performance, but can be refined. Laparoscopic D2-gastrectomy was better suited for standardized surgical photo-evaluation than open surgery.</p

Body Composition Is a Predictor for Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer:a Prospective Side Study of the LOGICA Trial

PURPOSE: There is a lack of prospective studies evaluating the effects of body composition on postoperative complications after gastrectomy in a Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: This is a prospective side study of the LOGICA trial, a multicenter randomized trial on laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Trial patients who received preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy with an available preoperative restaging abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan were included. The CT scan was used to calculate the mass (M) and radiation attenuation (RA) of skeletal muscle (SM), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT). These variables were expressed as Z-scores, depicting how many standard deviations each patient’s CT value differs from the sex-specific study sample mean. Primary outcome was the association of each Z-score with the occurrence of a major postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3b). RESULTS: From 2015 to 2018, a total of 112 patients were included. A major postoperative complication occurred in 9 patients (8%). A high SM-M Z-score was associated with a lower risk of major postoperative complications (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.28–0.78, p = 0.004). Furthermore, high VAT-RA Z-scores and SAT-RA Z-scores were associated with a higher risk of major postoperative complications (RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.52–5.23, p = 0.001 and RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.14–3.34, p = 0.015, respectively). VAT-M, SAT-M, and SM-RA Z-scores showed no significant associations. CONCLUSION: Preoperative low skeletal muscle mass and high visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue radiation attenuation (indicating fat depleted of triglycerides) were associated with a higher risk of developing a major postoperative complication in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11605-022-05321-0

Pain and Opioid Consumption After Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer:A Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial (LOGICA-Trial)

Background:Laparoscopic gastrectomy could reduce pain and opioid consumption, compared to open gastrectomy. However, it is difficult to judge the clinical relevance of this reduction, since these outcomes are reported in few randomized trials and in limited detail. Methods: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial compared laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). Postoperative pain was analyzed by opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME, mg/day) at postoperative day (POD) 1–5, WHO analgesic steps, and Numeric Rating Scales (NRS, 0–10) at POD 1–10 and discharge. Regression and mixed model analyses were performed, with and without correction for epidural analgesia. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 115 patients in the laparoscopic group and 110 in the open group underwent surgery. Some 16 patients (14%) in the laparoscopic group and 73 patients (66%) in the open group received epidural analgesia. At POD 1–3, mean opioid consumption was 131, 118, and 53 mg OME lower in the laparoscopic group, compared to the open group, respectively (all p &lt; 0.001). After correcting for epidural analgesia, these differences remained significant at POD 1–2 (47 mg OME, p = 0.002 and 69 mg OME, p &lt; 0.001, respectively). At discharge, 27% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 43% patients in the open group used oral opioids (p = 0.006). Mean highest daily pain scores were between 2 and 4 at all PODs, &lt; 2 at discharge, and did not relevantly differ between treatment arms. Conclusion: In this multicenter randomized trial, postoperative pain was comparable between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. After laparoscopic gastrectomy, this was generally achieved without epidural analgesia and with fewer opioids. Trial Registration: NCT02248519.</p

Effect of medical and surgical treatment of Barrett’s metaplasia

Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a change in the esophageal mucosa as a result of long-standing gastroesophageal reflux disease. The importance of BE is that it is the main risk factor for the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma, whose incidence is currently growing faster than any other cancer in the Western world. The aim of this review was to compare the common treatment modalities of BE, with the focus on proton pump inhibitors and operative fundoplication. We performed a literature search on medical and surgical treatment of BE to determine eligible studies for this review. Studies on medical and surgical treatment of BE are discussed with regard to treatment effect on progression and regression of disease. Although there is some evidence for control of reflux with either medical or surgical therapy, there is no definitive evidence that either treatment modality decreases the risk of progression to dysplasia or cancer. Even though there is a trend toward antireflux surgery being superior, there are no definitive studies to prove this

Oral Nutrition as a Form of Pre-Operative Enhancement in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Colorectal Cancer : A Systematic Review

Background: Nutritional status has major impacts on the outcome of surgery, in particular in patients with cancer. The aim of this review was to assess the merit of oral pre-operative nutritional support as a part of prehabilitation in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Methods: A systematic literature search and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations in order to review all trials investigating the effect of oral pre-operative nutritional support in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. The primary outcome was overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes were incision infection rate, anastomotic leakage rate, and length of hospital stay. Results: Five randomized controlled trials and one controlled trial were included. The studies contained a total of 583 patients with an average age of 63 y (range 23-88 y), of whom 87% had colorectal cancer. Malnourishment rates ranged from 8%-68%. All investigators provided an oral protein supplement. Overall patient compliance rates ranged from 72%-100%. There was no significant reduction in the overall complication rate in the interventional groups (odds ratio 0.82; 95% confidence interval 0.52 - 1.25). Conclusion: Current studies are too heterogeneous to conclude that pre-operative oral nutritional support could enhance the condition of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Patients at risk have a relatively lean body mass deficit (sarcopenia) rather than an absolute malnourished status. Compliance is an important element of prehabilitation. Targeting patients at risk, combining protein supplements with strength training, and defining standardized patient-related outcomes will be essential to obtain satisfactory results

Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer (LOGICA): A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND: The oncological efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy are under debate for the Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer undergoing multimodality treatment. METHODS: In 10 experienced upper GI centers in the Netherlands, patients with resectable (cT1-4aN0-3bM0) gastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. No masking was performed. The primary outcome was hospital stay. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. It was hypothesized that laparoscopic gastrectomy leads to shorter hospital stay, less postoperative complications, and equal oncological outcomes. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, a total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic (n = 115) or open gastrectomy (n = 112). Preoperative chemotherapy was administered to 77 patients (67%) in the laparoscopic group and 87 patients (78%) in the open group. Median hospital stay was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-9) in both groups (P = .34). Median blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group (150 v 300 mL, P < .001), whereas mean operating time was longer (216 v 182 minutes, P < .001). Both groups did not differ regarding postoperative complications (44% v 42%, P = .91), in-hospital mortality (4% v 7%, P = .40), 30-day readmission rate (9.6% v 9.1%, P = 1.00), R0 resection rate (95% v 95%, P = 1.00), median lymph node yield (29 v 29 nodes, P = .49), 1-year overall survival (76% v 78%, P = .74), and global health-related quality of life up to 1 year postoperatively (mean differences between + 1.5 and + 3.6 on a 1-100 scale; 95% CIs include zero). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic gastrectomy did not lead to a shorter hospital stay in this Western multicenter randomized trial of patients with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. Postoperative complications and oncological efficacy did not differ between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy

Cost-effectiveness of Laparoscopic vs Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: An Economic Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Laparoscopic gastrectomy is rapidly being adopted worldwide as an alternative to open gastrectomy to treat gastric cancer. However, laparoscopic gastrectomy might be more expensive as a result of longer operating times and more expensive surgical materials. To date, the cost-effectiveness of both procedures has not been prospectively evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic compared with open gastrectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial of patients undergoing total or distal gastrectomy in 10 Dutch tertiary referral centers, cost-effectiveness data were collected alongside a multicenter randomized clinical trial on laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). A modified societal perspective and 1-year time horizon were used. Costs were calculated on the individual patient level by using hospital registry data and medical consumption and productivity loss questionnaires. The unit costs of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy were calculated bottom-up. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated with the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire, in which a value of 0 indicates death and 1 indicates perfect health. Missing questionnaire data were imputed with multiple imputation. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate the uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness. The study was conducted from March 17, 2015, to August 20, 2018. Data analyses were performed between September 1, 2020, and November 17, 2021. Interventions: Laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Evaluations in this cost-effectiveness analysis included total costs and QALYs. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 227 patients were included. Mean (SD) age was 67.5 (11.7) years, and 140 were male (61.7%). Unit costs for initial surgery were calculated to be 8124 (US $8087) for laparoscopic total gastrectomy, 7353 (US$7320) for laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, 6584 (US $6554) for open total gastrectomy, and 5893 (US$5866) for open distal gastrectomy. Mean total costs after 1-year follow-up were 26084 (US $25965) in the laparoscopic group and 25332 (US$25216) in the open group (difference, 752 [US $749; 3.0%]). Mean (SD) QALY contributions during 1 year were 0.665 (0.298) in the laparoscopic group and 0.686 (0.288) in the open group (difference, -0.021). Bootstrapping showed that these differences between treatment groups were relatively small compared with the uncertainty of the analysis. Conclusions and Relevance: Although the laparoscopic gastrectomy itself was more expensive, after 1-year follow-up, results suggest that differences in both total costs and effectiveness were limited between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. These results support centers' choosing, based on their own preference, whether to (de)implement laparoscopic gastrectomy as an alternative to open gastrectomy.

18F-Fludeoxyglucose-Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Laparoscopy for Staging of Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Prospective Dutch Cohort Study (PLASTIC)

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