49 research outputs found

    The yield of diagnostic laparoscopy with peritoneal lavage in gastric adenocarcinoma:A retrospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) with peritoneal lavage has been adopted as a standard staging procedure for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Evaluation of the value of DL is important given ongoing improvements in diagnostic imaging and treatment. As contemporary data from European centres are sparse, this retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the yield of DL in patients with potentially curable gastric cancer, and to identify predictive factors for peritoneal metastases. Methods: Patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach, treated between January 2016 and December 2018, were identified from institutional databases of two high volume European Upper-GI centres. Patients who underwent a DL with peritoneal lavage for potentially curable disease after clinical staging with imaging (cT1-4N0-3M0) were included. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a positive DL, defined as macroscopic metastatic disease, positive peritoneal cytology washings (PC+) or locally irresectable disease. Results: Some 80 of 327 included patients (24.5%) had a positive DL, excluding these patients from neoadjuvant treatment (66 of 327; 20.2%) and/or surgical resection (76 of 327; 23.2%). In 34 of 327 patients (10.3%), macroscopic metastatic disease was seen, with peritoneal deposits in 30 of these patients. Only 16 of 30 patients with peritoneal disease had positive cytology. Some 41 of 327 patients (12.5%) that underwent DL had PC+ in the absence of macroscopic metastases and five patients (1.5%) had an irresectable primary tumour. Diffuse type carcinoma had the highest risk of peritoneal dissemination, irrespective of cT and cN categories. Conclusion: The diagnostic yield of staging laparoscopy is high, changing the management in approximately one quarter of patients. DL should be considered in patients with diffuse type carcinoma irrespective of cT and cN categories.</p

    The yield of diagnostic laparoscopy with peritoneal lavage in gastric adenocarcinoma:A retrospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) with peritoneal lavage has been adopted as a standard staging procedure for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Evaluation of the value of DL is important given ongoing improvements in diagnostic imaging and treatment. As contemporary data from European centres are sparse, this retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the yield of DL in patients with potentially curable gastric cancer, and to identify predictive factors for peritoneal metastases. Methods: Patients with adenocarcinoma of the stomach, treated between January 2016 and December 2018, were identified from institutional databases of two high volume European Upper-GI centres. Patients who underwent a DL with peritoneal lavage for potentially curable disease after clinical staging with imaging (cT1-4N0-3M0) were included. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a positive DL, defined as macroscopic metastatic disease, positive peritoneal cytology washings (PC+) or locally irresectable disease. Results: Some 80 of 327 included patients (24.5%) had a positive DL, excluding these patients from neoadjuvant treatment (66 of 327; 20.2%) and/or surgical resection (76 of 327; 23.2%). In 34 of 327 patients (10.3%), macroscopic metastatic disease was seen, with peritoneal deposits in 30 of these patients. Only 16 of 30 patients with peritoneal disease had positive cytology. Some 41 of 327 patients (12.5%) that underwent DL had PC+ in the absence of macroscopic metastases and five patients (1.5%) had an irresectable primary tumour. Diffuse type carcinoma had the highest risk of peritoneal dissemination, irrespective of cT and cN categories. Conclusion: The diagnostic yield of staging laparoscopy is high, changing the management in approximately one quarter of patients. DL should be considered in patients with diffuse type carcinoma irrespective of cT and cN categories.</p

    ASO Author Reflection: Is There a Role for Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Before Esophagectomy?

    No full text

    ASO Author Reflections: Gastric Cancer Staging: More than Just TNM?

    No full text

    Does Cardiopulmonary Testing Help Predict Long-Term Survival After Esophagectomy?

    No full text

    Long-term survival is not affected by severity of complications following esophagectomy

    No full text
    \ua9 2024 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical OncologyIntroduction: Outcomes following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer have continued to improve over the last 30 years. Post-operative complications impact upon peri-operative and short-term survival but the effect on long-term survival remains debated. This study aims to investigate the effect of post-operative complications on long-term survival following esophagectomy. Materials and methods: All patients who underwent an esophagectomy between January 2010 and January 2019 were included from a single high-volume center. Data was collected contemporaneously. Patients were separated into three groups; those who experienced no, or very minor complications (Clavien-Dindo 0 or 1), minor complications (Clavien-Dindo 2), and major complications (Clavien-Dindo 3–4), at 30 days. To correct for short-term mortality effects, those who died during the index hospital admission were excluded. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log rank testing. Results: The study cohort comprised 721 patients. There were 42.4% (306/721), 29.5% (213/721) and 25.7% (185/721) in the Clavien-Dindo 0–1, Clavien-Dindo 2, and Clavien-Dindo 3–4 group respectively. Seventeen patients (2.4%) died during their index hospital admission and were therefore excluded. There was no significant difference between median survival across the 3 groups (50, 57 and 52 months). Across all 3 groups, overall long-term survival rates were equivalent at 1 (87.5%, 84.9%, 83.2%), 3 (59.7%, 59.6%, 54.2%), and 5 years (43.9%, 48.9%, 45.7%) (p = 0.806). The only factors independently associated with survival in this cohort, were male gender, Charlson comorbidity index, and overall pathological stage of disease. Conclusion: Long-term survival is not affected by peri-operative complications, irrespective of severity, following esophagectomy. Further study into the long-term quality of life is required
    corecore