D2 procedure has been accepted in Far East as the standard treatment for both early(EGC) and advanced gastric cancer(AGC) for many decades. Recently EGC has been successfully treated with endoscopy ...by endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection, when restricted or extended Gotoda’s criteria can be applied and D1+ surgery is offered only to patients not fitted for less invasive treatment. Furthermore, two randomised controlled trials(RCTs) have been demonstrating the non inferiority of minimally invasive technique as compared to standard open surgery for the treatment of early cases and recently the feasibility of adequate D1+ dissection has been demonstrated also for the robot assisted technique. In case of AGC the debate on the extent of nodal dissection has been open for many decades. While D2 gastrectomy was performed as the standard procedure in eastern countries, mostly based on observational and retrospective studies, in the west the Medical Research Council(MRC), Dutch and Italian RCTs have been conducted to show a survival benefit of D2 over D1 with evidence based medicine. Unfortunately both the MRC and the Dutch trials failed to show a survival benefit after the D2 procedure, mostly due to the significant increase of postoperative morbidity and mortality, which was referred to splenopancreatectomy. Only 15 years after the conclusion of its accrual, the Dutch trial could report a significant decrease of recur-rence after D2 procedure. Recently the long term survival analysis of the Italian RCT could demonstrate a benefit for patients with positive nodes treated with D2 gastrectomy without splenopancreatectomy. As nowadays also in western countries D2 procedure can be done safely with pancreas preserving technique and without preventive splenectomy, it has been suggested in several national guidelines as the recommended procedure for patients with AGC.
Gastric cancer poses a significant public health problem, especially in the Far East, due to its high incidence in these areas. Surgical treatment and guidelines have been markedly different in the ...West, but nowadays this debate is apparently coming to an end. Laparoscopic surgery has been employed in the surgical treatment of gastric cancer for two decades now, but with controversies about the extent of resection and lymphadenectomy. Despite these difficulties, the apparent advantages of the laparoscopic approach helped its implementation in early stage and distal gastric cancer, with an increase on the uptake for distal gastrectomy for more advanced disease and total gastrectomy. Nevertheless, there is no conclusive evidence about the laparoscopic approach yet. In this review article we present and analyse the current status of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer.
To conduct a systematic review to identify surgical strategies that may decrease leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).
LSG is growing in popularity as a primary bariatric procedure. ...Technical aspects of LSG including bougie size remain controversial.
Our systematic review yielded 112 studies encompassing 9991 LSG patients. A general estimating equation (GEE) model was used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) for leak based on bougie size, distance from the pylorus, and use of buttressing on the staple line. Baseline characteristics, including age and body mass index (BMI), were included. A linear repeated measures regression model compared excess weight loss (%EWL) between bougie sizes.
A total of 198 leaks in 8922 patients (2.2%) were identified. The GEE model revealed that the risk of leak decreased with bougie ≥40 Fr (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.37-0.77; P = 0.0009). Buttressing did not impact leak. There was no difference in %EWL between bougie <40 Fr and bougie ≥40 Fr up to 36 months (mean: 70.1% EWL; P = 0.273). Distance from the pylorus did not affect leak or %EWL.
Utilizing bougie ≥40 Fr may decrease leak without impacting %EWL up to 3 years. Distance from the pylorus does not impact leak or weight loss. Buttressing does not seem to impact leak; however, if surgeons desire to buttress, bioabsorbable material is the most common type used. Longer-term studies are needed to definitively determine the effect of bougie size on weight loss after LSG.
Bariatric Surgery Worldwide 2013 Angrisani, L.; Santonicola, A.; Iovino, P. ...
Obesity surgery,
10/2015, Letnik:
25, Številka:
10
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Background
The first global survey of bariatric/metabolic surgery based on data from the nations or national groupings of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic ...Diseases (IFSO) was published in 1998, followed by reports in 2003, 2009, 2011, and 2012. In this survey, we report a global overview of worldwide bariatric surgery in 2013.
Materials and Methods
A questionnaire evaluating the number and the type of bariatric procedure performed in 2013 was emailed to all members of bariatric societies belonging to IFSO. Trend analyses from 2003 to 2013 were also performed.
Results
There were 49/54 (90.7 %) responders; 37 of the 49 with national registries. The total number of bariatric procedures performed worldwide in 2013 was 468,609, 95.7 % carried out laparoscopically. The highest number (
n
= 154,276) was from the USA/Canada region. The most commonly performed procedure in the world was Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 45 %; followed by sleeve gastrectomy (SG), 37 %; and adjustable gastric banding (AGB), 10 %. Most significant were the rise in prevalence of SG from 0 to 37 % of the world total from 2003 to 2013, and the fall in AGB of 68 % from its peak in 2008 to 2013.
Conclusions
SG is currently the most frequently performed procedure in the USA/Canada and in the Asia/Pacific regions, and second to RYGB in the Europe and Latin/South America regions. The accuracy of the IFSO-based world survey of procedures would be enhanced if each nation or national group would create a national registry.
For the purpose of building best practice guidelines, an international expert panel was surveyed in 2014 and compared with the 2011 Sleeve Gastrectomy Consensus and with survey data culled from a ...general surgeon audience.
To measure advancement on aspects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and identify current best practices.
International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) 2014, Fifth International Summit for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy, Montréal, Canada.
In August 2014, expert surgeons (based on having performed>1000 cases) completed an online anonymous survey. Identical survey questions were then administered to general surgeon attendees.
One hundred twenty bariatric surgeons completed the expert survey, along with 103 bariatric surgeons from IFSO 2014 general surgeon audience. The following indications were endorsed: as a stand-alone procedure (97.5%); in high-risk patients (92.4%); in kidney and liver transplant candidates (91.6%); in patients with metabolic syndrome (83.8%); body mass index 30-35 with associated co-morbidities (79.8%); in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (87.4%); and in the elderly (89.1%). Significant differences existed between the expert and general surgeons groups in endorsing several contraindications: Barrett's esophagus (80.0% versus 31.3% P<.001), gastroesophageal reflux disease (23.3% versus 52.5% P<.001), hiatal hernias (11.7% versus 54.0% P<.001), and body mass index>60 kg/m(2) (5.0% versus 28.0% P<.001). Average reported weight loss outcomes 5 years postoperative were significantly higher for the expert surgeons group (P = .005), as were reported stricture (P = .001) and leakage (P = .005) rates. The following significant differences exist between 2014 and 2011 expert surgeons: Patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease should have pH and manometry study pre-laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (32.8% versus 50.0%; P = .033); it is important to take down the vessels before resection (88.1% versus 81.8%; P = .025); it is acceptable to buttress (81.4% versus 77.3%; P<.001); the smaller the bougie size and tighter the sleeve, the higher the incidence of leaks (78.8% versus 65.2%; P = .006).
This study highlights areas of new and improved best practices on various aspects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy performance among experts from 2011 and 2014 and among the current general surgeon population.
Sleeve gastrectomy(SG) is a restrictive bariatric surgery technique that was first used as part of restrictive horizontal gastrectomy in the original Scopinaro type biliopancreatic diversion. Its ...good results as a single technique have led to a rise in its use, and it is currently the second most performed technique worldwide. SG achieves clearly better results than other restrictive techniques and is comparable in some aspects to the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, the current gold standard in bariatric surgery. These benefits have been associated with different pathophysiologic mechanisms unrelated to weight loss such as increased gastric emptying and intestinal transit, and activation of hormonal mechanisms such as increased GLP-1 hormone and decreased ghrelin. The aim of this review was to highlight the salient aspects of SG regarding its historical evolution, pathophysiologic mechanisms, main results, clinical applications and perioperative complications.
Background
The possible advantages of laparoscopic (assisted) total gastrectomy (LTG) versus open total gastrectomy (OTG) have not been reviewed systematically. The aim of this study was to ...systematically review the short-term outcomes of LTG versus OTG in the treatment of gastric cancer.
Methods
A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Embase was conducted. All original studies comparing LTG with OTG were included for critical appraisal. Data describing short-term outcomes were pooled and analyzed.
Results
A total of eight original studies that compared LTG (
n
= 314) with OTG (
n
= 384) in patients with gastric cancer fulfilled quality criteria and were selected for review and meta-analysis. LTG compared with OTG was associated with a significant reduction of intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference = 227.6 ml; 95 % CI 144.3–310.9;
p
< 0.001), a reduced risk of postoperative complications (risk ratio = 0.51; 95 % CI 0.33–0.77), and shorter hospital stay (weighted mean difference 4.0 = days; 95 % CI 1.4–6.5;
p
< 0.001). These benefits were at the cost of longer operative time (weighted mean difference = 55.5 min; 95 % CI 24.8–86.2;
p
< 0.001). In-hospital mortality rates were comparable for LTG (0.9 %) and OTG (1.8 %) (risk ratio = 0.68; 95 % CI 0.20–2.36).
Conclusion
LTG shows better short term outcomes compared with OTG in eligible patients with gastric cancer. Future studies should evaluate 30- and 60-day mortality, radicality of resection, and long-term follow-up in LTG versus OTG, preferably in randomized trials.
Background
The aim of this study is to compare surgical outcomes including postoperative complications and prognosis between total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) for proximal gastric ...cancer (GC). Propensity-score-matching analysis was performed to overcome patient selection bias between the two surgical techniques.
Methods
Among 457 patients who were diagnosed with GC between January 1990 and December 2010 from four Italian institutions, 91 underwent PG and 366 underwent TG. Clinicopathologic features, postoperative complications, and survivals were reviewed and compared between these two groups retrospectively.
Results
After propensity-score matching had been done, 150 patients (75 TG patients, 75 PG patients) were included in the analysis. The PG group had smaller tumors, shorter resection margins, and smaller numbers of retrieved lymph nodes than the TG group. N stages and 5-year survival rates were similar after TG and PG. Postoperative complication rates after PG and TG were 25.3 and 28%, respectively, (
P
= 0.084). Rates of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture were 12 and 6.6% after PG and 2.6 and 1.3% after TG, respectively (
P
<
0.001 and
P
= 0.002). 5-year overall survival for PG and TG group was 56.7 and 46.5%, respectively (
P
= 0.07). Survival rates according to the tumor stage were not different between the groups. Multivariate analysis showed that type of resection was not an independent prognostic factor.
Conclusion
Although PG for upper third GC showed good results in terms of survival, it is associated with an increased mortality rate and a higher risk of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture.
The goal of a gastric cancer operation is a microscopically negative resection margin and D2 lymphadenectomy. Minimally invasive techniques (laparoscopic and robotic) have been proven to be ...equivalent for oncologic care, yet with faster recovery. Endoscopic mucosal resection can be used for T1a N0 tumor resection. Better understanding of hereditary gastric cancer and molecular subtypes has led to specialized recommendations for MSI-high tumors and patients with pathogenic CDH1 mutations. In the future, surgical management will support minimally invasive approaches and personalized cancer care based on subtype.
PDF
