Gastric Cancer

, Volume 22, Issue 5, pp 1060–1068 | Cite as

Oncological feasibility of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy compared with laparoscopic proximal or total gastrectomy for cT1N0M0 gastric cancer in the upper gastric body

  • Yosuke Kano
  • Manabu OhashiEmail author
  • Satoshi Ida
  • Koshi Kumagai
  • Souya Nunobe
  • Takeshi Sano
  • Naoki Hiki
Original Article



The upper gastric body is of particular interest in relation to gastrectomy because this area includes a border; that is, both distal and proximal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer can involve this area. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LsTG) is reported to be suitable procedure compared with laparoscopic proximal and total gastrectomy (LPG, LTG), regarding postoperative nutritional status and surgical safety. However, whether LsTG is an oncologically acceptable procedure for early gastric cancer in the upper gastric body is unclear.


We analyzed 215 patients with cT1N0M0 gastric cancer limitedly located in the upper gastric body. The frequency of conversion from each intended procedure to an alternative procedure, the width of the pathological margin, the incidence of lymph node metastasis at each station and the 3-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were evaluated.


LsTG was planned for 65 patients, and LPG for 72 and LTG for 78, respectively. Conversion to other procedures was required in about 10% of patients for whom LsTG or LPG was planned. The width of the pathological margin in patients who underwent LsTG was significantly shorter than patients who underwent the others. No patients who underwent LsTG, LPG or LTG had metastases in station no. 2 or 4sa lymph node. The 3-year OS and RFS rates of patients for whom each procedure was planned were not different.


LsTG could be an oncologically acceptable procedure for cT1N0M0 gastric cancer in the upper gastric body. LsTG could be one option for such disease.


Early gastric cancer Upper gastric body Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy Laparoscopic total gastrectomy 



The authors declare that no external funding was received for this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Human rights statement

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national committees governing human experimentation and in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions.

Informed consent

Informed consent or an appropriate substitute was obtained from all patients prior to their inclusion in the study.


  1. 1.
    Deans C, Yeo MS, Soe MY, Shabbir A, Ti TK, So JB. Cancer of the gastric cardia is rising in incidence in an Asian population and is associated with adverse outcome. World J Surg. 2011;35:617–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhou Y, Zhang Z, Zhang Z, Wu J, Ren D, Yan X, et al. A rising trend of gastric cardia cancer in Gansu Province of China. Cancer Lett. 2008;269:18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahn HS, Lee HJ, Yoo MW, Jeong SH, Park DJ, Kim HH, et al. Changes in clinicopathological features and survival after gastrectomy for gastric cancer over a 20-year period. Br J Surg. 2011;98:255–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gong CS, Kim BS, Kim HS. Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler in patients with gastric cancer: a single-center experience. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23:8553–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu X, Hu Y, Liu H, Mou T, Deng Z, Wang D, et al. Short-term outcomes of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy using the transorally inserted anvil versus extracorporeal circular anastomosis during laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis. J Surg Res. 2016;200:435–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iwata Y, Ito S, Misawa K, Ito Y, Komori K, Abe T, et al. Incidence and treatment of metachronous gastric cancer after proximal gastrectomy. Surg Today. 2018;48:552–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nozaki I, Kurita A, Nasu J, Kubo Y, Aogi K, Tanada M, et al. Higher incidence of gastric remnant cancer after proximal than distal gastrectomy. Hepatogastroenterology. 2007;54:1604–8.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    An JY, Youn HG, Choi MG, Noh JH, Sohn TS, Kim S. The difficult choice between total and proximal gastrectomy in proximal early gastric cancer. Am J Surg. 2008;196:587–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen S, Li J, Liu H, Zeng J, Yang G, Wang J, et al. Esophagogastrostomy plus gastrojejunostomy: a novel reconstruction procedure after curative resection for proximal gastric cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:497–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Furukawa H, Kurokawa Y, Takiguchi S, Tanaka K, Miyazaki Y, Makino T, et al. Short-term outcomes and nutritional status after laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with a very small remnant stomach for cStage I proximal gastric carcinoma. Gastric Cancer. 2018;21:500–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nakauchi M, Suda K, Nakamura K, Shibasaki S, Kikuchi K, Nakamura T, Uyama I, et al. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: technical aspects and surgical, nutritional and oncological outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:4631–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma—2nd English edition. Gastric Cancer. 1998;1:10–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017;20:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14:101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kamikawa Y, Kobayashi T, Kamiyama S, Satomoto K. A new procedure of esophagogastrostomy to prevent reflux following proximal gastrectomy (in Japanese). Shoukakigeka. 2001;24:1053–60.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hiki N, Nunobe S, Kubota T, Jiang X. Function-preserving gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2683–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jiang X, Hiki N, Nunobe S, Nohara K, Kumagai K, Sano T, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted subtotal gastrectomy with very small remnant stomach: a novel surgical procedure for selected early gastric cancer in the upper stomach. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14:194–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kawakatsu S, Ohashi M, Hiki N, Nunobe S, Nagino M, Sano T. Use of endoscopy to determine the resection margin during laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2017;104:1829–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kamiya S, Ohashi M, Ida S, Kumagai K, Nunobe S, Sano T, et al. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with a new marking technique, endoscopic cautery marking: preservation of the stomach in patients with upper early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc. (Online Jun 19, 2018).
  20. 20.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sun Z, Li DM, Wang ZN, Huang BJ, Xu Y, Li K, Xu HM. Prognostic significance of microscopic positive margins for gastric cancer patients with potentially curative resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:3028–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cho BC, Jeung HC, Choi HJ, Rha SY, Hyung WJ, Cheong JH, Noh SH, Chung HC. Prognostic impact of resection margin involvement after extended (D2/D3) gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a 15-year experience at a single institute. J Surg Oncol. 2007;95:461–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kim BS, Oh ST, Yook JH, Kim HS, Lee IS, Kim BS. Appropriate gastrectomy resection margins for early gastric carcinoma. J Surg Oncol. 2014;109:198–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, Kim W, Lee HJ, Ryu SW, et al., Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) Group. Effect of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy vs open distal gastrectomy on long-term survival among patients with stage I gastric cancer: the KLASS-01 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. (Online Feb 7, 2019).

Copyright information

© The International Gastric Cancer Association and The Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Cancer Institute HospitalJapanese Foundation for Cancer ResearchTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations