Advertisement

Prognosis After Laparoscopic Gastrectomy in Patients with Pathological Stage II or III Gastric Cancer Who Were Preoperatively Diagnosed with Clinical Stage I: Propensity Score Matching Analysis of a Multicenter Dataset

  • Yuki Ito
  • Mitsuro KandaEmail author
  • Seiji Ito
  • Yoshinari Mochizuki
  • Hitoshi Teramoto
  • Kiyoshi Ishigure
  • Toshifumi Murai
  • Takahiro Asada
  • Akiharu Ishiyama
  • Hidenobu Matsushita
  • Chie Tanaka
  • Daisuke Kobayashi
  • Michitaka Fujiwara
  • Kenta Murotani
  • Yasuhiro Kodera
Peritoneal Surface Malignancy
  • 53 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is a standard approach for patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer in East Asia; however, following surgery, these patients may be pathologically diagnosed with stage II or III cancer. The prognosis of patients with gastric cancer migration from clinical stage I to pathological stage II or III after LG has not been completely clarified.

Methods

To compare the prognosis following LG and open gastrectomy (OG) in patients with pathological stage II or III gastric cancer who were preoperatively diagnosed with stage I cancer, we conducted a retrospective analysis using a multicenter dataset comprising details of 3480 patients who underwent gastrectomy between 2010 and 2014 at nine participating institutions. We used propensity score matching to reduce selection bias.

Results

After propensity score matching, 146 patients were finally selected. There were no significant differences in the number of dissected lymph nodes. Morbidity rates, length of postoperative hospital stay, and time between surgery and initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy were comparable between the two groups. Moreover, there were no significant differences in the overall, disease-specific, and relapse-free survival rates between the LG and OG groups. The LG group tended to have more patients with hematogenous recurrence, whereas the OG group tended to have more patients with peritoneal recurrence.

Conclusions

Our multicenter dataset analysis indicated that the prognosis of patients with gastric cancer migration from clinical stage I to pathological stage II or III was independent of the surgical approach.

Notes

DISCLOSURE

Yuki Ito, Mitsuro Kanda, Seiji Ito, Yoshinari Mochizuki, Hitoshi Teramoto, Kiyoshi Ishigure, Toshifumi Murai, Takahiro Asada, Akiharu Ishiyama, Hidenobu Matsushita, Chie Tanaka, Daisuke Kobayashi, Michitaka Fujiwara, Kenta Murotani, and Yasuhiro Kodera declare they have no conflicts of interest and no sources of financial support were used in the preparation of this study.

Supplementary material

10434_2019_7781_MOESM1_ESM.docx (59 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 58 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Katai H, Ishikawa T, Akazawa K, Isobe Y, Miyashiro I, Oda I, et al., Five-year survival analysis of surgically resected gastric cancer cases in Japan: a retrospective analysis of more than 100,000 patients from the nationwide registry of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2001–2007). Gastric Cancer. 2018;21:144–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kanda M, Fujiwara M, Tanaka C, Kobayashi D, Iwata N, Mizuno A, et al. Predictive value of drain amylase content for peripancreatic inflammatory fluid collections after laparoscopic (assisted) distal gastrectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:4353–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017;20:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fukagawa T, Katai H, Mizusawa J, Nakamura K, Sano T, Terashima M, et al. A prospective multi-institutional validity study to evaluate the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of pathological stage III gastric cancer (JCOG1302A). Gastric Cancer. 2018;21:68–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu CW, Hsiung CA, Lo SS, Hsieh MC, Chen JH, Li AF, et al., Stage migration influences on stage-specific survival comparison between D1 and D3 gastric cancer surgeries. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31:153–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kinoshita T, Uyama I, Terashima M, Noshiro H, Nagai E, Obama K, et al., Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for clinical Stage II/III gastric cancer: a multicenter cohort study in Japan (LOC-a study). Ann Surg. 2019;269(5):887–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martinez-Ramos D, Miralles-Tena JM, Cuesta MA, Escrig-Sos J, Van der Peet D, Hoashi JS, et al., Laparoscopy versus open surgery for advanced and resectable gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2011;103:133–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen K, Xu XW, Mou YP, Pan Y, Zhou YC, Zhang RC, et al., Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2013;11:182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Inaki N, Etoh T, Ohyama T, Uchiyama K, Katada N, Koeda K, et al., A multi-institutional, prospective, Phase II feasibility study of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 Lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer (JLSSG0901). World J Surg. 2015;39:2734-41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hayashi S, Kanda M, Ito S, Mochizuki Y, Teramoto H, Ishigure K, et al., Number of retrieved lymph nodes is an independent prognostic factor after total gastrectomy for patients with stage III gastric cancer: propensity score matching analysis of a multi-institution dataset. Gastric Cancer. 2019;22(4):853–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ryo S, Kanda M, Ito S, Mochizuki Y, Teramoto H, Ishigure K, et al. The controlling nutritional status score serves as a predictor of short- and long-term outcomes for patients with Stage 2 or 3 gastric cancer: analysis of a multi-institutional data set. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(2):456–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ito Y, Kanda M, Ito S, Mochizuki Y, Teramoto H, Ishigure K, et al., Intraoperative Blood Loss is Associated with Shortened Postoperative Survival of Patients with Stage II/III Gastric Cancer: Analysis of a Multi-institutional Dataset. World J Surg. 2019;43:870–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu JY, Peng CW, Yang XJ, Huang CQ, Li Y. The prognosis role of AJCC/UICC 8(th) edition staging system in gastric cancer, a retrospective analysis. Am J Transl Res. 2018;10:292–303.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kanda M, Kodera Y, Sakamoto J. Updated evidence on adjuvant treatments for gastric cancer. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;9:1549–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kanda M, Murotani K, Kobayashi D, Tanaka C, Yamada S, Fujii T, et al. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 alters recurrence patterns and prognostic factors among patients with stage II/III gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis. Surgery. 2015;158:1573–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    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
  17. 17.
    Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transpl. 2013;48:452–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Katai H, Mizusawa J, Katayama H, Takagi M, Yoshikawa T, Fukagawa T, et al. Short-term surgical outcomes from a phase III study of laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA/IB gastric cancer: japan clinical oncology group study JCOG0912. Gastric Cancer. 2017;20:699–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, Kim W, Lee HJ, Ryu SW, et al. 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. 2019;5(4):506–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hikage M, Tokunaga M, Makuuchi R, Irino T, Tanizawa Y, Bando E, et al. Surgical outcomes after gastrectomy in very elderly patients with gastric cancer. Surg Today. 2018;48(8):773–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuki Ito
    • 1
    • 2
  • Mitsuro Kanda
    • 2
    Email author
  • Seiji Ito
    • 3
  • Yoshinari Mochizuki
    • 4
  • Hitoshi Teramoto
    • 5
  • Kiyoshi Ishigure
    • 6
  • Toshifumi Murai
    • 7
  • Takahiro Asada
    • 1
  • Akiharu Ishiyama
    • 8
  • Hidenobu Matsushita
    • 9
  • Chie Tanaka
    • 2
  • Daisuke Kobayashi
    • 2
  • Michitaka Fujiwara
    • 2
  • Kenta Murotani
    • 10
  • Yasuhiro Kodera
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryGifu Prefectural Tajimi HospitalTajimiJapan
  2. 2.Department of Gastroenterological Surgery (Surgery II)Nagoya University Graduate School of MedicineNagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryAichi Cancer Center Chuo HospitalNagoyaJapan
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryKomaki Municipal HospitalKomakiJapan
  5. 5.Department of SurgeryYokkaichi Municipal HospitalYokkaichiJapan
  6. 6.Department of SurgeryKonan Kosei HospitalKonanJapan
  7. 7.Department of SurgeryIchinomiya Municipal HospitalIchinomiyaJapan
  8. 8.Department of SurgeryOkazaki City HospitalOkazakiJapan
  9. 9.Department of SurgeryTosei General HospitalSetoJapan
  10. 10.Division of Biostatistics, Clinical Research CenterAichi Medical University HospitalNagakuteJapan

Personalised recommendations