Background/Aims: Lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma (LELC) is a rare subtype of gastric cancer. We aimed to identify the clinicopathological features and rate of lymph node metastasis (LNM) to investigate the feasibility of endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric LELC confined to the mucosa or submucosa. Methods: We compared the clinicopathological characteristics of 116 early gastric LELC patients and 5,753 early gastric well- or moderately differentiated (WD or MD) tubular adenocarcinoma patients treated by gastrectomy. Results: Compared to WD or MD early gastric cancer (EGC) patients, early LELC patients were younger and had a higher prevalence of proximally located tumors. Despite more frequent deep submucosal invasion (86.2% vs 29.8%), lymphatic invasion was less frequent (6.0% vs 16.2%) in early LELC patients than in WD or MD EGC patients. Among tumors with deep submucosal invasion, the tumor size was smaller, lymphatic invasion was less frequent (6.0% vs 40.2%) and the rate of LNM was lower (10.0% vs 19.4%) in patients with LELC than in those with WD or MD EGC. The overall rate of LNM in early LELC patients was 8.6% (10/116). The risk of LNM in patients with mucosal, shallow submucosal invasive, or deep submucosal invasive LELC was 0% (0/6), 0% (0/10), and 10% (10/100), respectively. Conclusions Early LELC is a distinct subtype of EGC with more frequent deep submucosal invasion but less lymphatic invasion and LNM than WD or MD EGCs. Endoscopic submucosal dissection may be considered curative for patients with early LELC confined to the mucosa or shallow submucosa, given its negligible rate of LNM.

Objectives: This study examined the characteristics of patients according to nutritional status assessed by five nutritional screening tools: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), NUTRISCORE, Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) and to compare the agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of these tools. Methods: A total of 952 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy and chemotherapy from January 2009 to December 2012 were included. The patients were categorized into malnutrition and normal status according to five nutritional screening tools one month after surgery. The Spearman partial correlation, Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of each two screening tools were calculated. Results: Malnutrition was observed in 86.24% of patients based on the PG-SGA and 85.82% based on the NUTRISCORE. When NRI or CONUT were applied, the proportions of malnutrition were < 30%. Patients with malnutrition had lower intakes of energy and protein than normal patients when assessed using the PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, or NRI. Lower levels of albumin, hemoglobin, total lymphocyte count, and total cholesterol and longer postoperative hospital stays were observed among patients with malnutrition compared to normal patients when NRI, PNI, or CONUT were applied. Relatively high agreement for NUTRISCORE relative to PG-SGA was found; the sensitivity was 90.86%, and the AUC was 0.78. When NRI, PNI, and CONUT were compared, the sensitivities were 23.72% for PNI relative to NRI, 44.53% for CONUT relative to NRI, and 90.91% for CONUT relative to PNI. The AUCs were 0.95 for NRI relative to PNI and 0.91 for CONUT relative to PNI. Conclusions NUTRISCORE had a high sensitivity compared to PG-SGA, and CONUT had a high sensitivity compared to PNI. NRI had a high specificity compared to PNI. This relatively high sensitivity and specificity resulted in 77.00% agreement between PNI and CONUT and 77.94% agreement between NRI and PNI. Further cohort studies will be needed to determine if the nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, NRI, PNI, and CONUT predicts the gastric cancer prognosis.

Purpose: With advances in surgical techniques, reduced-port laparoscopic surgery is increasingly being performed for the treatment of gastric carcinoma. Many studies have reported satisfactory short-term outcomes after reduced 3-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term oncological outcomes of 3-port LG in patients with gastric carcinoma. Materials and Methods: We reviewed the medical records of 1,117 patients who underwent LG for gastric carcinoma in three major institutions between 2012 and 2015. The data showed that 460 patients underwent 3-port LG without assistance, and 657 underwent conventional 5-port LG. We compared the overall and disease-free survival rates between the 2 groups. Results: There were 642 male and 475 female patients with a mean age of 56.1 years.Among them, 1,028 (92.0%) underwent distal gastrectomy and 89 (8.0%) underwent total gastrectomy. In the final pathologic examination, 1,027 patients (91.9%) were stage I, 73 (6.5%) were stage II, and 17 (1.5%) were stage III, and there were no significant difference in the pathologic stage between groups. The 3- and 5-port LG groups showed no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival (94.3% vs. 96.7%, P=0.138) or disease-free survival (94.3% vs. 95.9%, P=0.231). Stratified analyses according to pT and pN stages also showed no significant differences in overall or disease-free survival between the two groups. Conclusions Long-term survival after 3- and 5-port LG was comparable in patients with early-stage gastric carcinoma. The 3-port technique requiring limited surgical assistance may be an appropriate surgical option for this patient population.

Objectives: This study aimed to examine the characteristics of patients according to their nutritional status as assessed by five nutritional screening tools: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), NUTRISCORE, Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) and to compare the agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of these tools. Methods: A total of 952 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy and chemotherapy from January 2009 to December 2012 at the Samsung Medical Center were included. We categorized patients into malnourished and normal according to the five nutritional screening tools 1 month after surgery and compared their characteristics. We also calculated the Spearman partial correlation, Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of each pair of screening tools. Results: We observed 86.24% malnutrition based on the PG-SGA and 85.82% based on the NUTRISCORE among gastric cancer patients in our study. When we applied NRI or CONUT, however, the malnutrition levels were less than 30%. Patients with malnutrition as assessed by the PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, or NRI had lower intakes of energy and protein compared to normal patients. When NRI, PNI, or CONUT were used to identify malnutrition, lower levels of albumin, hemoglobin, total lymphocyte count, total cholesterol, and longer postoperative hospital stays were observed among patients with malnutrition compared to those without malnutrition. We found relatively high agreement between PG-SGA and NUTRISCORE; sensitivity was 90.86% and AUC was 0.78. When we compared NRI and PNI, sensitivity was 99.64% and AUC was 0.97. AUC ranged from 0.50 to 0.67 for comparisons between CONUT and each of the other nutritional screening tools. Conclusions Our study suggests that PG-SGA and NRI have a relatively high agreement with the NUTRISCORE and PNI, respectively. Further cohort studies are needed to examine whether the nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, NRI, PNI, and CONUT predicts the gastric cancer prognosis.

Objectives: This study aimed to examine the characteristics of patients according to their nutritional status as assessed by five nutritional screening tools: Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA), NUTRISCORE, Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) and to compare the agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of these tools. Methods: A total of 952 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy and chemotherapy from January 2009 to December 2012 at the Samsung Medical Center were included. We categorized patients into malnourished and normal according to the five nutritional screening tools 1 month after surgery and compared their characteristics. We also calculated the Spearman partial correlation, Cohen’s Kappa coefficient, the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of each pair of screening tools. Results: We observed 86.24% malnutrition based on the PG-SGA and 85.82% based on the NUTRISCORE among gastric cancer patients in our study. When we applied NRI or CONUT, however, the malnutrition levels were less than 30%. Patients with malnutrition as assessed by the PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, or NRI had lower intakes of energy and protein compared to normal patients. When NRI, PNI, or CONUT were used to identify malnutrition, lower levels of albumin, hemoglobin, total lymphocyte count, total cholesterol, and longer postoperative hospital stays were observed among patients with malnutrition compared to those without malnutrition. We found relatively high agreement between PG-SGA and NUTRISCORE; sensitivity was 90.86% and AUC was 0.78. When we compared NRI and PNI, sensitivity was 99.64% and AUC was 0.97. AUC ranged from 0.50 to 0.67 for comparisons between CONUT and each of the other nutritional screening tools. Conclusions Our study suggests that PG-SGA and NRI have a relatively high agreement with the NUTRISCORE and PNI, respectively. Further cohort studies are needed to examine whether the nutritional status assessed by PG-SGA, NUTRISCORE, NRI, PNI, and CONUT predicts the gastric cancer prognosis.

Purpose: Splenectomy for patients with remnant gastric cancer has been controversial. The purpose of this study is to identify the impact of splenectomy in the treatment of remnant gastric cancer. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 285 patients with remnant gastric cancer who underwent completion total gastrectomy with or without splenectomy in Samsung Medical Center, between September 1996 and December 2017. We used a 1:1 propensity score matching method for the analysis. The matching factors were age, sex, and pathologic stage. After the matching process, we compared the 5-year overall survival (OS) and the disease-free survival (DFS) between patients with and without splenectomy during completion total gastrectomy. Results: The median duration of follow-up was 58.0 months (range, 0–132 months). After propensity score matching, there were no statistically significant differences between the splenectomy group (n = 77) and no splenectomy group (n = 77) in terms of clinicopathological features. The 5-year OS rate between the no splenectomy and splenectomy group were not significantly different. There was no significant difference between 5-year DFS of the matched groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that splenectomy is not a significant prognostic factor in terms of 5-year OS (no splenectomy vs. splenectomy; 61.5% vs. 60.2%, P = 0.884) or DFS (74.9% vs. 69.8%, P = 0.880). Conclusion Splenectomy has no impact on the OS and DFS in patients with remnant gastric cancer. Splenectomy during completion total gastrectomy may not be necessary.

no abstract available.

Purpose: High microsatellite instability (MSI) is related to good prognosis in gastric cancer. We aimed to identify the prognostic factors of patients with recurrent gastric cancer and investigate the role of MSI as a prognostic and predictive biomarker of survival after tumor recurrence. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients treated for stage II/III gastric cancer who developed tumor recurrence and in whom the MSI status or mismatch repair (MMR) status of the tumor was known. MSI status and the expression of MMR proteins were evaluated using polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemical analysis, respectively. Results: Of the 790 patients included, 64 (8.1%) had high MSI status or MMR deficiency. The tumor-node-metastasis stage, type of recurrence, Lauren classification, chemotherapy after recurrence, and interval to recurrence were independently associated with survival after tumor recurrence. The MSI/MMR status and receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were not associated with survival after recurrence. In a subgroup analysis of patients with high MSI or MMR-deficient gastric cancer, those who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy had better treatment response to chemotherapy after recurrence than those who received adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusion Patients with high MSI/MMR-deficient gastric cancer should be spared from adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery, but aggressive chemotherapy after recurrence should be considered. Higher tumor-node-metastasis stage, Lauren classification, interval to recurrence, and type of recurrence are associated with survival after tumor recurrence and should thus be considered when establishing a treatment plan and designing clinical trials targeting recurrent gastric cancer.

PURPOSE: Preoperative endoscopic clipping is a popular method in identifying the location of tumors during total laparoscopic or robotic gastrectomy. We investigated the usefulness of additional intraoperative abdominal radiographs to identify the location of clips.METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 331 patients with early gastric cancer who underwent endoscopic clipping before total laparoscopic or robotic gastrectomy between September 2012 and September 2018. Endoscopists applied two clips 1 cm from the proximal aspect of the upper margin of the tumor which was located above the angle of the stomach. We compared outcomes of patients who underwent preoperative abdominal radiographs only (group A) and those who underwent additional abdominal radiographs (group B).RESULTS: Of the total patients, 80 (24.2%) underwent additional intraoperative abdominal radiographs. The rates of positive frozen biopsy in the two groups were not significantly different (group A vs. group B: 2.8% vs. 3.8%, P=0.456). The additional resection rate was significantly higher in group B compared to group A (8.8% vs. 2.8%, P=0.048). The mean distance from the tumor was 3.3 cm (±2.4) in group A and 2.4 cm (±1.3) in group B (P<0.001). Large tumor size (≥2.4 cm) was significantly associated with additional resection (odds ratio, 5.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.17–26.30; P=0.031).CONCLUSION: Additional intraoperative abdominal radiographs may be unnecessary for confirmation of proximal resection margin, if the resection line can be predetermined with preoperative abdominal radiographs. For large tumors, to avoid additional resection, the resection line should be placed 1 cm or more proximally from the preoperatively applied clips.
Biopsy ; Gastrectomy ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach ; Stomach Neoplasms

BACKGROUND: Billroth I anastomosis is one of the most common reconstruction methods after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Intracorporeal Billroth I (ICBI) anastomosis and extracorporeal Billroth I (ECBI) anastomosis are widely used in laparoscopic surgery. Here we compared ICBI and ECBI outcomes at a major gastric cancer center. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 2,284 gastric cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy between 2009 and 2017. We divided the subjects into ECBI (n=1,681) and ICBI (n=603) groups, compared the patients’ clinical characteristics and surgical and short-term outcomes, and performed risk factor analyses of postoperative complication development. RESULTS: The ICBI group experienced shorter operation times, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stays than the ECBI group. There were no clinically significant intergroup differences in diet initiation. Changes in white blood cell counts and C-reactive protein levels were similar between groups. Grade II–IV surgical complication rates were 2.7% and 4.0% in the ECBI and ICBI groups, respectively, with no significant intergroup differences. Male sex and a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 were independent risk factors for surgical complication development. In the ECBI group, patients with a BMI ≥30 experienced a significantly higher surgical complication rate than those with a lower BMI, while no such difference was observed in the ICBI group. CONCLUSION: The surgical safety of ICBI was similar to that of ECBI. Although the chosen anastomotic technique was not a risk factor for surgical complications, ECBI was more vulnerable to surgical complications than ICBI in patients with a high BMI (≥30).
Body Mass Index ; C-Reactive Protein ; Diet ; Gastrectomy ; Gastroenterostomy ; Humans ; Intraoperative Complications ; Laparoscopy ; Length of Stay ; Leukocyte Count ; Male ; Postoperative Complications ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Stomach Neoplasms