Dataset Information

Gastrectomy with or without Complete Omentectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background and Objectives: Surgery remains the only possible curative treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Peritoneal metastases are estimated to occur in approximately 55-60% AGC patients. Greater omentum is the most common metastatic area in AGC. At present, omentectomy alone or bursectomy are usually carried out during gastric cancer surgery. We performed a meta-analysis in order to evaluate long-term and short-term outcomes among AGC patients, who have undergone radical gastrectomy with or without complete omentectomy (CO). Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan (Computer program) Version 5.4. Results: The eight included studies covered an approximately 20 years long study period (2000-2018). Almost all included studies were retrospective ones and originated from Asian countries. Meta-analysis indicated gastrectomy without CO as significantly associated with longer 3-year (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.90-0.98, p = 0.005) and 5-year overall survivals (OS) (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.88-0.98, p = 0.007). Moreover, we found longer operative time (MD: 24.00, 95% CI: -0.45-48.45, p = 0.05) and higher estimated blood loss (MD: 194.76, 95% CI: 96.40-293.13, p = 0.0001) in CO group. Conclusions: Non-complete omentectomy (NCO) group had a statistically greater rate in 3-year and 5-year OSs than the CO group, while the CO group had significantly longer operative time and higher estimated blood loss than the NCO group. Further randomized, possibly multi-center trials may turn out of paramount importance in confirming our results.

SUBMITTER: Zizzo M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9503724 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gastrectomy with or without Complete Omentectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Zizzo Maurizio M Zanelli Magda M Sanguedolce Francesca F Palicelli Andrea A Ascani Stefano S Morini Andrea A Tumiati David D Mereu Federica F Zuliani Antonia Lavinia AL Nardecchia Melissa M Gatto Francesca F Zanni Manuel M Giunta Alessandro A

Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) 20220907 9

<i>Background and Objectives</i>: Surgery remains the only possible curative treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Peritoneal metastases are estimated to occur in approximately 55-60% AGC patients. Greater omentum is the most common metastatic area in AGC. At present, omentectomy alone or bursectomy are usually carried out during gastric cancer surgery. We performed a meta-analysis in order to evaluate long-term and short-term outcomes among AGC patients, who have undergone radical gastre ...[more]

PMID: 36143918

Similar Datasets

Project description:To conduct a meta-analysis comparing laparoscopic (LGD2) and open D2 gastrectomies (OGD2) for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC).Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs comparing LGD2 with OGD2 for AGC treatment, published between 1 January 2000 and 12 January 2013, were identified in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Primary endpoints included operative outcomes (operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and conversion rate), postoperative outcomes (postoperative analgesic consumption, time to first ambulation, time to first flatus, time to first oral intake, postoperative hospital stay length, postoperative morbidity, incidence of reoperation, and postoperative mortality), and oncologic outcomes (the number of lymph nodes harvested, tumor recurrence and metastasis, disease-free rates, and overall survival rates). The Cochrane Collaboration tools and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality and risk of bias of RCTs and non-RCTs in the study. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore the incidence rate of various postoperative morbidities as well as recurrence and metastasis patterns. A Begg's test was used to evaluate the publication bias.One RCT and 13 non-RCTs totaling 2596 patients were included in the meta-analysis. LGD2 in comparison to OGD2 showed lower intraoperative blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -137.87 mL, 95%CI: -164.41--111.33; P < 0.01], lower analgesic consumption (WMD = -1.94, 95%CI: -2.50--1.38; P < 0.01), shorter times to first ambulation (WMD = -1.03 d, 95%CI: -1.90--0.16; P < 0.05), flatus (WMD = -0.98 d, 95%CI: -1.30--0.66; P < 0.01), and oral intake (WMD = -0.85 d, 95%CI: -1.67--0.03; P < 0.05), shorter hospitalization (WMD = -3.08 d, 95%CI: -4.38--1.78; P < 0.01), and lower postoperative morbidity (odds ratio = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.61-0.99; P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between LGD2 and OGD2 for the following criteria: reoperation incidence, postoperative mortality, number of harvested lymph nodes, tumor recurrence/metastasis, or three- or five-year disease-free and overall survival rates. However, LGD2 had longer operative times (WMD = 57.06 min, 95%CI: 41.87-72.25; P < 0.01).Although a technically demanding and time-consuming procedure, LGD2 may be safe and effective, and offer some advantages over OGD2 for treatment of locally AGC.

Project description:BackgroundWe performed a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of complete omentectomy (CO) in patients undergoing radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.MethodsWe conducted a literature search in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases for clinical research that compared CO with non-complete omentectomy (NCO). These articles were published prior to April 2021. Overall survival (OS) rates, relapse-free survival (RFS) rates, recurrence rates, operation times, estimates of blood loss, numbers of harvested lymph nodes, complications, and lengths of hospital stays were compared using relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs). RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis.ResultsNine studies that included 3329 patients (1960 in the CO group) and 1369 in the NCO group comprised the analysis. The meta-analysis showed that CO was associated with a decreased 3-year OS rate (RR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98, P = 0.005) and 5-year OS rate (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.98, P = 0.007). However, it was not associated with the 3-year RFS rate (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.90-1.04, P = 0.44), 5-year RFS (RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.90-1.06, P = 0.60), or recurrence rate (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.95-1.45, P = 0.15) compared to the NCO group. For surgical-related outcomes, significant heterogeneity existed between the studies. Compared to the NCO group, CO was found to be associated with significantly more estimated blood loss (WMD = 250.90, 95% CI 105.90-396.28, P = 0.0007) and less harvested lymph nodes (WMD = - 3.59, 95% CI - 6.88, - 0.29, P = 0.03). Although, there was no significant difference in the surgical time (WMD = 15.93, 95% CI - 0.21, 32.07, P = 0.05). No statistically significant differences were observed in the rates of overall (P = 0.79) and major complications (P = 0.90), or the lengths of hospital stays (P = 0.11) between the two groups.ConclusionsBased on the available evidence, CO is not superior to NCO in terms of survival. CO is not recommended as a routine surgery for gastric cancer. Future well-designed high-quality RCTs are warranted.

Project description:Background: Advanced gastric cancer is the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Patients with metastatic advanced gastric cancer commonly develop a gastric outlet obstruction that considerably worsens their quality of life. Surgical interventions such as gastrojejunostomy and palliative gastrectomy are commonly administered to alleviate this obstruction. However, whether one intervention is better than another at improving morbidity- and mortality-related outcomes is unclear. Thus, in this meta-analysis, we compare outcomes of palliative gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy (overall hospital stay length, time to oral intake, survival, and complication rates) in patients with metastatic advanced gastric cancer to identify the best procedure. Objective: To compare morbidity and mortality outcomes of palliative gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy in patients with metastatic advanced gastric cancer. Methods: We followed the PRISMA guidelines to systematically search Web of Science, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and MEDLINE for relevant studies. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to find differential outcomes between palliative gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy among variables such as time to oral intake, overall hospital stay length, complication rates, and survival in patients with metastatic advanced gastric cancer. Results: From 963 studies, we found 7 eligible studies with 642 patients (70.3 ± 4.7 years) who had undergone palliative gastrectomy or gastrojejunostomy. Our meta-analysis revealed an insignificant (p > 0.05) differences in terms of overall survival duration (Hedge's g, 1.22), complication risks (odds ratio, 1.35), and time to oral intake (g, 0.62) and hospital stay length (g, 0.12) between patients undergoing gastrojejunostomy and palliative gastrectomy. Conclusion: In this present study we observed no statistically significant differences in terms of morbidity and mortality outcomes after palliative gastrectomy and gastrojejunostomy in patients with metastatic advanced gastric cancer. Therefore, no conclusions can be drawn for the variables evaluated. This study provides a preliminary overview of the risks associated with gastrojejunostomy and palliative gastrectomy to help gastroenterologists manage patients with metastatic advanced-stage gastric cancer.

Project description:BackgroundThe complete mesogastrium excision (CME) based on D2 radical gastrectomy is believed to significantly reduce the local-regional recurrence compared with D2 radical gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer, and it is widely used in China. This study aimed to explore whether D2 + CME is superior to D2 on surgical outcomes during gastrectomy from Chinese data.MethodsFeasible studies comparing the D2 + CME (D2 + CME group) and D2 (D2 group) published up to March 2020 are searched from electronic databases. The data showing surgical and complication outcomes are extracted to be pooled and analyzed.ResultsFourteen records including 1352 patients were included. The D2 + CME group had a shorter mean operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -16.72 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -26.56 to -6.87 min, P < 0.001), lower mean blood loss (WMD = -39.08 mL, 95% CI: -49.94 to -28.21 mL, P < 0.001), higher mean number of retrieved lymph nodes (WMD = 2.13, 95% CI: 0.58-3.67, P = 0.007), shorter time to first flatus (WMD = -0.31 d, 95% CI: -0.53 to - 0.10 d, P = 0.005), and postoperative hospital days (WMD = -1.09, 95% CI: -1.92 to -0.25, P = 0.010) than the D2 group. Subgroup analysis suggested that the advantages from the D2 + CME group were obvious in traditional open radical gastrectomy, proximal gastrectomy, and distal gastrectomy compared with D2 group. The evaluations of post-operative complications showed that the patients who underwent D2 + CME had a lower incidence of post-operative complications than the patients who underwent D2 surgery alone (relative risk [RR] = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.45-0.87, P = 0.003). The D2 radical gastrectomy plus CME improved 3-year overall survival (OS) (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.02-1.32, P = 0.020) and lowered the local recurrence rate (RR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.28-0.94, P = 0.030). The patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery or total gastrectomy had more significant advantages compared between D2 + CME and D2 groups in 3-year OS.ConclusionThe data from China show that D2 radical gastrectomy plus CME are reliable procedures and safety compared to D2 radical gastrectomy with faster recovery, lower risk, and better prognosis.

Dataset Information

Gastrectomy with or without Complete Omentectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Gastrectomy with or without Complete Omentectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets