K Ludwig1, D Möller2, J Bernhardt2. 1. Klinik für Allgemein‑, Viszeral, Thorax- und Gefäßchirurgie, Klinikum Südstadt Rostock, Südring 81, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland. kaja.ludwig@kliniksued-rostock.de. 2. Klinik für Allgemein‑, Viszeral, Thorax- und Gefäßchirurgie, Klinikum Südstadt Rostock, Südring 81, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the last decade the implementation of the new technique of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and the rapid progression of laparoscopic gastric cancer (LAG) resection with an adequate lymphadenectomy (LAD) have played an increasing role in the treatment of patients with early stage gastric cancer (EGC). OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the currently available data in the literature was carried out to evaluate the contemporary surgical management for treatment of EGC. RESULTS: Endoscopic resection (ER) of mucosal T1 gastric cancer (T1m) in accordance with the German guidelines on resection criteria is a widely accepted treatment option, if a definitive R0 resection can be achieved. Excellent en bloc and R0 results in more than 90% of these cases have been shown particularly for ESD. In contrast to T1m gastric carcinomas with a low risk of lymph node metastases (approximately 3%), nodal involvement reaches more than 20% for submucosal infiltrated EGC (T1sm). For this reason, a surgical resection with adequate LAD is further recommended in all cases of non-curative ER or any T1sm gastric cancer. In seven randomized controlled trials and a series of meta-analyses including high-quality non-randomized trials, significant benefits in short-term postoperative outcome have been demonstrated for LAG in comparison to open gastrectomy (OG) in the treatment of EGC. The general morbidity was also significantly lower in LAG than in OG. The 30-day mortality and long-term survival outcome were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The use of ESD should be the standard treatment for T1m EGC within the guidelines criteria. For non-curative ESD and T1sm gastric cancer, surgical resection with LAD is recommended. The LAG is a technically safe, feasible, and favorable approach in terms of faster recovery compared to OG. The long-term survival outcome is comparable between LAG and OG for EGC.
BACKGROUND: In the last decade the implementation of the new technique of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and the rapid progression of laparoscopic gastric cancer (LAG) resection with an adequate lymphadenectomy (LAD) have played an increasing role in the treatment of patients with early stage gastric cancer (EGC). OBJECTIVE: A systematic review of the currently available data in the literature was carried out to evaluate the contemporary surgical management for treatment of EGC. RESULTS: Endoscopic resection (ER) of mucosal T1 gastric cancer (T1m) in accordance with the German guidelines on resection criteria is a widely accepted treatment option, if a definitive R0 resection can be achieved. Excellent en bloc and R0 results in more than 90% of these cases have been shown particularly for ESD. In contrast to T1m gastric carcinomas with a low risk of lymph node metastases (approximately 3%), nodal involvement reaches more than 20% for submucosal infiltrated EGC (T1sm). For this reason, a surgical resection with adequate LAD is further recommended in all cases of non-curative ER or any T1sm gastric cancer. In seven randomized controlled trials and a series of meta-analyses including high-quality non-randomized trials, significant benefits in short-term postoperative outcome have been demonstrated for LAG in comparison to open gastrectomy (OG) in the treatment of EGC. The general morbidity was also significantly lower in LAG than in OG. The 30-day mortality and long-term survival outcome were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The use of ESD should be the standard treatment for T1m EGC within the guidelines criteria. For non-curative ESD and T1sm gastric cancer, surgical resection with LAD is recommended. The LAG is a technically safe, feasible, and favorable approach in terms of faster recovery compared to OG. The long-term survival outcome is comparable between LAG and OG for EGC.