Giovanna Sgarzini

In Brief Objective: The aim of this study was to compare technical feasibility and both early and 5-year clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted and open radical subtotal gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer. Summary Background Data: The role of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer has not yet been defined, and many doubts remain about the ability to satisfy all the oncologic criteria met during conventional, open surgery. Methods: This study was designed as a prospective, randomized clinical trial with a total of 59 patients. Twenty-nine (49.1%) patients were randomized to undergo open subtotal gastrectomy (OG), while 30 (50.9%) patients were randomized to the laparoscopic group (LG). Demographics, ASA status, pTNM stage, histologic type of the tumor, number of resected lymph nodes, postoperative complications, and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were studied to assess outcome differences between the groups. Results: The demographics, preoperative data, and characteristics of the tumor were similar. The mean number of resected lymph nodes was 33.4 ± 17.4 in the OG group and 30.0 ± 14.9 in the LG (P = not significant). Operative mortality rates were 6.7% (2 patients) in the OG and 3.3% (1 patient) in the LG (P = not significant); morbidity rates were 27.6% and 26.7%, respectively (P = not significant). Five-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 55.7% and 54.8% and 58.9% and 57.3% in the OG and the LG, respectively (P = not significant). Conclusions: Laparoscopic radical subtotal gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer is a feasible and safe oncologic procedure with short- and long-term results similar to those obtained with an open approach. Additional benefits for the LG were reduced blood loss, shorter time to resumption of oral intake, and earlier discharge from hospital. This randomized study compared the technical feasibility and 5-year outcomes of laparoscopic and open subtotal gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy showed mortality and morbidity rates and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates similar to those of the open approach and is a feasible and safe oncologic procedure.

BACKGROUND: A retrospective study was conducted to determine incidence and predisposing factors of incisional hernia after an emergency midline laparotomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study population consisted in 197 patients of whom 138 were followed-up for 2 years after surgery. RESULTS: An incisional hernia developed in 25 (18.1%) patients at a mean follow-up of 11.2 months. Multivariate analysis showed the importance of age (> 60 years, p < 0.004), obesity (p < 0.008) and occurrence of post-operative wound infection (p < 0.00001) for the development of an incisional hernia. Univariate analysis showed that intestinal occlusion (p < 0.02), peritonitis (p < 0.006), upper abdominal access (p < 0.04) and post-operative wound infection (p < 0.003) in older patients and obesity (p < 0.003) and the presence of a neoplasm (p < 0.006) in younger patients, played a significant role. The comparison between young and old patients showed that upper abdominal access (p < 0.007), interrupted and layered wound closure (p < 0.02 and p < 0.01, respectively) and contamination of the operative field (p < 0.004) played a statistically significant role in older patients. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of incisional hernia after an emergency midline laparotomy is higher than after elective procedures. However, it could be reduced with proper attention to the suture technique, i.e. mass and continuous suture, better preparation of the operative field and scrupulous sterility throughout the procedure in order to decrease the incidence of post-operative wound infection.