Lymph node (LN) metastasis is the most common form of metastasis in gastric cancer (GC). The status and stage of LN metastasis are important indicators that reflect the progress of GC. The number of LN metastases is still the most effective index to evaluate the prognosis of patients in all stages of LN metastasis. Examined LN (ELN) count refers to the number of LNs harvested from specimens by curative gastrectomy for pathological examination. This review summarizes the factors that influence ELN count, including individual and tumor factors, intraoperative dissection factors, postoperative sorting factors, and pathological examination factors. Different ELN counts will lead to prognosis-related stage migration. Fine LN sorting and regional LN sorting are the two most important LN sorting technologies. The most direct and effective way to harvest a large number of LNs is for surgeons to perform in vitro fine LN sorting.

Variation in the approach, radicality, and quality of gastroesophageal surgery impacts patient outcomes. Pathological outcomes such as lymph node yield are routinely used as surrogate markers of surgical quality, but are subject to significant variations in histopathological evaluation and reporting. A multi-society consensus group was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations for the standardized assessment of gastroesophageal cancer specimens.

A consensus group comprised of surgeons, pathologists, and oncologists was convened on behalf of the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain & Ireland. Literature was reviewed for 17 key questions. Draft recommendations were voted upon via an anonymous Delphi process. Consensus was considered achieved where >70% of participants were in agreement.

Consensus was achieved on 18 statements for all 17 questions. Twelve strong recommendations regarding preparation and assessment of lymph nodes, margins, and reporting methods were made. Importantly, there was 100% agreement that the all specimens should be reported using the Royal College of Pathologists Guidelines as the minimum acceptable dataset. In addition, two weak recommendations regarding method and duration of specimen fixation were made. Four topics lacked sufficient evidence and no recommendation was made.

These consensus recommendations provide explicit guidance for gastroesophageal cancer specimen preparation and assessment, to provide maximum benefit for patient care and standardize reporting to allow benchmarking and improvement of surgical quality.

In 2016, Kaiser Permanente Northern California regionalized gastric cancer care, introducing a regional comprehensive multidisciplinary care team, standardizing staging and chemotherapy, and implementing laparoscopic gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy for patients eligible for curative-intent surgery. This study evaluated the effect of regionalization on outcomes.

The retrospective cohort study included gastric cancer cases diagnosed from January 2010 to May 2018. Information was obtained from the electronic medical record, cancer registry, state vital statistics, and chart review. Overall survival was compared in patients with all stages of disease, stage I-III disease, and curative-intent gastrectomy patients using annual inception cohorts. For the latter, the surgical approach and surgical outcomes were also compared.

Among 1,429 eligible patients with gastric cancer with all stages of disease, one third were treated after regionalization, 650 had stage I-III disease, and 394 underwent curative-intent surgery. Among surgical patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy utilization increased from 35% to 66% (P < .0001), laparoscopic gastrectomy increased from 18% to 92% (P < .0001), and D2 lymphadenectomy increased from 2% to 80% (P < .0001). Dissection of ≥ 15 lymph nodes increased from 61% to 95% (P < .0001). Surgical complication rates did not appear to increase after regionalization. Length of hospitalization decreased from 7 to 3 days (P < .001). Overall survival at 2 years was as follows: all stages, 32.8% pre and 37.3% post (P = .20); stage I-III cases with or without surgery, 55.6% and 61.1%, respectively (P = .25); and among surgery patients, 72.7% and 85.5%, respectively (P < .03).

Regionalization of gastric cancer care within an integrated system allowed comprehensive multidisciplinary care, conversion to laparoscopic gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy, increased overall survival among surgery patients, and no increase in surgical complications.

Despite multiple clinical trials and practice guidelines for the treatment of gastric cancer, oncologic outcomes have not improved in the United States. One potential reason could be differences in the quality of surgery as performed in a controlled trial versus in practice.

Using the National Cancer Database, rates of adherence with operative standards for gastrectomy for cancer were analyzed. Of the numerous evidence-based operative standards outlined in the manual, two were reliably measured in the NCDB: (1) achieving and R0 resection, and (2) having > 16 lymph nodes examined. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling and logistic regression were performed.

A total of 28,705 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent gastrectomy during 2004-2014 were identified. Only 36.5% of stage 0/I patients, and 41.8% of stage II/III patients, met minimum standards. Predictors for meeting standards included age < 65, fewer comorbidities, Asian/Pacific Islander race, and treatment at academic and high-volume centers. Patients who met standards had longer OS (stage 0/I: 104.9 versus 66.6 months; stage II/III: 40.6 versus 26.0 months; p < 0.001 for both). Meeting standards was a significant predictor for improved OS for both stage 0/I and II/III patients (HR = 0.665 and HR = 0.747, respectively, p < 0.001 for both).

For standards that are measurable in the NCDB, adherence is poor. Improved adherence with operative standards may improve survival for gastric cancer patients in the U.S. There is a need for better measuring of, and adherence with, operative standards in gastrectomy for cancer.

The different advantages of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and robotic gastrectomy (RG), two new minimally invasive surgical techniques for gastric cancer, remain controversial.

To compare the short-term clinical outcomes of LG and RG.

A retrospective, single-center comparative study of 1044 patients (LG = 750, RG = 294) was conducted. Patients undergoing LG and RG were matched (2:1 ratio) according to sex, age, BMI, extent of gastric resection, and pathologic stage. The primary outcomes were morbidity and mortality and perioperative recovery parameters; major types of complications were also analyzed.

After matching, 798 patients (LG = 532, RG = 266) were included. Both the LG and RG groups showed similar overall complication rates (LG = 12.8% vs RG = 12.4%) and operative mortality (LG = 0.4% vs RG = 0.4%). Compared to those who underwent LG, patients undergoing RG had significantly longer operative times (236.92 ± 57.28 vs 217.77 ± 65.00 min, p < 0.001), higher total costs (US$16,241.42 vs US$12,497, p < 0.001), less operative blood loss (77.07 ± 64.37 vs 103.68 ± 86.92 ml, p < 0.001), higher numbers of retrieved lymph nodes (32.0 vs 29.9, p < 0.001), and higher rates of retrieving more than 16 lymph nodes (94.0 vs 85.5%; p < 0.001). No significant differences between groups were noted in terms of the rate of reoperation, time until a soft diet was consumed, or length of hospital stay. The major complication and readmission rates were similar in both groups.

RG and LG produced similar short-term clinical outcomes, indicating that RG is a safe and beneficial surgical procedure.

This report discusses the technique of solo single-incision pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (SIPPG) for early gastric cancer. To overcome difficulties regarding lymph node dissection (LND), a scope holder and an energy device were used, allowing fine dissection in a fixed field of view. The overlap gastro-gastrostomy technique was used for anastomosis. Seventeen patients underwent solo SIPGG. The mean operation time was 150.1 ± 28.7 min, and no patients developed postoperative complications or delayed gastric emptying within 30 days of the operation. Using scope holders and performing fine dissection with the energy device, challenges regarding LND in SIPPG can be overcome. INTACT anastomosis was initially used; however, due to its inconsistency and the high degree of surgical skill required, it was changed to the overlap method. Solo SIPPG with overlap gastro-gastrostomy may be safe and feasible with good cosmetic results and fast patient recovery.

The aim of this study was to compare gastric cancer (GC) patients aged 80 years or older undergoing gastrectomy at two high-volume cancer centers in the US and China.

Patients aged ≥ 80 years who underwent R0 resection at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in New York, USA (n = 159), and Fujian Medical University Union Hospital (FMUUH) in Fujian, China (n = 118) from January 2000 to December 2013 were included. Demographic, surgical, and pathologic variables were compared, and factors associated with survival were determined via multivariate analysis.

The number of patients increased annually in the FMUUH cohort but not in the MSKCC cohort. Patients at MSKCC were slightly older (mean age 83.7 vs. 82.7 years), more commonly female (38 vs. 19%), and had higher average body mass index (BMI; 26 vs. 23). Treatment at FMUUH more frequently employed total gastrectomy (59 vs. 20%) and laparoscopic surgery (65 vs. 7%), and less frequently included adjuvant therapy (11 vs. 18%). In addition, FMUUH patients had larger tumors of more advanced T, N, and TNM stage. Morbidity (35 vs. 25%, p = 0.08) and 30-day mortality (2.5 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.67) were similar between the cohorts. For each TNM stage, there was no significant difference between MSKCC and FMUUH patients in 5-year overall survival and disease-specific survival (DSS). TNM stage was the only independent predictor of DSS for both cohorts.

Patients ≥ 80 years of age selected for gastrectomy for GC at MSKCC and FMUUH had acceptable morbidity and mortality, and DSS was primarily dependent on TNM stage.

Dissection of lymph nodes (LN) immediately after esophagectomy is utilized by some surgeons to aid determination of LN stations involved in esophageal cancer. Some suggest that this increases LN yield and gives information regarding the pattern of lymphatic spread, others feel that this may compromise a circumferential resection margin (CRM) assessment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of ex vivo dissection on the assessment of the CRM and the pattern of lymph node dissemination in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) undergoing radical surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and their prognostic impact. Data from consecutive patients with potentially curable adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and GEJ who received neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery were analyzed. Clinical and pathological findings were reviewed and LN burden and location correlated with clinical outcome. Pathology specimens were dissected into individual LN groups 'ex-vivo' by the surgeon. A total of 301 patients were included: 295 had a radical proximal and distal resection margin however in 62(20.6%) CRM could not be assessed. A median of 33(10-77) nodes were recovered. A 117(38.9%) patients were ypN0 while 184(61.1%) were LN positive (ypN1-N3). LN stations close to the tumor were most frequently involved. Twenty-seven (14.7%) patients had only thoracic stations involved, 48(26.1%) only abdominal stations and 109 (59.2%) had both. Median survival for yN0 patients was 171 months compared to 24 months for those LN positive (P< 0.001). Multivariate analyses identified ypT-category, ypN-category, male gender, and nonradical resection (proximal or distal) margin as significant prognostic factors. Surgical dissection of nodes after esophagectomy enables accurate LN assessment, but may compromise CRM assessment in up to 20% of cases. It also provides valuable information regarding the pattern of nodal spread.

In contrast to the significant advantages of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy has shown little benefit over laparoscopic gastrectomy. This study aimed to compare multi-dimensional aspects of surgical outcomes after open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy.

Data from 915 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy by one surgeon between March 2009 and May 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative parameters were analyzed for short-term outcomes. Surgical success was defined as the absence of conversion to open surgery, major complications, readmission, positive resection margin, or fewer than 16 retrieved lymph nodes.

This study investigated 241 patients undergoing open gastrectomy, 511 patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 173 patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. For each approach, the respective incidences were as follows: conversion to open surgery (not applicable, 0.4%, and 0%; p = 0.444), in-hospital major complications (5.8, 2.7, and 1.2%; p = 0.020), delayed complications requiring readmission (2.9, 2.0, and 1.2%; p = 0.453), positive resection margin (1.7, 0, and 0%; p = 0.003), and inadequate number of retrieved lymph nodes (0.4, 4.1, and 1.7%; p = 0.010). Compared with open and laparoscopic surgery, robotic gastrectomy had the highest surgical success rate (90, 90.8, and 96.0%). Learning-curve analysis of success using cumulative sum plots showed success with the robotic approach from the start. Multivariate analyses identified age, sex, and gastrectomy extent as significant independent parameters affecting surgical success. Surgical approach was not a contributing factor.

Open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy exhibited different incidences and causes of surgical failure. Robotic gastrectomy produced the best surgical outcomes, although the approach method itself was not an independent factor for success.

Variability in surgical and pathological techniques in Western centers may lead to inconsistency in lymph node staging in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. We hypothesize that ex vivo dissection (EVD) after gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma increases lymph node yield.

We retrospectively reviewed 222 consecutive patients who underwent gastrectomy with curative intent for adenocarcinoma between November 2010 and June 2014. In August of 2012, we began performing EVD of nodes in surgical specimens (EVD group, N = 111), as opposed to submitting specimens en bloc with lymph node basins attached to the specimen (No EVD group, N = 111). Primary end point was lymph node yield.

The median number of lymph nodes procured was significantly higher in the EVD compared to that in the No EVD group (30 vs. 21 lymph nodes, respectively; P < 0.0001). Moreover, 28% of the No EVD group were not adequately staged (defined by ≤15 nodes), compared to 5% of the EVD group (P < 0.0001). Stage-for-stage overall survival was not significantly different.

EVD may be a useful tool to maximize lymph node yield. However, this had no impact on staging or survival. This is an interesting finding that warrants further investigation.

Examination of at least 16 lymph nodes (LNs) has been traditionally recommended during gastric adenocarcinoma resection to optimize staging, but the impact of this strategy on survival is uncertain. Because recent randomized trials have demonstrated a therapeutic benefit from extended lymphadenectomy, we sought to investigate the impact of the number of LNs removed on prognosis after gastric adenocarcinoma resection.

We analyzed patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma from 2000 to 2012, at 7 US academic institutions. Patients with M1 disease or R2 resections were excluded. Disease-specific survival (DSS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using log-rank and Cox regression analyses.

Of 742 patients, 257 (35%) had 7 to 15 LNs removed and 485 (65%) had ≥16 LNs removed. Disease-specific survival was not significantly longer after removal of ≥16 vs 7 to 15 LNs (10-year survival, 55% vs 47%, respectively; p = 0.53) for the entire cohort, but was significantly improved in the subset of patients with stage IA to IIIA (10-year survival, 74% vs 57%, respectively; p = 0.018) or N0-2 disease (72% vs 55%, respectively; p = 0.023). Similarly, for patients who were classified to more likely be "true N0-2," based on frequentist analysis incorporating both the number of positive and of total LNs removed, the hazard ratio for disease-related death (adjusted for T stage, R status, grade, receipt of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, and institution) significantly decreased as the number of LNs removed increased.

The number of LNs removed during gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma appears itself to have prognostic implications for long-term survival.

Although D2 lymphadenectomy has been shown to improve outcomes in gastric cancer, it may increase postoperative morbidity, mainly owing to splenopancreatic complications. In addition, the effects of nodal dissection along the proper hepatic artery have not been extensively elucidated. We hypothesized that modified D2 (ie, D1+) lymphadenectomy may decrease surgical risks without impairing oncologic adequacy.

Patients with node-positive gastric cancer undergoing curative total gastrectomy were intraoperatively randomized to D1+ (group 1, 36 patients) or standard D2 lymphadenectomy (group 2, 37 patients), the latter including splenectomy and nodal group 12a. The index of estimated benefit was used to assess the efficacy of dissection of each nodal station. The primary endpoint for oncologic adequacy was the disease-free survival (DFS) rate.

Surgical complications were significantly more common in group 2, which also included 2 postoperative deaths. Overall, 35 patients (49%) experienced tumor recurrence. The primary site of tumor relapse and the 5-year DFS rate were not different between the 2 groups. Involvement of the second nodal level was associated with a worse DFS rate; however, patients undergoing more extensive lymphadenectomy did not show a better DFS rate. The incidence of involvement of nodal stations 10, 11d, and 12a was 5%, and the 5-year DFS rate was zero. Consequently, the benefit to dissect such lymph nodes was null.

These findings suggest that modified D2 lymphadenectomy confers the same oncologic adequacy as standard D2 lymphadenectomy, with a significant reduction of postoperative morbidity.

After much controversy, multimodality therapy is now accepted worldwide as the gold standard for treatment of resectable bulky localized gastric cancer. There is significant regional variation in the style of multimodality treatment with adjuvant chemoradiation the North American standard, neoadjuvant chemotherapy preferred in Europe and Australasia, whilst adjuvant chemotherapy is preferred in Asia. With further standardization of surgery and D1+/D2 resections increasingly accepted world wide, and in particular in the West, as the surgical standard of care for potentially curable disease, it is timely to reassess the multimodality regimes being used. The challenge in the use of multimodality therapy is how current outcomes can be standardized and improved further. Recent studies indicate that mere intensification of the regime in time, dosage or addition of further agents does not improve localized gastric cancer outcomes. More novel strategies including early commencement of adjuvant therapies, intra-peritoneal chemotherapy or assessing neoadjuvant response with positron emission tomography scanning may give improvements in outcomes. The introduction of targeted therapies means that the adjuvant use of biological agents needs to be explored. By proper assessment of the patient's co-morbidities, full tumour staging, and a better understanding of the tumour's molecular pathology, multimodality therapy for gastric adenocarcinoma may be individualized to optimize the likelihood of cure.

Much debate still exists regarding the appropriate extent of lymphadenectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. In high incidence countries in Eastern Asia, more extensive (e.g. D2) lymphadenectomies are standard, and these surgeries are generally done by experienced surgeons with low morbidity (<20 %) and mortality (<1 %). In United States and Western Europe, where the incidence of gastric adenocarcinoma is much lower, the majority of patients are treated at non-referral centers with less extensive (e.g. D1 or D0) lymphadenectomy. This symposium article first reviews early studies that led to recommendations for less extensive lymphadenectomy. Two large prospective, randomized trials performed in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands in the 1990s failed to demonstrate a survival benefit of D2 over D1 lymphadenectomy, but these trials have been criticized for inadequate surgical training and high surgical morbidity (43-46 %) and high mortality rates (10-13 %) in the D2 group. We then discuss more contemporary studies that support more extensive lymphadenectomy with a minimum of 16 lymph nodes for adequate staging. The 15-year follow-up of the Netherlands trial now demonstrates an improved disease-specific survival and locoregional recurrence in the D2 group. A prospective, randomized trial from Taiwan found a survival benefit of more extensive lymphadenectomies, and another randomized trial from Japan found adding dissection of para-aortic nodes to a D2 lymphadenectomy did not improve survival. Western surgeons have increasingly accepted the importance of performing more than a D1 node dissection, and Eastern surgeons are accepting that more than a D2 node dissection does not improve survival and increases morbidity. Thus both Eastern and Western approaches are favoring D2 lymphadenectomy as a standard, and on this topic we appear to be harmonizing.