RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) has been shown to be safe and feasible in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). However, it is unclear whether RG is equivalent to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), especially in the Western world. Our objective was to compare the outcomes of RG and LG in GC patients. METHODS: We reviewed all gastric adenocarcinoma patients who underwent curative gastrectomy by minimally invasive approach in our institution from 2009 to 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to reduce selection bias. DaVinci Si platform was used for RG. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients were eligible for inclusion (48 RG and 108 LG). Total gastrectomy was performed in 21.3% and 25% of cases in LG and RG, respectively. The frequency of stage pTNM II/III was 48.1%, and 54.2% in the LG and RG groups (p = 0.488). After PSM, 48 patients were matched in each group. LG and RG had a similar number of dissected lymph nodes (p = 0.759), operative time (p = 0.421), and hospital stay (p = 0.353). Blood loss was lower in the RG group (p = 0.042). The major postoperative complications rate was 16.7% for LG and 6.2% for RG (p = 0.109). The 30-day mortality rate was 2.1% and 0% for LG and RG, respectively (p = 1.0). There was no significant difference between the LG and RG groups for disease-free survival (79.6% vs. 61.2%, respectively; p = 0.155) and overall survival (75.9% vs. 65.7%, respectively; p = 0.422). CONCLUSION: RG had similar surgical and long-term outcomes compared to LG, with less blood loss observed in RG.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been shown to be a safe and feasible method in gastric cancer (GC) treatment. However, most studies are in Eastern cohorts and there is great interest in knowing whether the method can be used routinely, especially in the West. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the short-term surgical outcomes of D2-gastrectomy by RG versus open gastrectomy (OG). METHODS: Single-institution, open-label, non-inferiority, randomized clinical trial performed between 2015 and 2020. GC patients were randomized (1:1 allocation) to surgical treatment by RG or OG. Da Vinci Si platform was used. INCLUSION CRITERIA: gastric adenocarcinoma, stage cT2-4 cN0-1, potentially curative surgery, age 18-80 years, and ECOG performance status 0-1. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: emergency surgery and previous gastric or major abdominal surgery. Primary endpoint was short-term surgical outcomes. The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02292914). RESULTS: Of 65 randomized patients, 5 were excluded (3 palliatives, 1 obstruction and emergency surgery, and 1 for material shortage). Consequently, 31 and 29 patients were included for final analysis in the OG and RG groups, respectively. No differences were observed between groups regarding age, sex, BMI, comorbidities, ASA, and frequency of total gastrectomy. RG had similar mean number of harvested lymph nodes (p = 0.805), longer surgical time (p < 0.001), and less bleeding (p < 0.001) compared to OG. Postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and readmissions in 30 days were equivalent between OG and RG. CONCLUSIONS: RG reduces operative bleeding by more than 50%. The short-term outcomes were non-inferior to OG, although surgical time was longer in RG.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: : The II Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer of the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association BGCA (Part 1) was recently published. On this occasion, countless specialists working in the treatment of this disease expressed their opinion in the face of the statements presented. AIM: : To present the BGCA Guidelines (Part 2) regarding indications for surgical treatment, operative techniques, extension of resection and multimodal treatment. METHODS: To formulate these guidelines, the authors carried out an extensive and current review regarding each declaration present in the II Consensus, using the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases initially with the following descriptors: gastric cancer, gastrectomy, lymphadenectomy, multimodal treatment. In addition, each statement was classified according to the level of evidence and degree of recommendation. RESULTS: : Of the 43 statements present in this study, 11 (25,6%) were classified with level of evidence A, 20 (46,5%) B and 12 (27,9%) C. Regarding the degree of recommendation, 18 (41,9%) statements obtained grade of recommendation 1, 14 (32,6%) 2a, 10 (23,3%) 2b e one (2,3%) 3. CONCLUSION: : The guidelines complement of the guidelines presented here allows surgeons and oncologists who work to combat gastric cancer to offer the best possible treatment, according to the local conditions available.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Trocars position for the Si model (position is similar for the Xi, although trocars stay more in line). Robotic gastrectomy is gaining popularity worldwide. It allows reduced blood loss and lesser pain. However, it widespread use is limited by the extensive learning curve and costs. AIM: To describe our standard technique with reduced use of robotic instruments. METHODS: We detail the steps involved in the procedure, including trocar placement, necessary robotic instruments, and meticulous surgical description. RESULTS: After standardizing the procedure, 28 patients were operated with this budget technique. For each procedure material used was: 1 (Xi model) or 2 disposable trocars (Si) and 4 robotic instruments. Stapling and clipping were performed by the assistant through an auxiliary port, limiting the use of robotic instruments and reducing the cost. CONCLUSION: This standardization helps implementing a robotic program for gastrectomy in the daily practice or in one`s institution.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Background : The II Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer of the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association BGCA (Part 1) was recently published. On this occasion, countless specialists working in the treatment of this disease expressed their opinion in the face of the statements presented. Aim : To present the BGCA Guidelines (Part 2) regarding indications for surgical treatment, operative techniques, extension of resection and multimodal treatment. Methods: To formulate these guidelines, the authors carried out an extensive and current review regarding each declaration present in the II Consensus, using the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases initially with the following descriptors: gastric cancer, gastrectomy, lymphadenectomy, multimodal treatment. In addition, each statement was classified according to the level of evidence and degree of recommendation. Results : Of the 43 statements present in this study, 11 (25,6%) were classified with level of evidence A, 20 (46,5%) B and 12 (27,9%) C. Regarding the degree of recommendation, 18 (41,9%) statements obtained grade of recommendation 1, 14 (32,6%) 2a, 10 (23,3%) 2b e one (2,3%) 3. Conclusion : The guidelines complement of the guidelines presented here allows surgeons and oncologists who work to combat gastric cancer to offer the best possible treatment, according to the local conditions available.

RESUMO Racional: O II Consenso Brasileiro de Câncer Gástrico da Associação Brasileira de Câncer Gástrico ABCG (Parte 1) foi recentemente publicado. Nesta ocasião inúmeros especialistas que atuam no tratamento desta doença expressaram suas opiniões diante declarações apresentadas. Objetivo: Apresentar as Diretrizes da ABCG (Parte 2) quanto às indicações de tratamento cirúrgico, técnicas operatórias, extensão de ressecção e terapia combinada. Métodos: Para formulação destas diretrizes os autores realizaram extensa e atual revisão referente a cada declaração presente no II Consenso, utilizando as bases Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library e SciELO, inicialmente com os seguintes descritores: câncer gástrico, gastrectomia, linfadenectomia, terapia combinada. Ainda, cada declaração foi classificada de acordo com o nível de evidência e grau de recomendação. Resultados: Das 43 declarações presentes neste estudo, 11 (25,6%) foram classificadas com nível de evidência A, 20 (46,5%) B e 12 (27,9%) C. Quanto ao grau de recomendação, 18 (41,9%) declarações obtiveram grau de recomendação 1, 14 (32,6%) 2a, 10 (23,3%) 2b e um (2,3%) 3. Conclusão: O complemento das diretrizes aqui presentes possibilita que cirurgiões e oncologistas que atuam no combate ao câncer gástrico possam oferecer o melhor tratamento possível, de acordo com as condições locais disponíveis.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The II Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer by the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association (ABCG) was recently published. On this occasion, several experts in gastric cancer expressed their opinion before the statements presented. AIM: To present the ABCG Guidelines (part 1) regarding the diagnosis, staging, endoscopic treatment and follow-up of gastric cancer patients. METHODS: To forge these Guidelines, the authors carried out an extensive and current review regarding each statement present in the II Consensus, using the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases with the following descriptors: gastric cancer, staging, endoscopic treatment and follow-up. In addition, each statement was classified according to the level of evidence and degree of recommendation. RESULTS: Of the 24 statements, two (8.3%) were classified with level of evidence A, 11 (45.8%) with B and 11 (45.8%) with C. As for the degree of recommendation, six (25%) statements obtained grade of recommendation 1, nine (37.5%) recommendation 2a, six (25%) 2b and three (12.5%) grade 3. CONCLUSION: The guidelines presented here are intended to assist professionals working in the fight against gastric cancer with relevant and current information, granting them to be applied in the daily medical practice.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The II Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer by the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association (ABCG) was recently published. On this occasion, several experts in gastric cancer expressed their opinion before the statements presented. Aim: To present the ABCG Guidelines (part 1) regarding the diagnosis, staging, endoscopic treatment and follow-up of gastric cancer patients. Methods: To forge these Guidelines, the authors carried out an extensive and current review regarding each statement present in the II Consensus, using the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library and SciELO databases with the following descriptors: gastric cancer, staging, endoscopic treatment and follow-up. In addition, each statement was classified according to the level of evidence and degree of recommendation. Results: Of the 24 statements, two (8.3%) were classified with level of evidence A, 11 (45.8%) with B and 11 (45.8%) with C. As for the degree of recommendation, six (25%) statements obtained grade of recommendation 1, nine (37.5%) recommendation 2a, six (25%) 2b and three (12.5%) grade 3. Conclusion: The guidelines presented here are intended to assist professionals working in the fight against gastric cancer with relevant and current information, granting them to be applied in the daily medical practice.

O II Consenso Brasileiro de Câncer Gástrico da Associação Brasileira de Câncer Gástrico (ABCG) foi recentemente publicado. Nesta ocasião, inúmeros especialistas que atuam no tratamento desta doença expressaram sua opinião diante declarações apresentadas. Objetivo: Apresentar as Diretrizes da ABCG (Parte 1) quanto ao diagnóstico, estadiamento, tratamento endoscópico e seguimento dos pacientes com câncer gástrico. Métodos: Para formulação destas Diretrizes os autores realizaram extensa e atual revisão referente a cada declaração presente no II Consenso, utilizando as bases Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library e SciELO com os seguintes descritores: câncer gástrico, estadiamento, tratamento endoscópico e seguimento. Ainda, cada declaração foi classificada de acordo com o nível de evidência e grau de recomendação. Resultados: Das 24 declarações, duas (8,3%) foram classificadas com nível de evidência A, 11 (45,8%) B e 11 (45,8%) C. Quanto ao grau de recomendação, seis (25%) declarações obtiveram grau de recomendação 1, nove (37,5%) grau 2a, seis (25%) 2b e três (12,5%) 3. Conclusão: As diretrizes aqui presentes têm a finalidade de auxiliar os profissionais que atuam no combate ao câncer gástrico com informações relevantes e atuais, permitindo que sejam aplicadas na prática médica diária.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Background: Robotic gastrectomy is gaining popularity worldwide. It allows reduced blood loss and lesser pain. However, it widespread use is limited by the extensive learning curve and costs. Aim: To describe our standard technique with reduced use of robotic instruments. Methods: We detail the steps involved in the procedure, including trocar placement, necessary robotic instruments, and meticulous surgical description. Results: After standardizing the procedure, 28 patients were operated with this budget technique. For each procedure material used was: 1 (Xi model) or 2 disposable trocars (Si) and 4 robotic instruments. Stapling and clipping were performed by the assistant through an auxiliary port, limiting the use of robotic instruments and reducing the cost. Conclusion: This standardization helps implementing a robotic program for gastrectomy in the daily practice or in one`s institution.

RESUMO Racional: A gastrectomia robótica está ganhando popularidade no mundo. Ela permite menor perda sanguínea e menos dor. Entretanto, a curva de aprendizado extensa e os custos limitam seu amplo uso. Objetivo: Descrever nossa técnica padrão com uso reduzido de instrumental robótico. Métodos: Detalham-se todos os passos envolvidos no procedimento, incluindo posicionamento de portais, instrumentos robóticos necessários e descrição cirúrgica meticulosa. Resultados: Após a padronização do procedimento, 28 pacientes foram operados com essa técnica. Em cada procedimento foram utilizados: 1 (modelo Xi) ou 2 (Si) trocárteres descartáveis e 4 pinças robóticas. Grampeamentos e colocação de clips ficaram a cargo do auxiliar, reduzindo o número de instrumentos robóticos utilizados, diminuindo assim o custo. Conclusão: Essa padronização ajuda a implementar programa robótico de gastrectomia na prática diária ou em uma instituição.

Assuntos

RESUMO

ABSTRACT Background: Since the publication of the first Brazilian Consensus on Gastric Cancer (GC) in 2012 carried out by the Brazilian Gastric Cancer Association, new concepts on diagnosis, staging, treatment and follow-up have been incorporated. Aim: This new consensus is to promote an update to professionals working in the fight against GC and to provide guidelines for the management of patients with this condition. Methods: Fifty-nine experts answered 67 statements regarding the diagnosis, staging, treatment and prognosis of GC with five possible alternatives: 1) fully agree; 2) partially agree; 3) undecided; 4) disagree and 5) strongly disagree A consensus was adopted when at least 80% of the sum of the answers "fully agree" and "partially agree" was reached. This article presents only the responses of the participating experts. Comments on each statement, as well as a literature review, will be presented in future publications. Results: Of the 67 statements, there was consensus in 50 (74%). In 10 declarations, there was 100% agreement. Conclusion: The gastric cancer treatment has evolved considerably in recent years. This consensus gathers consolidated principles in the last decades, new knowledge acquired recently, as well as promising perspectives on the management of this disease.

RESUMO Racional: Desde a publicação do primeiro Consenso Brasileiro sobre Câncer Gástrico em 2012 realizado pela Associação Brasileira de Câncer Gástrico (ABCG), novos conceitos sobre o diagnóstico, estadiamento, tratamento e seguimento foram incorporados. Objetivo: Promover uma atualização aos profissionais que atuam no combate ao câncer gástrico (CG) e fornecer diretrizes quanto ao manejo dos pacientes portadores desta afecção. Métodos: Cinquenta e nove especialistas responderam 67 declarações sobre o diagnóstico, estadiamento, tratamento e prognóstico do CG com cinco alternativas possíveis: 1) concordo plenamente; 2) concordo parcialmente; 3) indeciso; 4) discordo e 5) discordo fortemente. Foi considerado consenso a concordância de pelo menos 80% da soma das respostas "concordo plenamente" e "concordo parcialmente". Este artigo apresenta apenas as respostas dos especialistas participantes. Os comentários sobre cada declaração, assim como uma revisão da literatura serão apresentados em publicações futuras. Resultados: Das 67 declarações, houve consenso em 50 (74%). Em 10 declarações, houve concordância de 100%. Conclusão: O tratamento do câncer gástrico evoluiu consideravelmente nos últimos anos. Este consenso reúne princípios consolidados nas últimas décadas, novos conhecimentos adquiridos recentemente, assim como perspectivas promissoras sobre o manejo desta doença.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, total omentectomy is performed along with gastric resection and extended lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer (GC) surgery. However, solid evidences regarding its oncologic benefit is still scarce. AIM: To evaluate the incidence of metastatic omental lymph nodes (LN) in patients undergoing curative gastrectomy for GC, as well as its risk factors and patients' outcomes. METHODS: All consecutive patients submitted to D2/modified D2 gastrectomy due to gastric adenocarcinoma from March 2009 to April 2016 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective collected database. RESULTS: Of 284 patients included, five (1.8%) patients had metastatic omental LN (one: pT3N3bM0; two: pT4aN3bM0; one: pT4aN2M0 and one pT4bN3bM0). Four of them deceased and one was under palliative chemotherapy due relapse. LN metastases in the greater omentum significantly correlated with tumor's size (p=0.018), N stage (p<0.001), clinical stage (p=0.022), venous invasion growth (p=0.003), recurrence (p=0.006), site of recurrence (peritoneum: p=0.008; liver: p=0.023; ovary: p=0.035) and death (p=0.008). CONCLUSION: The incidence of metastatic omental LN of patients undergoing radical gastrectomy due to GC is extremely low. Total omentectomy may be avoided in tumors smaller than 5.25 cm and T1/T2 tumors. However, the presence of lymph node metastases in the greater omentum is associated with recurrence in the peritoneum, liver, ovary and death.

Assuntos