RSS-Feed abonnieren
![](/products/assets/desktop/img/oa-logo.png)
DOI: 10.4103/sajc.sajc_182_18
Calculation of a clinical predictive factors identifying peritoneal disease on a staging laparoscopy in gastric cancers
Financial support and sponsorship Nil.![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/10.1055-s-00049561/201903/lookinside/thumbnails/10-4103_sajc-sajc_182_18_166-1.jpg)
Abstract
Introduction: Staging laparoscopy (SL) is the current standard staging workup for loco-advanced gastric cancers (GCs). Materials and Methods: We analyzed the data of all patients with loco-regionally advanced, nonmetastatic GCs, who underwent SL for the evaluation of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Results: Between December 2013 and October 2016, 363 patients underwent SL, of which 75 (20.7%) were found to have PC on SL. Age ≤40 years, CA 19-9 > upper limit of normal, and low serum albumin levels (≤3.5 g/dl) correlated significantly with the presence of PC on SL. There was a statistically significant difference in the median overall survival between patients with radiologically detected PC and SL detected PC (8.67 months vs. 15.3 months;P < 0.0001). Conclusion: SL upstaged disease status in 20.7% of patients. Clinical factors, identified in this study, need further validation in larger prospective cohorts before being used in clinical practice. Patients with radiologically detected PC have lower survival as compared to those with PC on SL.
Key words
Cervical canceComputed tomography scan - gastric cancers - peritoneal disease - predictive factors - staging laparoscopyPublikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
21. Dezember 2020
© 2019. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Smyth EC, Verheij M, Allum W, Cunningham D, Cervantes A, Arnold D, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2016;27:v38-49.
- 2 Allum WH, Blazeby JM, Griffin SM, Cunningham D, Jankowski JA, Wong R, et al. Guidelines for the management of oesophageal and gastric cancer. Gut 2011;60:1449-72.
- 3 Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver 4). Gastric Cancer 2017;20:1-9.
- 4 Guidelines for Diagnostic Laparoscopy – A SAGES Guideline. SAGES. Available from: https://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/guidelines-for-diagnostic-laparoscopy/. [Last accessed on 2017 Jun 01].
- 5 Leake PA, Cardoso R, Seevaratnam R, Lourenco L, Helyer L, Mahar A, et al. Asystematic review of the accuracy and utility of peritoneal cytology in patients with gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 2012;15 Suppl 1:S27-37.
- 6 Kakroo SM, Rashid A, Wani AA, Akhtar Z, Chalkoo MA, Laharwal AR, et al. Staging laparoscopy in carcinoma of stomach: A comparison with CECT staging. Int J Surg Oncol 2013;2013:674965.
- 7 Shrikhande SV, Shukla PJ, Qureshi S, Siddachari R, Upasani V, Ramadwar M, et al. D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer in Tata memorial hospital: Indian data can now be incorporated in future international trials. Dig Surg 2006;23:192-7.
- 8 Simon M, Mal F, Perniceni T, Ferraz JM, Strauss C, Levard H, et al. Accuracy of staging laparoscopy in detecting peritoneal dissemination in patients with gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Dis Esophagus 2016;29:236-40.
- 9 Sarela AI, Lefkowitz R, Brennan MF, Karpeh MS. Selection of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma for laparoscopic staging. Am J Surg 2006;191:134-8.
- 10 Grenader T, Plotkin Y, Mohammadi B, Dawas K, Hashemi M, Mughal M, et al. Predictive value of the neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio in peritoneal and/or metastatic disease at staging laparoscopy for gastric and esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Gastrointest Cancer 2015;46:267-71.
- 11 Bagaria B, Sood S, Sharma R, Lalwani S. Comparative study of CEA and CA19-9 in esophageal, gastric and colon cancers individually and in combination (ROC curve analysis). Cancer Biol Med 2013;10:148-57.
- 12 Hwang GI, Yoo CH, Sohn BH, Shin JH, Park YL, Kim HD, et al. Predictive value of preoperative serum CEA, CA19-9 and CA125 levels for peritoneal metastasis in patients with gastric carcinoma. Cancer Res Treat 2004;36:178-81.
- 13 Voron T, Messager M, Duhamel A, Lefevre J, Mabrut JY, Goere D, et al. Is signet-ring cell carcinoma a specific entity among gastric cancers? Gastric Cancer 2016;19:1027-40.
- 14 Ostwal V, Sahu A, Ramaswamy A, Sirohi B, Bose S, Talreja V, et al. Perioperative epirubicin, oxaliplatin, and capecitabine chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer: Safety and feasibility in an interim survival analysis. J Gastric Cancer 2017;17:21-32.
- 15 Mimatsu K, Oida T, Fukino N, Kano H, Kawasaki A, Kida K, et al. Glasgow prognostic score is a useful predictive factor of outcome after palliative gastrectomy for stage IV gastric cancer. Anticancer Res 2014;34:3131-6.
- 16 Isobe T, Hashimoto K, Kizaki J, Miyagi M, Aoyagi K, Koufuji K, et al. Characteristics and prognosis of gastric cancer in young patients. Oncol Rep 2013;30:43-9.