No abstract

IMPORTANCE Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers, with a high mortality-to-incidence ratio. It is uncertain whether developed nations may encounter an increasing burden of gastric cancer in young adults, as occurs for other cancers.OBJECTIVES To evaluate the incidence and mortality of gastric cancer and compare the global incidence trends between younger (<40 years) and older (Ն40 years) populations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis population-based cohort study analyzed data from global and national cancer registries, including data from 1980 to 2018, with at least 15 calendar years of incidence and mortality data. Data on age-standardized incidence and mortality rates of gastric cancer among 48 countries were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, the National Cancer Institute, the Nordic Cancer Registries, and the World Health Organization Mortality Database. The 10-year incidence trend of gastric cancer was assessed by age and sex. The 2018 GLOBOCAN database was used for reporting the global incidence and mortality of gastric cancer, the most recent data available at the time of analysis. Analyses were performed

ESD achieved similar oncological outcomes when compared with radical gastrectomy for treatment of EGC. Patients receiving ESD had better perioperative outcomes in terms of operative time, complication rate, and hospital stay.

Background Recent evidence suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is an effective and safe alternative to percutaneous drainage (PT-GBD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two procedures in high risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis. Methods A comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted for all articles published up to October 2017 to identify comparative studies between EUS-GBD and PT-GBD. A meta-analysis was performed on outcomes including technical success, clinical success, post-procedure adverse events, length of hospital stay, unplanned hospital readmission, need for reintervention, recurrent cholecystitis, and disease- or treatment-related mortality for these two procedures. Results Five comparative studies (206 patients in the EUS-GBD group vs. 289 patients in the PT-GBD group), were included in the final analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in technical success (odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.12 to 1.58; P  = 0.21; I 2 = 0 %) and clinical success (OR 1.07, 95 %CI 0.36 to 3.16; P  = 0.90; I 2 = 44 %) between the two procedures. EUS-GBD had fewer adverse events than PT-GBD (OR 0.43, 95 %CI 0.18 to 1.00; P  = 0.05; I 2 = 66 %). Moreover, patients undergoing EUS-GBD had shorter hospital stays, with pooled standard mean difference of – 2.53 (95 %CI – 4.28 to – 0.78; P = 0.005; I 2 = 98 %), and required significantly fewer reinterventions (OR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.04 to 0.042; P <  0.001; I 2 = 32 %) resulting in significantly fewer unplanned readmissions (OR 0.16, 95 %CI 0.05 to 0.53; P  = 0.003; I 2 = 79 %). Conclusions EUS-GBD was associated with lower rates of post-procedure adverse events, shorter hospital stays, and fewer reinterventions and readmissions compared with PT-GBD in patients with acute cholecystitis who were unfit for surgery.