A systematic review of patient surveillance after curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a brief review

Cardoso, Roberta; Coburn, Natalie; Seevaratnam, Rajini; Mahar, Alyson; Helyer, Lucy; Law, Calvin; Singh, Simron

doi:10.1007/s10120-012-0142-9

Cited by 51 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cardoso et al[43] published a systematic review on this topic in 2012. In this study, the authors searched the literature from 1999 to 2009 and selected five retrospective studies that reported data on follow-up after gastric resection and included a total of 810 patients[44-48].…”

Section: What Is the Evidence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Follow-up after curative resection for gastric cancer: Is it time to tailor it?

Aurello¹,

Petrucciani²,

Antolino³

et al. 2017

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is still no consensus on the follow-up frequency and regimen after curative resection for gastric cancer. Moreover, controversy exists regarding the utility of follow-up in improving survival, and the recommendations of experts and societies vary considerably. The main reason to establish surveillance programs is to diagnose tumor recurrence or metachronous cancers early and to thereby provide prompt treatment and prolong survival. In the setting of gastric malignancies, other reasons have been put forth: (1) the detection of adverse effects of a previous surgery, such as malnutrition or digestive sequelae; (2) the collection of data; and (3) the identification of psychological and/or social problems and provision of appropriate support to the patients. No randomized controlled trials on the role of follow-up after curative resection of gastric carcinoma have been published. Herein, the primary retrospective series and systematic reviews on this subject are analyzed and discussed. Furthermore, the guidelines from international and national scientific societies are discussed. Follow-up is recommended by the majority of institutions; however, there is no real evidence that follow-up can improve long-term survival rates. Several studies have demonstrated that it is possible to stratify patients submitted to curative gastrectomy into different classes according to the risk of recurrence. Furthermore, promising studies have identified several molecular markers that are related to the risk of relapse and to prognosis. Based on these premises, a promising strategy will be to tailor follow-up in relation to the patient and tumor characteristics, molecular marker status, and individual risk of recurrence.

show abstract

Section: What Is the Evidence?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Follow-up after curative resection for gastric cancer: Is it time to tailor it?

Aurello¹,

Petrucciani²,

Antolino³

et al. 2017

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent systematic review by Cardoso et al [52] reviewed five studies enrolling a total of 810 patients and assessing outcomes of follow-up after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. They did not find any evidence suggesting that postoperative surveillance has any survival benefit; it is also stressed that no studies addressed quality of life issues.…”

Section: Evidence From Follow-up Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Follow-Up: The Evidence

D’Ugo¹,

Biondi²,

Tufo³

et al. 2013

Dig Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is currently no consensus on the best strategy for the follow-up of patients who have undergone surgical treatment with curative intent for gastric cancer. The wide variation in recommendations for surveillance among international experts and hospital schedules clearly reflects a lack of an established body of evidence on this subject. Consequently, most of the international guidelines aimed at early detection of disease recurrence gloss over details concerning the mode, duration, and intensity of surveillance since they cannot be based on an acceptable grade of recommendation. Very few report anything other than the detection of recurrences or death as the primary endpoints, and, given the poor survival of patients with recurrent gastric cancer, the prognostic effect of early detection seems doubtful. In recent years, an increasing focus on evidence-based medicine, which has coincided with a growing concern about costs and efficiency in medicine, has caused a reevaluation of most surveillance practices. In this paper, we review and discuss the current body of evidence and follow-up practices after curative resection of gastric cancer.

show abstract

“…Asymptomatic and symptomatic recurrence patterns are biologically different and associated with different survival outcomes Kim et al [14] Bilici et al [9] cancer, found that symptomatic recurrence is an important prognostic factor for post-recurrence survival and that presence of symptoms may be considered a marker of biologic tumor aggressiveness, which is an important determinant of survival at the time of recurrence diagnosis during follow-up for gastric cancer. A recent systematic review by Cardoso et al reviewed five studies enrolling a total of 810 patients and assessing outcomes of follow-up after gastrectomy for gastric cancer [16].…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%