Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010 (ver. 3)

,

doi:10.1007/s10120-011-0042-4

Cited by 2,014 publications

(960 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

948

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines (Ver. 3) also specifies D2 lymphadenectomy as the standard operation [6] . Focus and difficulty of D2 radical surgery subgroup among the no vascular variation population in Table 5.…”

Section: Results From Comparing Observational Indices In Each Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of celiac artery variations and related surgical techniques in gastric cancer

Huang¹,

Mu²,

Qin³

et al. 2015

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:To investigate celiac artery variations in gastric cancer patients and the impact on gastric cancer surgery, and also to discuss the value of the ultrasonic knife in reducing the risk caused by celiac artery variations. METHODS:A retrospective analysis was conducted to investigate the difference in average operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, average postoperative drainage within 3 d, and postoperative hospital stay between the group with vascular variations and no vascular variations, and between the ultrasonic harmonic scalpel and conventional electric scalpel surgery group. RESULTS:One hundred and fifty-eight cases presented with normal celiac artery, and 80 presented with celiac artery variation (33.61%). The average operation time, blood loss, average drainage within 3 d after surgery in the celiac artery variation group were significantly more than in the no celiac artery variation group (215.7 ± 32.7 min vs 204.2 ± 31.3 min, 220.0 ± 56.7 mL vs 163.1 ± 52.3 mL, 193.6 ± 41.4 mL vs 175.3 ± 34.1 mL, respectively, P < 0.05). In celiac artery variation patients, the average operation time, blood loss, average drainage within 3 d after surgery in the ultrasonic harmonic scalpel group were significantly lower than in the conventional electric scalpel surgery group (209.5 ± 34.9 min vs 226.9 ± 29.4 min, 207.5 ± 57.1 mL vs 235.6 ± 52.9 mL, 184.4 ± 38.2 mL vs 205.0 ± 42.9 mL, respectively, P < 0.05), and the number of lymph node dissections was significantly higher than in the conventional surgery group (25.5 ± 9.2 vs 19.9 ± 7.8, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Celiac artery variation increases the ORIGINAL ARTICLE Study of celiac artery variations and related surgical techniques in gastric cancerand the effect of vascular variation on gastric cancer surgery outcome among 238 patients receiving radical gastrectomy, meanwhile addressing the efficacy of ultrasound harmonic scalpel in minimizing risk due to vascular variation, so as to provide a reference for guiding gastric cancer treatment in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS General informationTwo hundred and thirty-eight patients undergoing D2 radical gastrectomy by well experienced general surgeons in our department from January 2009 to May 2014 were included; the detailed information of tumor staging can be seen in Figure 1. All patients provided informed consent, and signed agreements. All the patients were preoperatively examined, through upper abdominal 64 multi-slice computed tomography angiography (MSCTA), to determine whether there was variation in the celiac trunk and its branches, wherein the abnormal hepatic artery was classified with reference to Hiatt's [4] classification. Inclusion and exclusion criteriaInclusion criteria: (1) preoperative pathology via gastroscopic biopsy indicated gastric cancer; (2) preoperative MSCTA was taken; (3) preoperative assessment showed indications for D2 radical surgery; (4) preoperative assessment showed no evident surgical contraindication; and (5) D2 or D2+ radical su...

show abstract

Section: Results From Comparing Observational Indices In Each Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of celiac artery variations and related surgical techniques in gastric cancer

Huang¹,

Mu²,

Qin³

et al. 2015

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this current study, we could successfully and safely perform laparoscopy assisted distal gastrectomy with D1 plus lymphadenectomy for distal gastric cancer guided by the oncologic surgical principles [19]. Although in this study we reused several times the single use hand piece of vascular sealing device for dissection and hemostasis; the advantages of minimal invasive surgery like précised dissection have been maintained.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Perigastric and left gastric lymphadenectomy (D1 plus) lymphadenectomy was tried in all patients according to the guidelines of the Japanese gastric cancers treatment [19].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Laparoscopy Assisted Distal Gastrectomy for Cancer at a Tertiary Center in Egypt. Is It Safe and Feasible?

Amin¹,

Salem²,

Fakhry³

et al. 2017

JCT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for cancer has significant short-and long-term advantages. The feasibility and safety of laparoscopicdistal gastrectomy for cancer (LADG) is unclear in low to middle income countries as resources are limited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of (LADG) in low to middle income countries; Egypt as an example. Methods: Thirty four Patients with stage I-II cancer at the pylorus and antrum have been enrolled for LADG between 2012 and 2015 with the reuse of single use vascular sealing device has been evaluated. Results: Finally 27 patients had been included in the study and successful LADG has been done for all selected cases. The average operative time was 151 ± 10 minutes. The average estimated blood loss was 73.3 ± 13 ml. No intra-operative complications have been recorded. The average time for postoperative patient ambulation was 9 hours (SD ± 1.8) and for oral fluid intake was 3.5 SD ± 1 days. The average duration of the hospital stay was 9.3 ± 1.2 days. The average number of retrieved lymph nodes was 21.7 ± 3.8 days. All the cases had free surgical margin. The median number of reuse of the vascular sealing device was 3.8 times (3 -5 times). Conclusion: Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for cancer could be safe and feasible in developing countries and give similar results for that of developed countries. Safe reuse of single use expensive parts of some instruments for laparoscopy could help in utilization of these advanced surgeries in low to middle income countries. Long term follow up as well as comparative studies with open surgery are required.

show abstract

“…It was expanded to include clinical stage T1‐2 cancers with or without perigastric lymph node metastasis, except for lesions for which endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was indicated 8, 9. So far, in Korea and Japan, neither robotic nor laparoscopic gastrectomy is indicated for the treatment of serosa‐involved advanced gastric cancer 10. As there are some reports on serosa‐involved gastric cancer in the use of robotics or laparoscopy, it seems that it would not be a clear contraindication to a minimally invasive approach.…”

Section: Indications Of Robotic Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current evidence

Alhossaini

Altamran

Seo

et al. 2017

Annals of Gastroent Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The robotic system has gained wide acceptance in specialties such as urological and gynecological surgery. It has also been applied in the field of upper gastrointestinal surgery. Since the first implementation of the robotic system for the treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma, the procedure has been found to be safe and feasible. Although robotic gastrectomy does not meet our expectations and yield better results than laparoscopic gastrectomy, this procedure seems to provide several advantages over laparoscopy such as reduced blood loss, shorter learning curves and increased number of retrieved lymph nodes. However, as many case series, including a recent multicenter study, have revealed, higher cost and longer operation time are the major limitations of robotic gastrectomy. Furthermore, there are no results from well‐designed randomized clinical trials comparing the two procedures. New procedures in much more technically demanding cases will test the genuine benefits of robotic gastrectomy.

show abstract

Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010 (ver. 3)

Cited by 2,014 publications

References 26 publications

Study of celiac artery variations and related surgical techniques in gastric cancer

Study of celiac artery variations and related surgical techniques in gastric cancer

Laparoscopy Assisted Distal Gastrectomy for Cancer at a Tertiary Center in Egypt. Is It Safe and Feasible?

Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About