4.7 Article

Surgical Outcome and Long-Term Survival of Conversion Surgery for Advanced Gastric Cancer

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 11, Pages 4250-4260

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-08559-7

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The present study aims to report the surgical outcome and long-term survival of conversion surgery and clarify its role in advanced gastric cancer. Patients and Methods A total of 95 primary advanced gastric adenocarcinoma patients who underwent systemic chemotherapy and conversion surgery were reviewed retrospectively. The survival of conversion surgery was analyzed by Cox regression and the Kaplan-Meier method. Surgical outcomes were analyzed according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Results The median survival time (MST) of the 95 patients was 26.8 months, and the postoperative MST was 19.3 months. The MSTs of the patients in categories 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 28.8, 25.5, 43.6, and 11.3 months, respectively. The MSTs of the patients who underwentR0 resection (47 cases) andR1/2 resection (48 cases) were 49.3 months and 21.9 months, respectively. The MST of patients treated with total gastrectomy was shorter (21.9 months) than that of patients who underwent proximal (55.0 months) or distal (46.3 months) gastrectomy. Patients who received more than 6 cycles of induction chemotherapy had a longer MST than patients who received 3-5 cycles or 1-2 cycles (MST: 55.0 months versus 21.1 months versus 21.7 months). The incident postoperative complications and postoperative mortality rates were 10.5% and 1.1%, respectively. Conclusions Advanced gastric cancer patients may obtain a survival benefit from conversion surgery, except category 4. Performing a sufficient number of cycles of induction chemotherapy (usually >= 6 cycles) is recommended. Surgical oncologists should performR0 resection and avoid total gastrectomy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available