Background
Gastric cancer is one of the most common gastrointestinal cancers in Asian countries, especially in Japan[
1]. Peritoneal dissemination (P+) is the most common type of recurrence in advanced gastric cancer, and gastric cancer with serosal exposure is often associated with P + or positive cytology (CY1)[
2]. Once peritoneal metastases are detected, patient outcomes are poor despite complete (R0) resection[
2‐
4]. The indication for cytoreductive gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients without clinical symptoms such as bleeding, strictures or perforation has been equivocal[
5]. The use of chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer has been stimulated by the development of new anticancer agents, which may provide a means of improving the clinical outcomes of gastric cancer patients with distant metastases[
6‐
8]. We previously reported that salvage surgery in stage IV gastric cancer patients after intensive chemotherapy was associated with good clinical outcomes[
9]. Therefore, detection of P1 or CY1 is an indication for intensive chemotherapy but not R0 surgery.
Although overt dissemination or ascitic fluid can be routinely detected by preoperative abdominal CT or ultrasonography combined with other modalities, tiny lesions often go undetected. The intraabdominal spread of advanced gastrointestinal cancer is often underestimated by conventional laparotomy, leading to a high rate of unnecessary laparotomies or gastrectomies[
10]. Accurate tumor staging is essential for the selection of the appropriate treatment strategy for gastric cancer. In comparison to conventional extracorporeal imaging technique, staging laparoscopy is an effective and less invasive tool for the detection of unsuspected peritoneal metastasis. With the improvements in laparoscopic instruments and techniques, gastrectomy with lymph node dissection has become a popular procedure among gastrointestinal surgeons[
11]. These advances have improved the accuracy of staging laparoscopy and have enabled the detection of intra-abdominal deposits by intraoperative pathological examination. Since June 2002, perioperative staging laparoscopy has been used at our institution to determine whether R0 gastrectomy or less invasive surgical intervention is indicated in patients with advanced gastric cancer. The present study is a retrospective analysis of the clinical outcomes of this series and a discussion of the clinical implications of perioperative staging laparoscopy.
Discussion
Gastrectomy for gastric cancer is of no value in patients with P1 and/or CY1 except as a palliative surgery to reduce symptoms such as bleeding and stricture[
15]. On the other hand, staging laparoscopy can be beneficial because of its high rate of detection of peritoneal metastases or positive cytology.
Song
et al. showed that the overall accuracy of the P factor was 91.7% in T3 and T4 gastric cancer[
16]. Tsuchida
et al. also showed that the detection rate of P1 or CY1 by staging laparoscopy was higher than 30% in T4 gastric cancer[
17], which is in agreement with our results. Moreover, we showed a high positivity rate of P1 or CY1 in stage III gastric cancer. Concerning cost-effectiveness[
18], staging laparoscopy is indicated in patients with advanced (stage III or higher) gastric cancer.
A variety of laparoscopic interventions can be performed during staging laparoscopy and these laparoscopic interventions can especially be utilized for P1 or CY1 patients with significant clinical symptoms. Complete laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy and feeding tube insertion for gastric outlet obstruction has been reported[
19‐
21]. In our series, 16 patients showed good recovery with food intake after gastrojejunostomy, and their quality of life was found to be improved during outpatient visits.
An intraperitoneal infuser port was inserted in 59 patients for the treatment of ascitic fluid or for the administration of anticancer agents. Furthermore, this route was repeatedly used for cytological evaluation during the course of chemotherapy. In fact, after confirmation of negative cytology using this port, R0 gastrectomy was performed after second-look laparoscopy.
In patients receiving intensive chemotherapy for P1 or CY1 gastric cancer, if lesions cannot be detected by CT or US, second-look laparoscopy should be used to estimate accurate staging. The timing of the second-look laparoscopy was generally selected based on the detection of negative cytology through the intraabdominal port. Yano
et al. showed that a second staging laparoscopy accurately assessed the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, thus helping make decisions regarding R0 gastrectomy[
22]. Moreover, Ajani
et al. indicated that clinical staging by laparoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography improved R0 resection rates after chemotherapy in patients with potentially resectable gastric carcinoma[
23].
Although the surgical outcome of these patients was fairly good, three (38%) showed postoperative peritoneal recurrence. Pathological examination showed a poor histological effect of chemotherapy in these three patients. As we previously reported[
9], the histological grading reflected the postoperative course of salvage surgery in the current study. When performing R0 surgery in patients with peritoneal metastasis, P0 and CY0 status should be confirmed by laparoscopy and the histological grade of the chemotherapy should be considered.
Conclusions
In conclusion, we showed the clinical usefulness of staging laparoscopy for advanced (stage III or higher) gastric cancer patients not only to avoid negative laparotomy, but also to facilitate laparoscopic interventions. Second-look laparoscopy after intensive chemotherapy is a useful tool for confirming the indication of R0 gastrectomy.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
IS designed the study, searched the literature and drafted the manuscript. AT contributed to the analysis, interpretation of data and revision of the article. NS participated in study design and coordination. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.