Combined Surgery and Extensive Intraoperative Peritoneal Lavage vs Surgery Alone for Treatment of Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: The SEIPLUS Randomized Clinical Trial.
China
/ epidemiology
Disease-Free Survival
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Gastrectomy
/ methods
Humans
Incidence
Intraoperative Period
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasm Staging
Peritoneal Lavage
/ methods
Postoperative Complications
/ epidemiology
Retrospective Studies
Stomach Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
Survival Rate
/ trends
Treatment Outcome
Journal
JAMA surgery
ISSN: 2168-6262
Titre abrégé: JAMA Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101589553
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 07 2019
01 07 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
28
3
2019
medline:
23
2
2020
entrez:
28
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Peritoneal metastasis is the most frequent pattern of postoperative recurrence in patients with gastric cancer. Extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage (EIPL) is a new prophylactic strategy for treatment of peritoneal metastasis of locally advanced gastric cancer; however, the safety and efficacy of EIPL is currently unknown. To evaluate short-term outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer who received combined surgery and EIPL or surgery alone. From March 2016 to November 2017, 662 patients with advanced gastric cancer receiving D2 gastrectomy were enrolled in a large, multicenter, randomized clinical trial from 11 centers across China. In total, 329 patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery alone, and 333 patients were randomly assigned to receive surgery plus EIPL. Clinical characteristics, operative findings, and postoperative short-term outcomes were compared between the 2 groups in the intent-to-treat population. Short-term postoperative complications and mortality. The present analysis included data from 550 patients, 390 men and 160 women, with a mean (SD) age of 60.8 (10.7) years in the surgery alone group and 60.6 (10.8) in the surgery plus EIPL group. Patients assigned to the surgery plus EIPL group exhibited reduced mortality (0 of 279 patients) compared with those assigned to surgery alone (5 of 271 patients [1.9%]) (difference, 1.9%; 95% CI, 0.3%-3.4%; P = .02). A significant difference in the overall postoperative complication rate was observed between patients receiving surgery alone (46 patients [17.0%]) and those receiving surgery plus EIPL (31 patients [11.1%]) (difference, 5.9%; 95% CI, 0.1%-11.6%; P = .04). Postoperative pain occurred more often following surgery alone (48 patients [17.7%]) than following surgery plus EIPL (30 patients [10.8%]) (difference, 7.0%; 95% CI, 0.8%-13.1%; P = .02). Inclusion of EIPL can increase the safety of D2 gastrectomy and decrease postoperative short-term complications and wound pain. As a new, safe, and simple procedure, EIPL therapy is easily performed anywhere and does not require any special devices or techniques. Our study suggests that patients with advanced gastric cancer appear to be candidates for the EIPL approach. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02745509.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30916742
pii: 2729452
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2019.0153
pmc: PMC6583840
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02745509']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
610-616Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Références
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2017 Feb 26;47(2):179-184
pubmed: 28173154
Gastric Cancer. 2011 Jun;14(2):113-23
pubmed: 21573742
Lancet. 1995 Mar 25;345(8952):745-8
pubmed: 7891484
Am J Surg. 1997 Jun;173(6):472-8
pubmed: 9207157
Ann Surg. 2009 Aug;250(2):242-6
pubmed: 19638909
Gastroenterology. 2000 Feb;118(2):316-27
pubmed: 10648460
Cancer Res. 1980 Feb;40(2):256-60
pubmed: 6766084
Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Jul;25(7):2044-2052
pubmed: 29752601
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Lancet. 1992 Mar 14;339(8794):629-31
pubmed: 1347336
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014 Jan;40(1):12-26
pubmed: 24290371
N Engl J Med. 1985 Feb 14;312(7):399-404
pubmed: 2578610
Lancet Oncol. 2004 Apr;5(4):219-28
pubmed: 15050953
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Oct 1;30(28):3507-15
pubmed: 22949151
Ann Surg Oncol. 2011 Jun;18(6):1575-81
pubmed: 21431408
BMC Anesthesiol. 2016 Oct 10;16(1):91
pubmed: 27724844
Gastroenterology. 2004 Jan;126(1):159-69
pubmed: 14699497
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Apr 20;34(12):1350-7
pubmed: 26903580
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Aug 15;22(16):3284-92
pubmed: 15310771
Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2016 Jun;17(3):357-62
pubmed: 26910781
Gastroenterology. 1999 Aug;117(2):378-87
pubmed: 10419919
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2014 Jan;44(1):101-3
pubmed: 24287077
Maedica (Buchar). 2016 Dec;11(4):277-285
pubmed: 28828043
Ann Surg. 1906 Aug;44(2):197-208
pubmed: 17861841
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jul 15;22(14):2767-73
pubmed: 15199090
Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Jun;17(6):1471-4
pubmed: 20180029
Fertil Steril. 2011 Mar 15;95(4):1224-8
pubmed: 21295297
J Invest Surg. 2006 Sep-Oct;19(5):291-7
pubmed: 16966207
J Oncol. 2012;2012:340380
pubmed: 22481921