• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.84-90
• /
• 2006

Purpose: The macroscopic findings of tumors are not always identical with the microscopic findings. This study investigated the oncologic implications of macroscopic serosal invasion in advanced gastric cancer to find out how to improve the accuracy for the depth of invasion assessed by the surgeon during an operation. Materials and Methods: The medical records of 789 patients with advanced gastric cancer who underwent a gastrectomy at Kyungpook National University Hospital between 1995 and 1999 were reviewed. The prognoses and the recurrence patterns were analyzed according to macroscopic serosal invasion and microscopic serosal invasion, and the clinico-pathological factors of cT3/ss cancers were compared with those of cT3/se cancers. Results: Difference of survival rates according to macroscopic serosal invasion and microscopic serosal invasion revealed statistically significant. Recurrence rates were similar in patients with macroscopic and microscopic serosal invasion (42.2% and 41.4%, respectively). Peritoneal recurrence rates were also similar (19.8% and 21.9%, respectively). The sensitivity and the specificity of macroscopic assessment of serosal invasion were 70.3% and 77.8%, respectively, On univariate and multivariate analyses, Borrmann type I/II cancers and the absence of distant metastases revealed the risk factors for overestimating of serosal invasion. Conclusion: Macroscopic serosal invasion assessed by a surgeon intraoperatively can be used to give a prognosis and to predict the recurrence pattern precisely, although there is a risk for overestimation when the tumor is a Borrmann type I/II cancer or the tumor has no distant metastases. (J Korean Gastric Cancer Assoc 2006;6:84-90)

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.252-258
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The macroscopic diagnosis of tumor invasion through the serosa during surgery is not always distinct in patients with gastric cancer. The prognostic impact of the difference between macroscopic findings and pathological diagnosis of serosal invasion is not fully elucidated and needs to be re-evaluated. Materials and Methods: A total of 370 patients with locally advanced pT2 to pT4a gastric cancer who underwent curative surgery were enrolled in this study. Among them, 155 patients with pT3 were divided into three groups according to the intraoperative macroscopic diagnosis of serosal invasion, as follows: serosa exposure (SE)(-) (no invasion, 72 patients), SE(${\pm}$) (ambiguous, 47 patients), and SE(+) (definite invasion, 36 patients), and the clinicopathological features, surgical outcomes, and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed. Results: A comparison of the 5-year DFS between pT3_SE(-) and pT2 groups and between pT3_SE(+) and pT4a groups revealed that the differences were not statistically significant. In addition, in a subgroup analysis of pT3 patients, the 5-year DFS was 75.1% in SE(-), 68.5% in SE(${\pm}$), and 39.4% in SE(+) patients (P<0.05). In a multivariate analysis to evaluate risk factors for tumor recurrence, macroscopic diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], SE(-) : SE(${\pm}$) : SE(+)=1 : 1.01 : 2.45, P=0.019) and lymph node metastasis (HR, N0 : N1 : N2 : N3=1 : 1.45 : 2.20 : 9.82, P<0.001) were independent risk factors for recurrence. Conclusions: Gross inspection of serosal invasion by the surgeon had a strong impact on tumor recurrence in gastric cancer patients. Consequently, the gross appearance of serosal invasion should be considered as a factor for predicting patients' prognosis.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.89-94
• /
• 2004

Purpose: There is no established treatment-related prognostic factor for gastric cancer except a curative tumor resection. This study was done to clarify the prognostic value of early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) in patients with serosa-positive gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: We analyzed retrospectively the postoperative survival data of 209 patients with serosapositive gastric cancer treated by surgery and chemotherapy. The survival period for patients was calculated from the date of resection until cancer-related death or the last date of follow-up; Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted and compared by using the log-rank test. A multivariate analysis was done by using the Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Statistically significant differences in survival rates were noted based on gender, depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, distant metastasis, stage, location of tumor, macroscopic type, extent of gastric resection, curability of surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Five-year survival rates of patients who received EPIC and systemic chemotherapy were 49 per cent and 25 per cent, respectively (P=0.009). A multivariate analysis revealed that invasion of an adjacent organ, lymph node metastasis, total gastrectomy, and palliative surgery were poor independent prognostic factors. Also, EPIC had a marginal prognostic value (P=0.056). Conclusion: Perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy can possibly be one of the independent prognostic indicators in case of serosa-positive gastric cancer. (J Korean Gastric Cancer Assoc 2004;4:89-94)