BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score on survival compared with the platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) in patients with resectable thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).MethodsOne hundred eighty-five consecutive patients who underwent subtotal esophagectomy with curative intent for resectable thoracic ESCC were retrospectively reviewed. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analyses for 3-year overall survival (OS) as the endpoint were performed, and the maximal Youden indices were calculated to assess discrimination ability and to determine the appropriate cut-off values of CONUT, PLR, and NLR. The patients were then classified into high and low groups based on these cut-off values. Correlations between CONUT and other clinicopathological characteristics were analyzed. Prognostic factors predicting overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsThe areas under the curve predicting 3-year OS were 0.603 for CONUT, 0.561 for PLR, 0.564 for NLR, and 0.563 for GPS. The optimal cut-off values were two for the CONUT score, 193 for PLR, and 3.612 for NLR. The high-CONUT group was significantly associated with lower BMI, high-PLR, high-NLR, and GPS1/2 groups. On univariate analysis, high-CONUT, high-PLR, high-NLR, and GPS 1/2 groups were significantly associated with poorer OS and RFS. Of these factors, multivariate analysis revealed that only the CONUT score was an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 2.303, 95 % CI 1.191–4.455; p = 0.013) and RFS (HR 2.163, 95 % CI 1.139–4.109; p = 0.018).ConclusionsThe CONUT score was an independent predictor of OS and RFS before treatment and was superior to PLR, NLR, and GPS in terms of predictive ability for prognosis in patients with resectable thoracic ESCC.

No abstract

OBJECTIVES:The usefulness of non-magnifying endoscopy with narrow-band imaging (NBI; NM-NBI) in the screening of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HGIN) remains unclear. Here, we aimed to compare NM-NBI and chromoendoscopy with iodine staining (CE-Iodine) in terms of the diagnostic performance, and to evaluate the usefulness of NM-NBI in detecting early esophageal SCC.METHODS:We prospectively enrolled 202 consecutive patients (male/female=180/22; median age, 67 years) with high-risk factors for esophageal SCC. All patients received endoscopic examination with NM-NBI and CE-Iodine to screen for early esophageal SCC or HGIN. We conducted the examinations sequentially, and calculated the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity through a per-lesion-based analysis. A propensity score matching analysis was performed to reduce the effects of selection bias, and we compared the respective outcomes according to NM-NBI and CE-Iodine after matching.RESULTS:The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of NM-NBI were 77.0, 88.3, and 75.2%, respectively, and those for unstained areas by CE-Iodine were 68.0, 94.2, and 64.0, respectively. The accuracy and specificity of NM-NBI were superior to those of CE-Iodine (P=0.03 and P=0.01, respectively). However, the sensitivity did not significantly differ between NM-NBI and CE-Iodine (P=0.67). The accuracy and specificity of NM-NBI before matching were superior to those of CE-Iodine after matching (P=0.04 and P=0.03).CONCLUSIONS:NM-NBI was useful and reliable for the diagnosis of esophageal SCC and can be a promising screening strategy for early esophageal SCC.

Preoperative PNI may have merit as a gauge of prognosis for patients with GC at stages 1 and 2, but PNI and postoperative morbidity showed no correlation in this setting.

Preoperative SMI, measured in cross-section using CT, is a useful nutritional determinant that may predict OS and CSS in patients with GC who undergo gastrectomy. In our view, nutritional support for sarcopenic patients with stage I GC, aimed at retaining or adding skeletal muscle mass, may improve survival. Our analysis showed no relationship between preoperative SMI and postoperative complications.

No abstract

Remnant gastric cancer (RGC) and gastric stump cancer after distal gastrectomy (DG) are recognized as the same clinical entity. In this review, the current knowledges as well as the non-settled issues of RGC are presented. Duodenogastric reflux and denervation of the gastric mucosa are considered as the two main factors responsible for the development of RGC after benign disease. On the other hand, some precancerous circumstances which already have existed at the time of initial surgery, such as atrophic gastritis and intestinal metaplasia, are the main factors associated with RGC after gastric cancer. Although eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) in remnant stomach is promising, it is still uncertain whether it can reduce the risk of carcinogenesis. Periodic endoscopic surveillance after DG was reported useful in detecting RGC at an early stage, which offers a chance to undergo minimally invasive endoscopic treatment or laparoscopic surgery and leads to an improved prognosis in RGC patients. Future challenges may be expected to elucidate the benefit of eradication of H. pylori in the remnant stomach if it could reduce the risk for RGC, to build an optimal endoscopic surveillance strategy after DG by stratifying the risk for development of RGC, and to develop a specific staging system for RGC for the standardization of the treatment by prospecting the prognosis.

Background/Aim: The relationship between the preoperative Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and morbidity of patients with gastric cancer (GC) undergoing gastrectomy has not yet been reported. Our study aimed to investigate whether preoperative GNRI is associated with shortterm outcomes in elderly patients with GC. Patients and Methods: This study enrolled 348 elderly patients with GC who were more than 75 years old and underwent curative gastrectomy for GC at our Institution between January 2006 and December 2015. GNRI was invoked to stratify patients as high (GNRI≥92; n=190) or low (GNRI<92; n=158) GNRI nutritional status. The clinicopathologic features and short-term outcomes were compared. Results: In multivariate analysis, low GNRI emerged as an independent predictor of postoperative complications (Clavien Dindo classification grade II≤). Low GNRI demonstrated significantly more frequent extra-surgical complications than high GNRI. Significantly more patients with low GNRI suffered from postoperative pneumoniae than patients with high GNRI (p=0.013). On the other hand, the incidence of surgical field complications such as leakage, pancreatic fistula and intraabdominal abscess did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusion: GNRI is useful in predicting postoperative complications of elderly patients with GC undergoing gastrectomy. Preoperative GNRI has merit as a gauge of postoperative complications in the extrasurgical field, especially pneumonia. There was no relationship between preoperative GNRI and surgical field complications in this setting.