Our results indicate that DTR is a useful reconstruction method after PG, especially in terms of preventing reflux esophagitis and anastomotic strictures.

LG can be a feasible treatment that is beneficial in terms of earlier recovery after operation and can be expected to result in similar survival as OG in patients with AGC.

BackgroundMechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway is essential for the growth of gastric cancer (GC), but mTOR inhibitor everolimus was not effective for the treatment of GCs. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) researchers reported that most diffuse-type GCs were genomically stable (GS). Pathological analysis suggested that some diffuse-type GCs developed from intestinal-type GCs.MethodsWe established patient-derived xenograft (PDX) lines from diffuse-type GCs, and searched for drugs that suppressed their growth. Diffuse-type GCs were classified into subtypes by their gene expression profiles.ResultsmTOR inhibitor temsirolimus strongly suppressed the growth of PDX-derived diffuse-type GC-initiating cells, which was regulated via Wnt-mTOR axis. These cells were microsatellite unstable (MSI) or chromosomally unstable (CIN), inconsistent with TCGA report. Diffuse-type GCs in TCGA cohort could be classified into two clusters, and GS subtype was major in cluster I while CIN and MSI subtypes were predominant in cluster II where PDX-derived diffuse-type GC cells were included. We estimated that about 9 and 55% of the diffuse-type GCs in cluster II were responders to mTOR inhibitors and checkpoint inhibitors, respectively, by identifying PIK3CA mutations and MSI condition in TCGA cohort. These ratios were far greater than those of diffuse-type GCs in cluster I or intestinal-type GCs. Further analysis suggested that diffuse-type GCs in cluster II developed from intestinal-type GCs while those in cluster I from normal gastric epithelial cells.ConclusionmTOR inhibitors and checkpoint inhibitors might be useful for the treatment of a subset of diffuse-type GCs which may develop from intestinal-type GCs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13046-019-1121-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Roux-en-Y reconstruction was superior to Billroth I reconstruction in terms of frequency of occurrence of residual food, bile reflux, remnant gastritis, and reflux esophagitis in the long term. Differences between the two methods became more evident as the follow-up period lengthened.

No abstract

Reduced port surgery (RPS), in which fewer ports are used than that in a conventional laparoscopic procedure, is becoming increasingly popular for various surgeries. However, the application of RPS to the field of gastrectomy is still underdeveloped. We started laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy through an umbilical port plus another 5 mm port (dual port laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy: DP-LATG) as an RPS for laparoscopyassisted total gastrectomy (LATG). A SILS TM port was inserted into an umbilical incision, while another 5 mm port was inserted at the right flank region. We performed DP-LATG on ten early gastric cancer cases consecutively from May 2011 onwards, with the surgeries all performed by a single surgeon. The results of DP-LATG were compared with the resuls of ten conventional LATGs (C-LATGs) that were performed between March 2010 and April 2011. There were no significant differences in the mean operation time (DP-LATG, 253.0 ± 26.8 min; C-LATG, 235.5 ± 20.6 min; p = 0.119), mean blood loss (33.4 ± 23.7, 39.8 ± 60.4 mL, p = 0.759), and number of lymph nodes dissected (31.6 ± 12.3, 40.9 ± 18.7, p = 0.205). There were no intraoperative complications, there was no need for additional ports, and there were no conversions to open surgery nor postoperative complications in the DP-LATG cases. We successfully and safely performed DP-LATG without incurring any notable differences from C-LATG in terms of operation time, blood loss, and number of lymph nodes dissected.

It is unknown whether reduced-port gastrectomy has a less invasive nature than conventional laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (C-LADG). So we compared 30 cases of dual-port laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (DP-LADG; using an umbilical port plus a right flank 5-mm port) as a reduced-port gastrectomy with 30 cases of C-LADG alternately performed by a single surgeon. No significant differences were observed in blood loss, intraoperative complications, the number of dissected lymph nodes, postoperative complications, the day of first defecation, analgesic agents required, changes in body temperature, heart rate, white blood cell count, serum albumin level, or lymphocyte count between the 2 groups. The amounts of oral intake in the DP-LADG group were significantly higher on postoperative days 9 and 10. We concluded that the amount of oral intake in the DP-LADG group was superior to that in the C-LADG group; however, no other evidence of DP-LADG being less invasive than C-LADG was obtained.

No abstract