Gastric cancer remains a significant global health concern. Radical gastrectomy is the primary curative treatment. Diabetes mellitus is a common comorbidity in patients undergoing surgery for gastric cancer, including radical gastrectomy. Previous studies have suggested that diabetes can negatively affect postoperative outcomes, such as wound healing, infection rates, and overall recovery. However, the specific impact of diabetes on recovery after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer remains poorly understood. evaluate the influence of diabetes on postoperative recovery, including hospital stay duration, complications, and readmission rates, in patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Understanding these effects could help optimize perioperative management and improve patient outcomes.

To investigate the impact of diabetes on recovery after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer and associated postoperative outcomes.

This retrospective cohort study was performed at the Endocrinology Department of Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. We examined patients who underwent radical gastrectomy for cancer between January 2010 and December 2020. The patients were divided into the diabetes and non-diabetes groups. The main outcomes included length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and 30-day readmission rate. Secondary outcomes included quality of life indicators. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for potential confounding factors.

A total of 1210 patients were included in the study, with 302 diabetic patients and 908 non-diabetic patients. After propensity score matching, 280 patients were included in each group. Diabetic patients demonstrated significantly longer hospital stays (mean difference 2.3 days, 95%CI: 1.7-2.9, P < 0.001) and higher rates of postoperative complications (OR 1.68, 95%CI: 1.32-2.14, P < 0.001). The 30-day readmission rate was also higher in the diabetic group as compared to the non-diabetic group (12.5% vs 7.8%, P = 0.02).

Patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer experience prolonged hospital stay, increased postoperative complications, and higher readmission rates, thus requiring optimized perioperative management strategies.

This study aimed to evaluate the safety of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in elderly patients with gastric cancer (GC).

To evaluate the safety of ERAS in elderly patients with GC.

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were used to search for eligible studies from inception to April 1, 2023. The mean difference (MD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were pooled for analysis. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores. We used Stata (V.16.0) software for data analysis.

This study consists of six studies involving 878 elderly patients. By analyzing the clinical outcomes, we found that the ERAS group had shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD = -0.51, I2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.72 to -0.30, P = 0.00); earlier times to first flatus (defecation; MD = -0.30, I² = 0.00%, 95%CI = -0.55 to -0.06, P = 0.02); less intestinal obstruction (OR = 3.24, I2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.07 to 9.78, P = 0.04); less nausea and vomiting (OR = 4.07, I2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 1.29 to 12.84, P = 0.02); and less gastric retention (OR = 5.69, I2 = 2.46%, 95%CI = 2.00 to 16.20, P = 0.00). Our results showed that the conventional group had a greater mortality rate than the ERAS group (OR = 0.24, I2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.07 to 0.84, P = 0.03). However, there was no statistically significant difference in major complications between the ERAS group and the conventional group (OR = 0.67, I2 = 0.00%, 95%CI = 0.38 to 1.18, P = 0.16).

Compared to those with conventional recovery, elderly GC patients who received the ERAS protocol after surgery had a lower risk of mortality.

Background: The incidence of complications in gastric cancer (GC) patients after surgery was increasing, and it was not clear whether postoperative complications would have an impact on prognosis. The current study attempted to investigate the role of postoperative complication for prognosis on GC patients undergoing radical resection. Materials and Methods: Eligible studies were searched in three databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, in accordance with the searching strategy on September 4th, 2022. The survival values were most concerned; then, hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled up. All prognostic values, including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS), were allowed. Subgroup analysis based on complication types was used for further in-depth research. Results: A total of 29 studies involving 33,858 patients were included in this study. Intra-abdominal abscess (19.4%) was the most common complications in the included studies, followed by anastomotic leakage (17.0%) and pneumonia (16.4%). There were 23, 4, 6, and 10 studies that reported OS, DFS, DSS, and RFS, respectively. After analysis, postoperative complication was found to be an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR = 1.52, I2 = 1.14%, 95% CI = 1.42-1.61, P = .00), DFS (HR = 1.71, I2 = 0.00%,95% CI = 1.44-1.98, P < .05), DSS (HR = 1.60, I2 = 54.58%, 95% CI = 1.26-1.93, P < .1), and RFS (HR = 1.26, I2 = 0.00%, 95% CI = 1.11-1.41, P < .05). Subgroup analysis found that noninfectious complication was not significantly associated with OS (HR = 1.39, I2 = 0.00%, 95% CI = 0.96-1.82, P > .05). Conclusion: Surgeons needed to pay more attention to GC patients who developed postoperative complications, especially infectious complications, and take proactive management to improve the prognosis.

Gastric cancer (GC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) are the fifth and third most common cancer worldwide, respectively. Nowadays, GC is reported to have a potential predictive value for CRC, especially for advanced CRC.

To evaluate the necessity of colonoscopy for gastric neoplasm (GN) patients.

Four databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Ovid, were used to perform the search strategy on May 2, 2023. The prevalence of colorectal neoplasms (CRN) and baseline characteristics were compared between the neoplasm group and the control group. Continuous variables are expressed as the mean difference and standard deviation. Relationships of categorical variables in the two groups are expressed as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). Subgroup analysis according to different kinds of GNs was conducted for more in-depth analysis. The results of this study are represented by forest plots. Publication bias was evaluated by a funnel plot. All data analyses were performed by STATA SE 16.0 software.

A total of 3018 patients with GNs and 3905 healthy controls (age and sex matched) were enrolled for analysis. After comparing the prevalence of CRNs between the two groups, CRNs were detected significantly more frequently in GN patients than in controls (OR = 1.69, 95%CI = 1.28 to 2.23, I2 = 85.12%, P = 0.00), especially in patients with GC (OR =1.80, 95%CI = 1.49 to 2.18, I2 = 25.55%, P < 0.1). Moreover, other risk factors including age (OR = 1.08, 95%CI = 1.00 to 1.17, I2 = 90.13%, P = 0.00) and male sex (OR = 2.31, 95%CI = 1.26 to 4.22, I2 = 87.35%, P = 0.00), were related to the prevalence of CRNs. For patients in the GN group, body mass index (BMI, OR = 0.88, 95%CI = 0.80 to 0.98, I2 = 0.00%, P = 0.92) and smoking (OR = 1.03, 95%CI = 1.01 to 1.05, I2 = 0.00%, P = 0.57) were protective and risk factors for CRNs, respectively.

Patients are recommended to undergo colonoscopy when diagnosed with GNs, especially GC patients with a low BMI and a history of smoking.

The purpose of the current study was to compare the outcomes of patients with gastric cancer (GC) between the type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) group and the non-T2DM group. The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to March 8, 2022, to identify propensity score matching (PSM) studies that analyzed the effect of T2DM on the outcomes of patients with GC. Total complications, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between the T2DM group and the non-T2DM group. A total of four PSM studies with 834 patients were included in the current study. There were 311 and 523 patients in the T2DM group and the non-T2DM group, respectively. Baseline characteristics of the two groups were adjusted with PSM in all the four studies, however, no significant difference was found in baseline characteristics (P>0.05). DFS was significantly worse in the T2DM group compared with that in the non-T2DM group [hazard ratio (HR), 1.45; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.10-1.90; P=0.007)]. However, after pooling up the data, there was no significant difference between the T2DM group and the non-T2DM group in terms of OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.92-2.16; P=0.11), CSS (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.92-1.81; P=0.14) and total complications (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.64-1.60; P=0.95). Patients with GC and T2DM are associated with poor DFS. However, there were no significant differences between the T2DM group and the non-T2DM group in terms of OS, CSS and total complications.

This current study aimed to explore whether gastrectomy history influenced surgical outcomes while undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies from inception to April 29, 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was adopted to assess the quality of included studies. The mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous variables, and the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated for dichotomous variables. RevMan 5.4 was used for data analysis.

Seven studies enrolling 8193 patients were eligible for the final pooling up analysis (380 patients in the previous gastrectomy group and 7813 patients in the non-gastrectomy group). The patients in the gastrectomy group were older (MD = 11.11, 95%CI = 7.80-14.41, P < 0.01) and had a higher portion of males (OR = 3.74, 95%CI = 2.92-4.79, P < 0.01) than patients in the non-gastrectomy group patients. Moreover, the gastrectomy group had longer LC operation time (MD = 34.17, 95%CI = 25.20-43.14, P < 0.01), a higher conversion rate (OR = 6.74, 95%CI = 2.17-20.26, P = 0.01), more intraoperative blood loss (OR = 1.96, 95%CI = 0.59-3.32, P < 0.01) and longer postoperative hospital stays (MD = 1.07, 95%CI = 0.38-1.76, P < 0.01) than the non-gastrectomy group.

Patients with a previous gastrectomy history had longer operation time, a higher conversion rate, more intraoperative blood loss, and longer postoperative hospital stays than patients without while undergoing LC. Surgeons should pay more attention to these patients and make prudent decisions to avoid worse surgical outcomes as much as possible.

The aim of this study was to investigate whether there was a difference in overall survival (OS) between elderly patients with early gastric cancer (EGC) who underwent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and those who underwent surgery.

Four databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and CKNI were searched on March 20, 2023. The characteristics of the studies and the baseline information of the patients, including their medical histories, postoperative data, and prognoses, were recorded. Odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled up to calculate baseline information and postoperative information. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were used to calculate the prognosis of the patients. Stata V16.0 software was used for the data analysis.

A total of eight studies involving 2334 patients were included for the data analysis in this study. After pooling up the data, we found that the ESD group had lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Groupprevious (ECOG) scores (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.17 to 0.65, I2 = 59.69%, P = 0.00 < 0.05) than the surgery group. There were significant differences in the operation time (MD = -3.38, 95% CI = -5.19 to -1.57, I2 = 98.31%, P = 0.00 < 0.05), length of hospital stay (MD = -3.01, 95% CI = -4.81 to -1.20, I2 = 98.83%, P = 0.00 < 0.05) and hospitalization expenses (MD = -2.67, 95% CI = -3.59 to -1.75, I2 = 93.21%, P = 0.00 < 0.05) between the two groups. The ESD group had a lower OS rate (HR = 2.81, 95% CI = 2.20 to 3.58, I2 = 12.28%, P = 0.00 < 0.05).

Elderly patients with EGC who underwent ESD had a significantly worse OS rate than those who underwent surgery. If the patient's condition was suitable, surgery was still recommended for these patients.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore whether liver cirrhosis (LC) influences short-term and long-term outcomes in gastric neoplasm patients who undergo endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Materials and Methods: Eligible studies were identified in three databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library on December 18, 2022. Clinical characteristics, short-term outcomes, and long-term outcomes were compared between an LC group and a no liver cirrhosis (NLC) group. For continuous variables, the mean difference (MD) and standard deviation (SD) were pooled. For discontinuous variables, raw data from the 2 × 2 tables or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled. Forest plots were used to show the results, and a funnel plot was used to evaluate publication bias. Data analyses were performed by STATA SE 16.0 software. Results: Six retrospective studies involving 1616 gastric neoplasm patients were included in the study. Clinical characteristics, including age, gender, location, macroscopic type, invasion depth, differentiation, and ulceration, were found to be not significantly different between the LC group and the NLC group (P > .05). Moreover, LC was not a risk factor for short-term outcomes, including operative time (MD = 0.15, 95% CI = -0.02 to 0.32, I² = 0.00%, P = .09), en bloc resection (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.43-1.75, I² = 0.00%, P = .69), R0 resection (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.42-1.43, I² = 8.97%, P = .41), bleeding (OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.62-1.93, I² = 0.00%, P = .75), and perforation (OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 0.45-5.84, I² = 0.00%, P = .46). However, gastric cancer patients with LC exhibited a higher recurrence rate (OR = 3.40, 95% CI = 1.09-10.61, I² = 0.00%, P = .04) after ESD. Conclusion: Surgeons performing ESD in gastric neoplasm patients should pay more attention to long-term effects.

The advanced lung cancer inflammation index (ALI) is a comprehensive assessment indicator that can reflect inflammation and nutrition conditions. However, there are some controversies about whether ALI is an independent prognostic factor for gastrointestinal cancer patients undergoing surgical resection. Thus, we aimed to clarify its prognostic value and explore the potential mechanisms.

Four databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI were used for searching eligible studies from inception to June 28, 2022. All gastrointestinal cancers, including colorectal cancer (CRC), gastric cancer (GC), esophageal cancer (EC), liver cancer, cholangiocarcinoma, and pancreatic cancer were enrolled for analysis. We focused on prognosis most in the current meta-analysis. Survival indicators, including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and cancer-special survival (CSS) were compared between the high ALI group and the low ALI group. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was submitted as a supplementary document.

We finally included fourteen studies involving 5091 patients in this meta-analysis. After pooling the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), ALI was found to be an independent prognostic factor for both OS (HR = 2.09, I² = 92%, 95% CI = 1.53 to 2.85, P < 0.01), DFS (HR = 1.48, I² = 83%, 95% CI = 1.18 to 1.87, P < 0.01), and CSS (HR = 1.28, I² = 1%, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.60, P = 0.03) in gastrointestinal cancer. After subgroup analysis, we found that ALI was still closely related to OS for CRC (HR = 2.26, I² = 93%, 95% CI = 1.53 to 3.32, P < 0.01) and GC (HR = 1.51, I² = 40%, 95% CI = 1.13 to 2.04, P = 0.006) patients. As for DFS, ALI also has a predictive value on the prognosis of CRC (HR = 1.54, I² = 85%, 95% CI = 1.14 to 2.07, P = 0.005) and GC (HR = 1.37, I² = 0%, 95% CI = 1.09 to 1.73, P = 0.007) patients.

ALI affected gastrointestinal cancer patients in terms of OS, DFS, and CSS. Meanwhile, ALI was a prognostic factor both for CRC and GC patients after subgroup analysis. Patients with low ALI had poorer prognoses. We recommended that surgeons should perform aggressive interventions in patients with low ALI before the operation.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes after simultaneous gastrectomy plus cholecystectomy in gastric cancer patients. PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to Apr 15, 2021. Short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the simultaneous gastrectomy plus cholecystectomy group and the gastrectomy only group. Five retrospective studies with 3,315 patients and 1 randomized controlled trial with 130 patients were included. There was no significant difference in age, sex, surgical methods, or reconstruction. In terms of short-term outcomes, no significance was found in postoperative complications (odds ratio, OR = 1.08, I ² = 24%, 95% CI = 0.78-1.50, P = 0.65), postoperative biliary complications (OR = 0.98, I ² = 0%, 95% CI = 0.43-2.25, P = 0.96), mortality (OR = 1.28, I ² = 0%, 95% CI = 0.49-3.37, P = 0.61), and postoperative hospital stay (MD = -0.10, I ² = 0%, 95% CI = -0.73-0.54, P = 0.77) between the two groups. Simultaneous gastrectomy plus cholecystectomy in gastric cancer patients is safe and does not increase the short-term outcomes.