Evaluation of salvage surgery for type 4 gastric cancer

Abstract

Patients with type 4 gastric cancer and peritoneal metastasis respond better to chemotherapy than surgery. In particular, patients without gastric stenosis who can consume a meal usually experience better quality of life (QOL). However, some patients with unsuccessful chemotherapy are unable to consume a meal because of gastric stenosis and obstruction. These patients ultimately require salvage surgery to enable them to consume food normally. We evaluated the outcomes of salvage total gastrectomy after chemotherapy in four patients with gastric stenosis. We determined clinical outcomes of four patients who underwent total gastrectomy as salvage surgery. Outcomes were time from chemotherapy to death and QOL, which was assessed using the Support Team Assessment Schedule-Japanese version (STAS-J). Three of the patients received combination chemotherapy [tegafur, gimestat and otastat potassium (TS-1); cisplatin]. Two of these patients underwent salvage chemotherapy after 12 and 4 mo of chemotherapy. Following surgery, they could consume food adequately and their STAS-J scores improved, so their treatments were continued. The third patient underwent salvage surgery after 7 mo of chemotherapy. This patient was unable to consume food adequately after surgery and developed surgical complications. His clinical outcomes at 3 mo were very poor. The fourth patient received combination chemotherapy (TS-1 and irinotecan hydrochloride) for 6 mo and then underwent received salvage surgery. After surgery, he could consume food adequately and his STAS-J score improved, so his treatment was continued. After the surgery, he enjoyed his life for 16 mo. Of four patients who received salvage total gastrectomy after unsuccessful chemotherapy, the QOL improved in three patients, but not in the other patient. Salvage surgery improves QOL in most patients, but some patients develop surgical complications that prevent improvements in QOL. If salvage surgery is indicated, the surgeon and/or oncologist must provide the patient with a clear explanation of the purpose of surgery, as well as the possible risks and benefits to allow the patient to reach an informed decision on whether to consent to the procedure.