Abstract
Simple SummaryGastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality, especially in Asia. Radical gastrectomy, including omentectomy, is the standard surgical procedure for curative treatment. Nevertheless, total omentectomy may have an impact on postoperative complications. Although the omentum serves as a bridge for peritoneal metastasis, some clinicians propose that the omentum could participate in anti-bacterial defense, hemostasis, and prevention of intestinal adhesions. Clinically, it is controversial whether extensive omentectomy provides better survival to patients. Here, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the safety and efficacy of partial omentectomy compared to total omentectomy during radical gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer. We demonstrate that partial omentectomy has non-inferior long-term oncological outcomes compared to total omentectomy. In addition, partial omentectomy is associated with shorter operative time and lesser blood loss. Therefore, it may not be necessary to perform total omentectomy routinely.Background: Surgical treatment is the key to cure localized gastric cancer. There is no strong evidence that supports the value of omentectomy. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of partial and total omentectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. All studies that compared total and partial omentectomy as treatments for gastric cancer were included. The primary outcomes were patients’ overall survival and disease-free survival, while the secondary outcomes were perioperative outcome and postoperative complications. Results: A total of nine studies were examined, wherein 1043 patients were included in the partial omentectomy group, and 1995 in the total omentectomy group. The partial omentectomy group was associated with better overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.98, p = 0.04, I2 = 0%), shorter operative time, and lesser blood loss than the total omentectomy group. In addition, no statistically significant difference was observed in the number of dissected lymph nodes, length of hospital stays, complication rate, and disease-free survival. Conclusions: Our results show that, compared with total omentectomy in gastric cancer surgery, partial omentectomy had non-inferior oncological outcomes and comparable safety outcomes.
Highlights
Gastric cancer (GC) is the fourth most common cancer worldwide
The omental lymph system was suggested as a bridge for metastasis to the peritoneal cavity in animal models [3], and omental lavage occasionally detect omental micrometastasis in patients with GC [4], there is still no evidence showing a definitive improvement of survival after gastrectomy with total omentectomy
We identified 513 records through the database search
Summary
Gastric cancer (GC) is the fourth most common cancer worldwide. In 2020, a total of1,089,103 (5.6% of all cancer) new gastric cancer cases, causing 768,793 deaths (7.7% of all cancer), were estimated [1]. D2 lymph node dissection is generally recommended during gastrectomy. Both omentum and bursa omentalis should be resected to prevent peritoneal metastasis. Surgical treatment is the key to cure localized gastric cancer. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the safety and efficiency of partial and total omentectomy in patients with gastric cancer. All studies that compared total and partial omentectomy as treatments for gastric cancer were included. Conclusions: Our results show that, compared with total omentectomy in gastric cancer surgery, partial omentectomy had non-inferior oncological outcomes and comparable safety outcomes
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
