Next Article in Journal
Establishment of Novel Mouse Model of Dietary NASH Rapidly Progressing into Liver Cirrhosis and Tumors
Previous Article in Journal
Applied Molecular-Based Quality Control of Biobanked Samples for Multi-Omics Approach
Previous Article in Special Issue
Short and Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy Compared with Open Total Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer Patients
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers

by
Ulrich Ronellenfitsch
Department of Visceral, Vascular and Endocrine Surgery, University Medical Center Halle (Saale), Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Ernst-Grube-Str. 40, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany
Cancers 2023, 15(14), 3743; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15143743
Submission received: 18 June 2023 / Accepted: 11 July 2023 / Published: 24 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers)
Even though there have been remarkable advances in systemic treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies over the last few decades, in the vast majority of instances, surgery remains the sole therapeutic approach offering a chance for a definite cure. Moreover, non-curative operations are part of the treatment algorithm of many patients with gastrointestinal cancer with the aim of alleviating symptoms, improving quality of life, and, in specific settings, prolonging survival [1]. In order to achieve the best outcomes, objective and unbiased decisions on if and when an operation should be carried out or rather avoided or deferred have to be made. Ideally, such decisions rely on a sound evidence base and are reached in a multidisciplinary setting [2]. Once the decision to operate has been made, it is on the surgeon to choose the most appropriate surgical approach for the specific patient and his or her disease from an ever-growing choice of available techniques. Minimally invasive operations, employing laparoscopy and thoracoscopy either in a conventional or robotic manner, have long gained popularity among both patients and surgeons. Yet, a broad foundation of high-quality evidence showing clearly superior outcomes for minimally invasive access does still not exist for many procedures [3].
Besides the indication for or against surgery and the choice of surgical techniques, perioperative treatment plays a crucial role in achieving the desired outcomes. This holds true for oncological surgery and particularly so for surgical treatment of gastrointestinal cancers. The perioperative treatment, possibly comprising neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy but also measures to prepare patients for surgery and to ensure good postoperative outcomes, needs to be tailored to the characteristics of both the operation and the patient [4,5]. Postoperative complications, which can have a debilitating or even fatal outcome in extensive oncological resections, are dreaded by patients and surgeons alike. Common sense dictates that all efforts should be made to avoid complications, or, if this is not possible, detect them early in order to treat them in a timely and appropriate manner, in order to decrease the likelihood of failure to rescue [6]. Long-lasting or permanent sequelae for the patient need to be avoided or at least mitigated.
In this Special Issue of Cancers, the articles deal with the indication for and timing of surgery in specific scenarios. Gorbudhun et al. analyzed a cohort of patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine-based chemotherapy prior to resection [7]. The surgical and oncological results of their series are remarkable with a 75% complete resection rate and a median overall survival of 29 months. These data complement the recently published results of a randomized controlled trial suggesting that neoadjuvant chemotherapy can increase overall survival in patients with pancreatic cancer [8]. Folkestad et al. analyzed patients with duodenal neuroendocrine tumors and showed that only 1 of 23 patients who underwent endoscopic or surgical resection experienced recurrence [9]. They concluded that tumors < 10 mm can be treated endoscopically whereas larger ones should be treated surgically. Analyzing series of patients with such rare tumors is of particular importance given that randomized trials are hardly feasible in these entities. Taliadoros et al. focused on another rare gastrointestinal cancer, anal canal carcinoma, and performed a systematic review of the available evidence [10]. Based on their review, trimodality treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by abdominoperineal rectum resection seems to be the most effective approach. The last contribution dealing with surgical indications looked at para-aortic lymph node metastases from colorectal cancer. Zizzo et al. performed a systematic review but found no sufficient evidence to provide a recommendation for or against surgery in this situation [11].
Three articles of this Special Issue focused on specific surgical approaches and techniques. Kremer et al., based on a series of 16 patients with tracheoesophageal fistula, devised an algorithm for the treatment of this complex and multi-faceted entity, which is a severe manifestation of head and neck and esophageal cancers [12]. In their series, Pfitzmaier et al. evaluated a 1318 nm diode laser in liver surgery and showed convincing intra- and postoperative results of this device which hitherto had been predominantly employed in pulmonary and urological resections [13]. Lastly, Bizzoca and colleagues compared early postoperative results of laparoscopic and open resection in a propensity-matched sample of obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) with colorectal cancer [14]. They found a higher lymph node yield, faster recovery, and fewer complications in patients operated laparoscopically. These results provide an instructive addition to those of randomized trials comprising patients regardless of obesity, showing short-term advantages of minimally invasive procedures [15]. In a similar approach using propensity-score matching, Koo et al. showed similar short- and long-term outcomes for laparoscopic and open total gastrectomy in patients with mostly early-stage stomach cancer [16]. These findings are in line with higher-level evidence from randomized trials [17].
Petrou et al. contributed two manuscripts to the Special Issue, which are based on a review of guidelines and address perioperative issues. In the first work, they recommend the use of oral antibiotic prophylaxis, with or without mechanical bowel preparation, as an adjunct to intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis, in patients undergoing elective colorectal resections [18]. However, the evidence from randomized controlled trials is heterogeneous, and ongoing network meta-analyses might be able to provide clearer recommendations [19]. For obese patients with colorectal cancer undergoing surgery, they recommend key perioperative treatment steps comprising preoperative optimization by dieticians and physiotherapists, postoperative early mobilization, incentive spirometry, and general and chest physiotherapy as well as weight-adjusted doses of postoperative pharmacotherapy [20].
In summary, the contributions to this Special Issue provide important evidence on the many facets of surgical treatments for gastrointestinal cancers. By producing such evidence and translating it into clinical practice, the treatment outcomes of patients can be sustainably improved.

Funding

This research was partially supported by the Advanced Clinician Scientist Program of the Medical Faculty of the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Parker, C.S.; Miner, T.J. Selecting Patients for Palliative Procedures in Oncology. Surg. Oncol. Clin. N. Am. 2021, 30, 449–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Basta, Y.L.; Bolle, S.; Fockens, P.; Tytgat, K. The Value of Multidisciplinary Team Meetings for Patients with Gastrointestinal Malignancies: A Systematic Review. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2017, 24, 2669–2678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Walshaw, J.; Huo, B.; McClean, A.; Gajos, S.; Kwan, J.Y.; Tomlinson, J.; Biyani, C.S.; Dimashki, S.; Chetter, I.; Yiasemidou, M. Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: The evolution of minimally invasive surgery-a narrative review. Front. Surg. 2023, 10, 1193486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Roulin, D.; Demartines, N. Principles of enhanced recovery in gastrointestinal surgery. Langenbeck’s Arch. Surg. 2022, 407, 2619–2627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Neumann, P.A.; Berlet, M.W.; Friess, H. Surgical oncology in the age of multimodality therapy for cancer of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract. Expert Rev. Anticancer Ther. 2021, 21, 511–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Lafonte, M.; Cai, J.; Lissauer, M.E. Failure to rescue in the surgical patient: A review. Curr. Opin. Crit. Care 2019, 25, 706–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Gorbudhun, R.; Patel, P.H.; Hopping, E.; Doyle, J.; Geropoulos, G.; Mavroeidis, V.K.; Kumar, S.; Bhogal, R.H. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy-Chemoradiation for Borderline-Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A UK Tertiary Surgical Oncology Centre Series. Cancers 2022, 14, 4678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Seufferlein, T.; Uhl, W.; Kornmann, M.; Algül, H.; Friess, H.; König, A.; Ghadimi, M.; Gallmeier, E.; Bartsch, D.K.; Lutz, M.P.; et al. Perioperative or only adjuvant gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for resectable pancreatic cancer (NEONAX)-a randomized phase II trial of the AIO pancreatic cancer group. Ann. Oncol. 2023, 34, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Folkestad, O.; Wasmuth, H.H.; Mjønes, P.; Fougner, R.; Hauso, Ø.; Fossmark, R. Survival and Disease Recurrence in Patients with Duodenal Neuroendocrine Tumours-A Single Centre Cohort. Cancers 2021, 13, 3985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Taliadoros, V.; Rafique, H.; Rasheed, S.; Tekkis, P.; Kontovounisios, C. Management and Outcomes in Anal Canal Adenocarcinomas-A Systematic Review. Cancers 2022, 14, 3738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Zizzo, M.; Dorma, M.P.F.; Zanelli, M.; Sanguedolce, F.; Bassi, M.C.; Palicelli, A.; Ascani, S.; Giunta, A. Long-Term Outcomes of Surgical Resection of Pathologically Confirmed Isolated Para-Aortic Lymph Node Metastases in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review. Cancers 2022, 14, 661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Kremer, T.; Gazyakan, E.; Maurer, J.T.; Ott, K.; Gerken, A.; Schmittner, M.; Ronellenfitsch, U.; Kneser, U.; Nowak, K. Intra- and Extrathoracic Malignant Tracheoesophageal Fistula-A Differentiated Reconstructive Algorithm. Cancers 2021, 13, 4329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Pfitzmaier, P.; Schwarzbach, M.; Ronellenfitsch, U. The Evaluation of the 1318 nm Diode Laser in Open Liver Surgery. Cancers 2022, 14, 1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bizzoca, C.; Zupo, R.; Aquilino, F.; Castellana, F.; Fiore, F.; Sardone, R.; Vincenti, L. Video-Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery in Obese Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Study. Cancers 2021, 13, 1844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Vilsan, J.; Maddineni, S.A.; Ahsan, N.; Mathew, M.; Chilakuri, N.; Yadav, N.; Munoz, E.J.; Nadeem, M.A.; Abbas, K.; Razzaq, W.; et al. Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches to Treat Colorectal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review of Literature. Cureus 2023, 15, e38956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Eom, S.S.; Park, S.H.; Eom, B.W.; Yoon, H.M.; Kim, Y.W.; Ryu, K.W. Short and Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy Compared with Open Total Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer Patients. Cancers 2022, 15, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Katai, H.; Mizusawa, J.; Katayama, H.; Morita, S.; Yamada, T.; Bando, E.; Ito, S.; Takagi, M.; Takagane, A.; Teshima, S.; et al. Survival outcomes after laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy versus open distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA or IB gastric cancer (JCOG0912): A multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2020, 5, 142–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Petrou, N.A.; Kontovounisios, C. The Use of Mechanical Bowel Preparation and Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Call for Change in Practice. Cancers 2022, 14, 5990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Friedrichs, J.; Seide, S.; Vey, J.; Zimmermann, S.; Hardt, J.; Kleeff, J.; Klose, J.; Michalski, C.W.; Kieser, M.; Pilz, M.; et al. Interventions to reduce the incidence of surgical site infection in colorectal resections: Systematic review with multicomponent network meta-analysis (INTRISSI): Study protocol. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e057226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Petrou, N.A.; Rafique, H.; Rasheed, S.; Tekkis, P.; Kontovounisios, C. Colorectal Cancer and the Obese Patient: A Call for Guidelines. Cancers 2022, 14, 5255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ronellenfitsch, U. Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers. Cancers 2023, 15, 3743. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15143743

AMA Style

Ronellenfitsch U. Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers. Cancers. 2023; 15(14):3743. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15143743

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ronellenfitsch, Ulrich. 2023. "Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers" Cancers 15, no. 14: 3743. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15143743

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop