Stomach Flashcards
A 68-year-old male with a history of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia presents to his primary care physician’s office with a chief complaint of worsening epigastric pain and weakness. The pain is improved with oral intake, especially milk-based products. The patient has been treating his pain with naproxen.
In the office, the patient is non-toxic with normal vital signs. His physical examination reveals mild epigastric tenderness with deep palpation. Serum hemoglobin was 8.3 g/dL. Fecal occult blood testing was positive. The patient underwent colonoscopy, which was normal.
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed a 2.5 cm ulcerated lesion with elevated, irregular borders 5 cm distal to thegastroesophageal junction.
Appropriate management of the ulcer includes?
A. Observation
B. Cessation of naproxen and begin sucralfate and a proton-pump inhibitor with repeat EGD in 3 months
C. Biopsy the ulcer
D. Proximal gastrectomy
E. Total gastrectomy
C.
Historically, biopsy of gastric ulcers was uniform practice throughout medical and surgical disciplines since there was a 5% to 11% attendant risk of malignancy. However, data now suggest that the incidence of gastric cancer is decreasing, thereby rendering mandatory biopsy of all gastric ulcers unnecessary.
When gastric ulcers have features suggestive of malignancy such as elevated irregular folds, association with a polypoid or fungated mass, and abnormal adjacent mucosal folds, then biopsy is warranted. Several biopsies, typically 6 or more, are necessary to minimize the false negative risk. If benign ulcers are diagnosed, then EGD is repeated in 6 weeks to ensure resolution. All ulcers should be followed and biopsied until complete resolution occurs.
If malignancy is detected, then further work-up with potential operative intervention is pursued.
Ulcers with a diameter of 3 cm or greater are termed giant gastric ulcers (Fig. 23-2). These large ulcers harbor an underlying malignancy in 30% of lesions.
Given the higher incidence of malignancy, perforation, and bleeding, surgical treatment is warranted.
A 68-year-old male with a history of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia presents to his primary care physician’s office with a chief complaint of worsening epigastric pain and weakness. The pain is improved with oral intake, especially milk-based products. The patient has been treating his pain with naproxen. In the office, the patient is non-toxic with normal vital signs. His physical examination reveals mild epigastric tenderness with deep palpation. Serum hemoglobin was 8.3 g/dL. Fecal occult blood testing was positive. The patient
underwent colonoscopy, which was normal. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed a 2.5 cm ulcerated lesion with elevated, irregular borders 5 cm distal to the gastroesophageal junction.
Final pathology reveals a poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma. The most sensitive preoperative examination to determine and N stage is:
A. Positron emission tomography (PE) scan
B. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)
C. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with gadolinium
D. Diagnostic laparoscopy
E. Triple-phase helical computed tomography (CT) scan
B.
EUS is important in preoperative locorégional staging for gastric cancer. It is currently the best imaging modality for assessing both tumor depth and nodal invasion. Spatial resolution of 0.1 mm can be achieved with EUS. T staging accuracy ranges from 60% to 90%, whereas N staging accuracy ranges from 50% to 80% EUS is better at identifying T1 (80%) and T3 (90%) lesions as opposed to T2 (38.5%).
EUS is not reliable at delineating between individual benign and malignant lymph nodes. Increasing T stage directly correlates with increased risk of nodal and distant metastasis (> 80% likelihood of nodal metastasis in T3 disease versus < 5% in stage T1 m).
CT remains an important preoperative tool to evaluate for metastatic disease. If metastatic disease is present, an unnecessary operation can be avoided.
T staging accuracy with CT approaches 80% (66% to 77%). N stage determination is variable with a wide range of 25% to 86%.
Small gastric tumors and metastases less than 5 mm can be missed on CT.
CT, MRI, and PET scanning show promise for preoperative staging, but have yet to become standard of care.
Routine diagnostic laparoscopy to minimize unnecessary operations has become a less popular pre-resection strategy.
However, diagnostic laparoscopy still has a role in advanced gastric cancer. Power et al., in 2009, evaluated patients with known gastric cancer without obvious metastatic disease and stratified them into low-risk (Tl-2, NO) and high-risk (T3-4, N+ , or both) groups based on EUS. Both
groups underwent diagnostic laparoscopy, which identified Ml disease in 20.5% of the high-risk patients and 4% of the low-risk patients.
The study concluded that laparoscopy can be avoided in patients with EUS early stage cancer, whereas more advanced
gastric cancers would benefit from diagnostic laparoscopy to rule out occult metastatic disease.
When diagnostic laparoscopy is performed, peritoneal lavage cytology should be obtained as positive results
can alter further therapy. Diagnostic laparoscopy, however, does not address the N stage.
A 68-year-old male with a history of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia presents to his primary care physician’s office with a chief complaint of worsening epigastric pain and weakness. The pain is improved with oral intake, especially milk-based products.
The patient has been treating his pain with naproxen. In the office, the patient is non-toxic with normal vital signs. His physical examination reveals mild epigastric tenderness with deep palpation. Serum hemoglobin was 8.3 g/dL. Fecal occult blood testing was positive. The patient underwent colonoscopy, which was normal.
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed a 2.5 cm ulcerated lesion with elevated, irregular borders 5 cm distal to the gastroesophageal junction.
The EUS suggests a T3N0 lesion. The most appropriate next step would be:
A. Neoadjuvant therapy
B. Proximal gastrectomy with negative margins (RO) only
C. Total gastrectomy
D. Total gastrectomy with splenectomy and distal pancreatectomy
E. Esophagogastrectomy with colonic interposition graft
A.
Although the patient will ultimately need an operation, the MAGIC trail demonstrates that the patient will benefit from neoadjuvant therapy instead of proceeding straight to the operating room, unless the patient is hemorrhaging from the mass resulting in hemodynamic instability.
Neoadjuvant therapy consisting of epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil is recommended for patients with T2 lesions or higher.
The benefits from the preoperative therapy are to reduce tumor size and stage, eliminate micrometastases, improve tumor-related symptoms, and determine whether tumors are sensitive to chemotherapy.
Gastric adenocarcinoma exists as two distinct entities: diffuse and intestinal type:
INTESTINAL Age: Older Gender: M>F Mets: Hematologic Site of mets: Liver Risk factors: Atrophic gastritis, intestinal metaplasia, H. pylori, diet high in salt, smoked and preserved food Cellular etiology: Glandular gastric mucosa Prognosis: Better
DIFFUSE Age: Younger Gender: M=F Mets: Lymphatic, submucosal spread which can result in a thickened, non-distensible stomach (linitis plastica) Site of mets: Peritoneum Risk factors: CHD-1 mutation, obesity Cellular etiology: Lamina propria Prognosis: Poor
Controversies surrounding the surgical management of gastric adenocarcinoma include: adequacy of surgical margins, need for resection of adjacent structures (i.e. spleen and distal pancreas), and extent of lymphadenectomy.
Diffuse type gastric adenocarcinoma spreads in the submucosa, thereby increasing the risk of microscopic residual positive margin (R1 resection).
In order to minimize the risk of leaving microscopic disease or recurrence, a 5 to 6 cm margin is considered acceptable for an R0 resection.
Newer studies emerging from Japan suggest that smaller proximal resection margins of 2 to 3 cm are adequate for T1 lesions.
If the patient went straight to surgery, total gastrectomy is preferred as the tumor is within 5 cm of the gastroesophageal junction.
Esophagogastrectomy is unnecessary when the gastroesophageal junction has no direct tumor involvement and surgical margins exceed 5 cm.
Assessing nodal disease at the time of operation can be difficult. A minimum of 15 lymph nodes is recommended for staging. Most surgeons tend to remove the perigastric lymph nodes (DI resection).
In countries like Japan where gastric cancer has a higher prevalence, a more aggressive D2 lymphadenectomy is frequently employed harvesting lymph nodes along the celiac trunk and its named branches, the middle colic artery, the superior mesenteric artery, and the periaortic area.
Several studies have demonstrated prolonged survival with the more aggressive (D2) lymphadenectomy. This is thought to be related to better locorégional disease control.
A recent randomized trial comparing DI versus D2 lymphadenectomy did not reveal a significant difference in long-term survival. Accordingly, more studies regarding the extent of lymphadenectomy
are required before a long-term endorsement of this more aggressive strategy can be made.
Removal of adjacent structures (ie., distal pancreas and spleen) confer no survival benefit and actually increase morbidity and mortality. Resection of these adjacent structures should be reserved for primary tumor invasion.
A 68-year-old male with a history of hypertension and hypercholesterolemia presents to his primary care physician’s office with a chief complaint of worsening epigastric pain and weakness. The pain is improved with oral intake, especially milk-based products.
The patient has been treating his pain with naproxen. In the office, the patient is non-toxic with normal vital signs. His physical examination reveals mild epigastric tenderness with deep palpation. Serum hemoglobin was 8.3 g/dL. Fecal occult blood testing was positive. The patient underwent colonoscopy, which was normal.
Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed a 2.5 cm ulcerated lesion with elevated, irregular borders 5 cm distal to the
gastroesophageal junction.
The final pathology revealed a T4N1 lesion with negative margins. The patient should next receive:
A. No additional therapy
B. Imatinib
C. External-beam radiation only
D. Fluorouracil-based chemotherapy only
E. External-beam radiation and fluorouracil-based chemotherapy
E.
The final pathology revealed Stage III gastric cancer. Given the high rate of locorégional failure (40% to 70%) and a 5-year survival rate of 20% to 28%, adjuvant therapy is recommended. This recommendation originates from the Intergroup Trial 0116, which demonstrated a benefit for those patients with advanced
gastric cancer undergoing curative resection combined with postoperative fluorouracil-based chemotherapy and radiation.
The CLASSIC trial demonstrated survival advantages using an adjuvant chemotherapy therapy regimen of capecitabine and oxaliplatin.
Resection without adjuvant therapy resulted in decreased survival when compared with those who received postoperative chemoradiation.
Palliation can be achieved with either external-beam radiation or chemotherapy, but local control and long-term survival are poor. Imatinib is a tyrosine-kinase
inhibitor currently used for gastrointestinal stromal tumors and other malignancies.
Which of the following describes the association between Irish’s node and gastric cancer?
A. An anterior mass palpable on digital rectal examination
B. A metastatic left supraclavicular lymph node
C. An ovarian mass from metastatic tumor
D. Metastatic left axillary lymph node
E. Umbilical mass suggestive of metastatic gastric cancer
D.
In general, physical findings portend advanced disease. Patients are typically cachectic and jaundiced when nodal metastatic disease obstructs the common bile duct.
Irish’s node is an enlarged lymph node within the left axilla.
A prerectal mass palpable on digital rectal examination is a Blumer shelf suggestive of a drop metastasis.
Virchow’s node, also known as Troisier’s sign, refers to carcinomatous involvement of the left supraclavicular lymph nodes at the junction of the thoracic duct with the subclavian vein.
Krukenberg tumors are ovarian masses from metastatic gastric cancer.
The Sister Mary Joseph node is a periumbilical nodule suggestive of carcinomatosis. It reflects tumor extension from the falciform ligament.
A 62-year-old man with hypertension was referred to the general surgery clinic for further evaluation of chronic abdominal pain, bloating, and early satiety, which had been worsening over several months. He was previously healthy except for hypertension controlled with metoprolol and a history of inguinal hernia repair.
His last screening colonoscopy performed 2 years ago was negative. On review of systems, he endorses significant fatigue. Laboratory results are consistent with mild anemia. An abdominal CT scan was obtained for
further evaluation and revealed a large tumor of gastric origin (pictured below).
The best next step to definitively diagnose this lesion is:
A. Abdominal MRI
B. Endoscopic ultrasound with FNA
C. Percutaneous image-guided biopsy
D. Diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy and peritoneal washings
B.
The CT slice shown demonstrates a large, well-demarcated, heterogeneously enhancing mass that appears to grow outward from the wall of the stomach.
These findings are characteristic of gastric GIST, although the differential diagnosis includes gastric adenocarcinoma, carcinoid, lymphoma,or leiomyosarcoma, as well as tumors of pancreatic, renal, or adrenal
origin.
GIST is a relatively uncommon neoplasm, with an incidence of about 7 per million population in the United States and Europe. The benefits of EUS include defining the layer of stomach wall from which the tumor originates, delineating its relationship to surrounding structures, and obtaining a tissue diagnosis transluminally, which avoids the risk of seeding a percutaneous biopsy tract.
Percutaneous image-guided biopsy may result in intraperitoneal tumor spillage or
hemorrhage as a result of the friable, vascular nature of these tumors and is therefore less desirable.
MRI offers no additional benefit over CT diagnostically, though it may provide more information regarding the tumors relationship to surrounding tissues. Diagnostic laparoscopy with peritoneal washings for cytology has a prognostic role in gastric adenocarcinoma, but a similar role has not been established in GIST.
Laparoscopic excision of the lesion may be performed without a tissue diagnosis for a small tumor, but the goal in this case is resection to clear margins, rather than simply to obtain tissue for diagnostic purposes and therefore, endoscopic ultrasound is the best choice.
Biopsied tissue is positive for KIT (CD 117) upon immunochemical staining. Which of the following is true of this type of tumor?
A. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) most commonly arises from the stomach.
B. The most common subtype is epithelioid.
C. A positive stain tor KIT (CD 117) is required to make the diagnosis of GIST.
D. The most common site of metastatic spread is the peritoneum.
E. All tumors >1 cm should be considered potentially malignant.
A.
The presence of the c-kit receptor tyrosine kinase on tumor cells, as in this case, is diagnostic of GIST.
However, it is noteworthy that about 5% of gastrointestinal stromal cells tumors are KIT-negative and only about 80% have a KIT mutation.
Other useful histologic markers include CD34 and smooth-muscle actin, if KIT negative GIST is suspected. The most common histologic subtype is the spindle-cell variety (70%), followed by epithelioid (20%) and mixed subtypes (10%).
All tumors greater than 2 cm in size should be considered malignant, even in the absence of metastases on initial work-up. The most common site of metastatic spread of GIST is the liver, followed by the omentum
and peritoneum. If present, these metastases are often identified by contrast enhanced CT scanning.
Metastasis to the lymph nodes, lung, or other distant sites may occur, but this is quite rare. Thus, extended surgical lymphadenectomy is not indicated for these tumors.
Over half of all GISTs arise from the stomach, making it the most common primary site.
Further review of the CT scan raises concerns that this 6-cm tumor may involve the neck of the pancreas. There is no evidence of distant metastatic disease. Further therapy in this case should include:
A. Surgical resection with en-bloc removal of the involved pancreas to achieve 1 cm negative margins.
B. Neoadjuvant imatinib prior to surgical therapy.
C. Avoidance of pancreatectomy by enucleation of the tumor.
D. An open rather than laparoscopic approach should be used.
E. An extended lymphadenectomy should be performed.
B.
When surgical morbidity can be reduced by its use, preoperative therapy with imatinib, a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, should be strongly considered.
In this case, tumor down-staging could potentially eliminate involvement with the pancreas and obviate the need for pancreatectomy.
For localized GIST, surgical resection is indicated and is curative for low risk lesions. If necessary to achieve an R0 resection, en-bloc removal of involved organs outside the primary site is indicated. However, there is no additional survival benefit to resection beyond microscopically negative margins.
An extended lymphadenectomy also offers no benefit to the patient, as nodal metastasizes are uncommon with GIST occurring about 1% of the time.
Enucleation of the tumor risks violating its pseudocapsule which may result in intraoperative tumor spillage, resulting in recurrence rates approaching 100%. Though laparoscopic surgery for GIST has not been prospectively evaluated, there is good retrospective evidence to show adequate oncologic outcomes with this approach.
Rates of R0 resection between 97% and 100% and disease free survival and overall survival rates of over 90%.
In the past, an open approach for tumors larger than 5 cm has been recommended.
Current guidelines indicate that laparoscopy is appropriate for larger tumors, providing
sound oncologic principles are maintained.
Af er appropriate therapy, final pathology returns with a GIST of gastric origin, 6 cm in greatest dimension with 15 mitoses per high-power field.
Which of the following is true regarding this patient?
A. Adjuvant therapy with imatinib will increase his chance of recurrence-free and overall survival at 5 years.
B. If this lesion were in the small bowel, the prognosis would be better.
C. This patient is at low risk of tumor recurrence.
D. Five year overall survival for all GIST patients is about 50%.
A.
Tumor size, mitotic rate, and location are important prognostic factors in GIST. Tumors with a size < 5 cm have a 5-year overall survival of about 70%.
This drops to about 45% when tumor size is > 10 cm.
Similarly, about 75% of patients with < 5 per
high-power field will survive 5 years, only 20% of those with more than 5 per high-powered field are alive at 5 years. Tumors of gastric origin are more favorable than those originating in the small bowel, with survival rates of approximately 75% and 50%, respectively, after 5 years.
Tumor rupture before or during surgery also portends a poor prognosis, as discussed above. Given the mitotic rate of the tumor in
this case, the patient has a relatively poor prognosis.
Adjuvant therapy with imatinib for 1 year has been shown to increase recurrence free survival by 15% and, if continued for 3 years, improve 5-year overall survival by 10%. However, about half of all patients will develop resistance to the drug within 2 years of its initiation. For these patients, other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (i.e. sunitinib) remain effective second line therapy.
Historically, the overall survival for all patients with GIST at 5 years has been about 50%. However, in the era of imatinib, the 5-year OS has improved to 84%, though survival varies markedly between patients with Stage 1 tumors (nearly 100%) versus more Stage 3 and higher tumors (22%).
Which of the following is true of gastrointestinal stromal tumors?
A. Because they arise from the mucosa, GISTs are easily identified at endoscopy.
B. Surgical resection is often appropriate for patients with recurrent or metastatic GIST.
C. These tumors arise from the smooth-muscle cells of the intestinal wall.
D. GIST tends to arise as a solitary lesion.
E. Abdominal pain is the most common clinical manifestation of GIST.
D.
Gastrointestinal stromal tumors are more likely to be solitary than multiple. This stands in contrast to carcinoid tumors, which often occur multiply. They arise from the muscular layer of the intestinal wall, but
from the interstitial cells of Cajal, not the smooth muscle cells.
Their location in the muscular layer can make small GISTs somewhat difficult to detect and lead to underestimation of tumor extent by endoscopy.
At presentation, GIST is frequently found to be metastatic, most commonly to the liver or peritoneum. Presenting symptoms may include abdominal pain, dyspepsia, or early satiety, but gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common occurrence, leading to the eventual diagnosis of a GIST. Life-threatening hemorrhage from intraperitoneal rupture of these highly vascular tumors may also occur.
Generally speaking, imatinib chemotherapy is considered first line therapy for metastatic or recurrent GIST and surgical resection is often inappropriate due to high rates of recurrence.
However, some patients with tumors response to imatinib and lesions that are felt
to be completely resectable may benefit. I
A 56-year-old man with a 4-month history of vague epigastric abdominal pain, decreased appetite and weight loss presents to his local gastroenterologist for evaluation. An esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reveals
non-specific gastritis and a polypoid lesion in the region of the antrum. Laboratory findings note mild anemia, elevated LDH, and H. pylori positive samples from the EGD.
Follow-up endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) notes a thickened antral wall, and multiple biopsies obtained reveal an extra-nodal marginal zone B cell lymphoma of mucosa (gut)-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) type (MALT lymphoma). Computed tomography of the
chest, abdomen, and pelvis reveals thickening of the distal half of the stomach with no evidence of adenopathy. Bone marrow biopsy reveals no evidence of disease dissemination.
After the patient has undergone a complete staging work-up as noted above, what stage low-grade gastric MALT lymphoma does this patient have?
A. Stage I
B. Stage II
C. Stage III
D. Stage IV
E. Unknown
A.
The staging of gastric lymphoma is paramount in the proper management of the disease. Although often indolent, approximately 10% of patients with gastric lymphoma will present with advanced disease.
EGD allows for visualization of the lesion and often tissue sampling as well as H. pylori diagnosis. Endoscopic ultrasound is also an important diagnostic procedure that can determine extent of disease, depth of invasion, and often allows more complete tissue sampling.
EUS also allows for accurate estimates of
depth of invasion, which is an important prognostic marker for disease recurrence. CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis is important to assess for disseminated disease while a bone marrow biopsy will detect evidence of distant disease in up to 15% of patients.
Standard laboratory testing includes complete blood count and LDH, as well as other standard chemistries.
Based on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines, the Lugano Staging System for Gastrointestinal Lymphoma is adequate. This modification of the Ann
Arbor Staging System is noted below, directly compared with the Ann Arbor Staging System.
Utilizing either staging system is appropriate. Based these staging systems, the above patient has Stage I disease.
Lugano Staging System
Stage I - The tumor is confined to the gastrointestinal tract. It can be a single primary lesion or multiple, noncontiguous lesions.
Stage II - The tumor extends into the abdomen. This is further subdivided based upon the location of nodal involvement:
• Stage II1 - Involvement of local nodes (paragastric nodes for gastric lymphoma or para-intestinal nodes for intestinal lymphoma)
• Stage II2: Involvement of distant nodes (paraaortic, para-caval, pelvic, or inguinal nodes for most tumors; mesenteric nodes in the case of
intestinal lymphoma)
• Stage IIE: The tumor penetrates the serosa to involve adjacent organs or tissues
Stage III - There is no stage III disease in this system.
Stage IV - There is disseminated extranodal involvement or concomitant supra-diaphragmatic nodal involvement.
Ann Arbor Staging System
Stage I - Involvement of a single lymph node region (I) or of a single extralymphatic organ or site (IE)*
Stage II - Involvement of two or more lymph node regions or lymphatic structures on the same side of the diaphragm alone (II) or with involvement of limited, contiguous extralymphatic
organ or tissue (IIE)
Stage III - Involvement of lymph node regions on both sides of the diaphragm (ID), which may include the spleen (HIS) or limited, contiguous extralymphatic organ or site (HIE) or both (IIIES)
Stage IV - Diffuse or disseminated foci of involvement of one or more extralymphatic organs or tissues, with or without associated lymphatic involvement
A 56-year-old man with a 4-month history of vague epigastric abdominal pain, decreased appetite and weight loss presents to his local gastroenterologist for evaluation. An esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reveals
non-specific gastritis and a polypoid lesion in the region of the antrum. Laboratory findings note mild anemia, elevated LDH, and H. pylori positive samples from the EGD.
Follow-up endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) notes a thickened antral wall, and multiple biopsies obtained reveal an extra-nodal marginal zone B cell lymphoma of mucosa (gut)-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) type (MALT lymphoma). Computed tomography of the
chest, abdomen, and pelvis reveals thickening of the distal half of the stomach with no evidence of adenopathy. Bone marrow biopsy reveals no evidence of disease dissemination.
The proper surgical management of this patient with gastric lymphoma is:
A. Total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection
B. Total gastrectomy with D1 lymph node dissection
C. Partial gastrectomy with D1 lymph node dissection
D. Partial/total gastrectomy with no lymph node dissection
E. Surgical resection is not warranted in most cases
E. Gastric lymphoma is the second most common gastric malignancy (behind gastric adenocarcinoma) and the most frequent cite of extra-nodal non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. For decades, surgical resection was considered appropriate therapy for all stages of “resectable” gastric lymphomas.
Although surgical resection has provided outstanding results and excellent long-term survival, stomach preserving methods have provided equivalent results without the morbidity associated with gastrectomy (partial or total) for both low-grade and high-grade B-cell lymphomas.
A prospective trial by the German Multicenter Trial group in 2005 examined 185 patients with Stage I and II low-grade gastric lymphoma and noted no difference in survival between those patients treated surgically and those receiving no surgical intervention.
A follow-up study by the same group examined an additional 393 patients and provided similar results. The results are similar for high-grade gastric lymphomas, where survival rates between primary
surgery and primary chemotherapy and radiation therapy groups is equivalent.
Surgical intervention for gastric lymphoma is largely reserved for rare cases of perforation, or hemorrhage that cannot be
controlled endoscopically.
Stomach preserving treatment strategies are now the standard of care in the management of gastric lymphoma.
A 56-year-old man with a 4-month history of vague epigastric abdominal pain, decreased appetite and weight loss presents to his local gastroenterologist for evaluation. An esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) reveals non-specific gastritis and a polypoid lesion in the region of the antrum. Laboratory findings note mild anemia, elevated LDH, and H. pylori positive samples from the EGD.
Follow-up endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) notes a thickened antral wall, and multiple biopsies obtained reveal an extra-nodal marginal zone B cell lymphoma of mucosa (gut)-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) type (MALT lymphoma).
Computed tomography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis reveals thickening of the distal half of the stomach with no evidence of adenopathy. Bone marrow biopsy reveals no evidence of disease dissemination.
First line therapy for a MALT lymphoma as noted in the patient above would consist of which of the following?
A. Surgical resection
B. Radiation therapy
C. Chemotherapy
D. H. pylori eradication
E. Watchful waiting
D.
Gastric MALT lymphomas arise from B-cells and constitute approximately 50% of gastric lymphomas, with the diffuse large B-cell lymphoma making up the other large proportion of gastric lymphomas.
Although surgical therapy was considered the mainstay of therapy for decades, in the late 1980s, a connection between Campylobacter (later Helicobacter) pylori, chronic gastritis and mucosal associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) was suspected.
By the early 1990s, the connection between the two was firmly established and the treatment of gastric MALT lymphoma with H. pylori eradication was
instituted. A meta-analysis of 34 studies with 1271 patients noted an overall H. pylori eradication rate of 98.3%, associated with a complete remission of
gastric lymphoma in 77.8% of patients.
The relapse rate for patients was 2.2% per year, and only 0.05% of patients had transformation of low-grade lymphoma into an aggressive, high-grade lymphoma.
Frequent endoscopic monitoring (3 month intervals initially) is paramount to assess for treatment response. Patients with pathology revealing clearance of H. pylori and resolution of lymphoma will require continued surveillance. Those patients with persistent H. pylori should receive additional eradication therapy. If gastric lymphoma persists despite multiple rounds of anti-H. pylori therapy, the
addition of external beam radiation and/or chemotherapy is warranted.
Patients with H. pylori negative gastric MALT lymphoma often have a documented translocation t(ll;18), and thus eradication therapy is often not effective. These patients are treated with radiation
therapy as first-line therapy. Rituximab has shown some effectiveness in these patients as well, and is currently considered in those patients with persistent localized disease and a contraindication to radiotherapy.
What is the management for persistent, localized, MALT lymphoma following repeatedly failed efforts at H. pylori eradication therapy?
A. Radiation therapy
B. Surgical resection
C. Chemotherapy
D. Rituximab
E. Bevacicumab
A.
The management of persistent, localized, early stage gastric MALT lymphoma is radiation therapy. Although there are various approaches taken in the management of these patients, radiation therapy (external beam, 30-40 cGy) has shown excellent
results and is the recommended treatment by NCCN guidelines.
In general, first-line salvage therapy provides remission rates of 90.1%. Radiation therapy was superior to chemotherapy or surgery, with a 97.3% remission rate versus 92.5% for surgery, and 85.3% for chemotherapy.
In fact, radiation therapy as a sole therapy was found to be superior to even combined
modality approaches.
Further support for radiation therapy is provided by Goda, et al. who noted an overall remission rate of 92% with excellent long-term (10-year) survival data.
Additional studies show long-term remission rates of 88% to 97% (5 to 7.8 years).
For some patients with Stage I disease, chemotherapy may be added to radiotherapy, but this is not considered the standard approach.
Chemotherapy for low-grade gastric MALT lymphoma is typically reserved for persistent Stage II disease or patient presenting with more advanced disease (Stage IIE or IV).
The exact chemotherapeutic regimen for advanced stage gastric MALT lymphoma is not well established, but is often treated with agents utilized against follicular lymphomas.
How does the treatment strategy change in patients with high-grade gastric lymphoma (advanced MALT lymphoma or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma)?
A. Surgical resection
B. Radiation therapy alone
C. Chemotherapy alone
D. H. pylori eradication
E. Combined chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy
E.
As addressed earlier, surgical therapy has been largely abandoned as the primary treatment of gastric lymphoma, including patients with advanced gastric MALT lymphoma and gastric diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
A study examining the long-term outcomes in patients treated with surgery alone, surgery followed by radiation therapy, surgery followed by chemotherapy and chemotherapy alone noted that complete response rates were similar in
the 4 arms.
But, survival was significantly improved in patients receiving chemotherapy, with no clear benefit to combined modality therapy with surgery and chemotherapy.
In fact, late toxicity was more frequent and severe in patients who had surgery.
In terms of H. pylori eradication, studies are ongoing. It was once thought that there was little benefit in treating H. pylori in these patients, since there was no MALT component in most patients.
Although there are cases exhibiting both gastric MALT lymphoma and DLBCL, first-line therapy was typically targeted at the more aggressive entity.
Recently, there has been some success noted with H. pylori eradication in early stage DLBCL patients that are H. pylori positive.
In comparing patients with pure gastric DLBCL and mixed (MALT and DLBCL), H. pylori eradication rates were 100% and 94.1%, respectively.
Remission rates were 68.8% for pure DLBCL and 56.3% for the mixed gastric DLBCL. Prospective studies are ongoing.
Currently, chemotherapy, with or without biologic therapy, is considered first-line therapy for gastric DLBCL, which is considered the more aggressive of the two most common gastric lymphomas.
NCCN clinical practice guidelines note that Stage I and II disease are treated with chemotherapy with localized radiation therapy added in certain cases.
The chemotherapeutic regimens utilized vary, but the most common regimen combines cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) and often the addition of a biologic agent (riuximab) (R-CHOP).
The CHOP regimen shows complete remission (CR) rates of 87% to 100% with good long-term survival.
An examination of the R-CHOP regimen reveals similar statistics with a CR rate of 87%, with the remaining 13%exhibiting a partial remission.
The addition of radiation therapy for early stage disease has been examined and there was a notable decrease in local recurrences in those patients treated with radiation therapy.
But, radiation therapy did not add to overall survival when compared with chemotherapy alone. Overall, radiation therapy is selectively added to chemotherapy in patients with gastric DLBCL, specifically for local control.
For patients with more advanced disease (specifically Lugano Stage IV), chemotherapy alone is utilized with radiation therapy reserved as needed for local control of symptoms.
A 58-year-old male presents to your clinic with upper abdominal pain and heartburn alter meals. He occasionally relieves symptoms with chewable antacids (calcium carbonate). He denies other problems except for gaining 5 lbs over the last year with decreased exercise. He has no surgical history, takes no medications, and has no significant family history. He used to smoke, but quit 15 years ago and drinks 2 glasses of red wine each night.
Other than improving his diet and decreasing his alcohol intake, what medication would you prescribe to best limit his esophageal acid exposure?
A. Proton pump inhibitor (PPI)
B. H2 receptor antagonist (H2RA)
C. Calcium carbonate
D. Sucralfate as needed
A.
The mainstay of medical treatment of GERD is acid suppression. Patients with persistent symptoms should be given PPIs, such as omeprazole. In doses as high as 40 mg/d, they can effect an 80% to 90% reduction in gastric acidity.
In patients with reflux disease, esophageal acid exposure is reduced by up to 80% with H,RAs and up to 95% with PPIs. Despite the superiority of the latter class of drug over the former, periods of acid breakthrough still occur.
A 58-year-old male presents to your clinic with upper abdominal pain and heartburn alter meals. He occasionally relieves symptoms with chewable antacids (calcium carbonate). He denies other problems except for gaining 5 lbs over the last year with decreased exercise. He has no surgical history, takes no medications, and has no significant family history. He used to smoke, but quit 15 years ago and drinks 2 glasses of red wine each night.
He is started on the medication and experiences relief. He returns to your clinic 1 year later, but now the medication is no longer relieving his symptoms. He also reports occasional cough and the sensation that he has to clear his throat. What should be your next step?
A. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD)
B. Perform barium swallow
C. Perform 24 hr ambulatory pH monitoring
D. Perform pulmonary function tests
A.
If after a year of successful symptom relief, the symptoms are no longer controlled by a single medication and he has developed extraesophageal symptoms (cough and sensation of postnasal drip) of GERD, then consideration should be given to prescribing another PPI.
It is important, though, to rule out ulcers, malignancy, a hiatal hernia, esophagitis or other esophageal, gastric, or duodenal erosive pathology. Therefore, EGD is the best option for direct mucosal visualization.
If no other pathology can account for the symptoms, a 24-hour pH monitoring would be the next step in diagnosis. This would determine if acid reflux is the cause of the patient’s symptoms.
A barium swallow could add some more information but is not diagnostic.
Halitosis would be an indicator of a diverticulum (Zenker’s) or possibly achalasia in which food is retained within the esophagus.
A better study to evaluate these pathologies is barium swallow esophagram. Pulmonary function tests are not indicated for evaluation of the patients cough.
A 58-year-old male presents to your clinic with upper abdominal pain and heartburn after meals. He occasionally relieves symptoms with chewable antacids (calcium carbonate). He denies other problems except for gaining 5 lbs over the last year with decreased exercise. He has no surgical history, takes no medications, and has no significant family history. He used to smoke, but quit 15 years ago and drinks 2 glasses of red wine each night.
He follows up in 3 weeks with a barium swallow, pH monitoring, and an EGD from an outside provider. He provides a copy of the 24 hr ambulatory pH monitoring report to you, which can be viewed below. He has a sliding (Type I) hiatal hernia, and
no evidence of intestinal metaplasia or ulcers.
ACID REFLUX COMPOSITE SCORE ANALYSIS (JOHNSON/DEMEESTER) (pH)
Upright time in reflux: 10.4% (5.1) (NV: <6.3)
Recumbent time in reflux: 10.0% (21.9) (NV: <1.2)
Total time in reflux: 10.2% (7.3) (NV: <4.2)
Episodes over 5 min: 5.4 (4.9) (NV: <3.1)
Longest episode: 41.7min (15.1) (NV: <9.2)
Total episodes: 48.6 (2.9) (NV: <50.1)
Composite score: 57.1 (NV: <22)
What is the intervention would you offer him at this time?
A. Esophagectomy
B. Nissen fundoplication
C. Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication
D. Botulinum toxin injection
B.
The acid reflux composite score analysis shown is consistent with the diagnosis of GERD. Therefore, a Nissen fundoplication is an appropriate surgical choice for this patient with refractory GERD and a sliding hiatal hernia.
Since the patient does not have high-grade dysplasia or evidence of esophageal cancer, esophagectomy would not be the correct choice.
The patient has a type I sliding hiatal hernia, not a paraesophageal hernia (Types II, III, and IV), therefore answer C would not be correct (see diagram).
Botulinum toxin and Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication are used in the treatment of achalasia, but would not be indicated in a patient with GERD.
What is the most common long-term complication of a Nissen fundoplication?
A. Stricture
B. Gastroesophageal leak
C. Gas bloat syndrome
D. Dysphagia
E. Slipped Nissen
D. Early complications of Nissen fundoplication: gastroesophageal leak, pneumothorax, abscess, and hematoma.
Of these, the most common is dysphagia.
Late complications of Nissan fundoplication: stricture, gas bloat syndrome, wrap disruption, wrap herniation, and dysphagia.
A 58-year-old male presents to your clinic with upper abdominal pain and heartburn alter meals. He occasionally relieves symptoms with chewable antacids (calcium carbonate). He denies other problems except for gaining 5 lbs over the last year with decreased exercise. He has no surgical history, takes no medications, and has no significant family history. He used to smoke, but quit 15 years ago and drinks 2 glasses of red wine each night.
He undergoes a Nissen fundoplication without complication and is discharged the following day. Five days after surgery, he returns for follow up appointment reporting left upper quadrant pain. He is hemodynamically normal and has a hemoglobin one point lower than his preoperative values. CT scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis shows a heterogeneous left upper quadrant fluid collection without rim enhancement and an associated small left pleural effusion.
What is the most appropriate initial management for this patient?
A. Admit for fluids and observation
B. Admit for antibiotics and total parenteral nutrition
C. Return to the operating room
D. Percutaneous drainage
A.
Development of fluid collection postoperatively without instability in vital signs, fever, WBC or other evidence of infection is most suspicious for hematoma.
The development of the collection of five days postoperatively would indicate a slow bleed, not requiring urgent reoperation.
Percutaneous drainage would increase the risk of introducing bacteria and infecting the fluid collection. Conservative management including hydration and observation is recommended for a small, stable hematoma. Antibiotics are not indicated without evidence of infection.
A 63-year-old female with a long history of gastroesophageal reflux disease presents to your clinic after a gastroenterologist performs an EGD. She is diagnosed with Barretts esophagus without evidence of dysplasia based upon the results of several biopsies.
When should her next EGD with biopsy be performed for appropriate surveillance?
A. 3 months
B. 6 months
C. 1 year
D. 3 years
C. Barrett’s esophagus without dysplasia has a risk of 0.1% to l%rate of progression to adenocarcinoma and initial surveillance should be with annual EGD with biopsy. Low grade dysplasia requires surveillance every 6 months until no dysplasia is found.
If no more dysplasia is found, surveillance can be extended to once every 3 years. High-grade dysplasia has a 5-year risk of adenocarcinoma of 30% and must be intervened upon with excision or ablation or
undergo endoscopic surveillance every 3 months.
A 63-year-old female with a long history of gastroesophageal reflux disease presents to your clinic after a gastroenterologist performs an EGD. She is diagnosed with Barretts esophagus without evidence of dysplasia based upon the results of several biopsies.
Her follow-up EGD demonstrates Barrett esophagus with low-grade dysplasia on multiple biopsies, so she is scheduled for follow up EGD in 6 months. She presents to the ER 12 hours later with rapid respirations, tachycardia, fever, and elevated WBC. Based upon your clinical suspicions, what is the best initial diagnostic test?
A. Gastrografin esophagography
B. Thin barium esophagography
C. CT with IV contrast for PE/DVT protocol
D. EGD
A. The patient has suffered an iatrogenic esophageal perforation.
The best initial test for diagnosis of this is esophagram with water-soluble contrast such as gastrografin.
If this does not demonstrate leak, thin barium should be used next.
The WBC elevation and acute nature of the presentation in relationship to the EGD procedure makes PE less likely than esophageal perforation.
EGD would not be recommended in this scenario as it could enlarge the perforation.
A 63-year-old female with a long history of gastroesophageal reflux disease presents to your clinic after a gastroenterologist performs an EGD. She is diagnosed with Barretts esophagus without evidence of dysplasia based upon the results of several biopsies.
A small intrathoracic perforation is confirmed. In your determination of a management plan, which of the following is an absolute contraindication to non-operative management?
A. Time of perforation >72 hrs
B. A history of Barrett’s esophagus with low grade dysplasia
C. Perforation contained in the mediastinum
D. Evidence of SIRS (systemic inflammatory response syndrome)
D.
Operative management is imperative in the
patient who is becoming unstable (developing a SIRS response) as it may become life-threatening. It should be considered if the perforation is not well-contained, in the acute time period after the procedure, or there is associated malignancy. In contrast, non-operative
management should be considered if the time of perforation > 72 hrs, there is no evidence of associated malignancy, or the perforation is well-contained.
A 63-year-old female with a long history of gastroesophageal reflux disease presents to your clinic after a gastroenterologist performs an EGD. She is diagnosed with Barretts esophagus without evidence of dysplasia based upon the results of several biopsies.
The patient has a small thoracic esophageal perforation with a left sided effusion and is
developing low blood pressure. After beginning resuscitation, you determine she needs to go to surgery for repair of the leak. Based upon the most likely location of these types of injuries, which incision would you use to expose the esophagus for repair?
A. Right postcriolatcral thoracotomy
B. Left postcriolatcral thoracotomy
C. Median sternotomy
D. Laparotomy
B. The surgical approach to the distal esophagus is a left posteriolateral thoracotomy. Any esophageal injury should be buttressed with other tissue like nearby pleura, a pericardial at pad, pedicled intercostal muscle, or the diaphragm.