
==== Front
Ann Surg Oncol
Ann Surg Oncol
Annals of Surgical Oncology
1068-9265
1534-4681
Springer International Publishing Cham

39085549
15950
10.1245/s10434-024-15950-1
Gastrointestinal Oncology
Feasibility of Regional Lymphadenectomy for Stomach-Preserving Surgery in Early Gastric Cancer Omitting Sentinel Node Navigation: A Post Hoc Analysis of the SENORITA Trial
Park Sin Hye MD 12
Kim Young-Woo MD, PhD 1
Min Jae-Seok MD, PhD 34
Yoon Hong Man MD 1
An Ji Yeong MD, PhD 5
Eom Bang Wool MD, PhD 1
Hur Hoon MD, PhD 6
Lee Young Joon MD, PhD 7
Cho Gyu Seok MD, PhD 8
Park Young-Kyu MD, PhD 9
Jung Mi Ran MD, PhD 9
Park Ji-Ho MD, PhD 7
Hyung Woo Jin MD, PhD 10
Jeong Sang-Ho MD, PhD 7
Kook Myeong-Cherl MD, PhD 1
Han Mira PhD 1112
Nam Byung-Ho PhD 1113
Ryu Keun Won MD, PhD docryu@ncc.re.kr

1
1 https://ror.org/02tsanh21 grid.410914.9 0000 0004 0628 9810 Center of Gastric Cancer, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea
2 https://ror.org/01fpnj063 grid.411947.e 0000 0004 0470 4224 Present Address: Department of Surgery, Eunpyeong St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
3 https://ror.org/055fmxa32 grid.464567.2 0000 0004 0492 2010 Department of Surgery, Dongnam Institute of Radiological and Medical Sciences, Cancer Center, Busan, Republic of Korea
4 grid.411134.2 0000 0004 0474 0479 Present Address: Division of Foregut Surgery, Korea University College of Medicine, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
5 grid.414964.a 0000 0001 0640 5613 Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
6 https://ror.org/03tzb2h73 grid.251916.8 0000 0004 0532 3933 Department of Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea
7 https://ror.org/00saywf64 grid.256681.e 0000 0001 0661 1492 Department of Surgery, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Republic of Korea
8 https://ror.org/03qjsrb10 grid.412674.2 0000 0004 1773 6524 Department of Surgery, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Bucheon, Republic of Korea
9 https://ror.org/054gh2b75 grid.411602.0 0000 0004 0647 9534 Department of Surgery, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Hwasun, Republic of Korea
10 https://ror.org/01wjejq96 grid.15444.30 0000 0004 0470 5454 Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
11 https://ror.org/02tsanh21 grid.410914.9 0000 0004 0628 9810 Biostatistics Collaboration Team, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea
12 https://ror.org/002wfgr58 grid.484628.4 0000 0001 0943 2764 Present Address: Department of Medical Research Collaborating Center, Seoul Metropolitan Government - Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea
13 Present Address: Clinical Design Research Center, HERINGS, The Institution of Advanced Clinical and Biomedical Research, Seoul, Republic of Korea
31 7 2024
31 7 2024
2024
31 10 69396946
5 3 2024
18 7 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Background

Sentinel node navigation (SNN) has been known as the effective treatment for stomach-preserving surgery in early gastric cancer; however, SNN presents several technical difficulties in real practice.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of regional lymphadenectomy omitting SNN, using the post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

Methods

Using data from the SENORITA trial that compared laparoscopic standard gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy and laparoscopic SNN, 237 patients who underwent SNN were included in this study. Tumor location was divided into longitudinal and circumferential directions. According to the location of the tumor, the presence or absence of lymph node (LN) metastases between sentinel and non-sentinel basins were analyzed. Proposed regional LN stations were defined as the closest area to the primary tumor. Sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values (NPV) of SNN and regional lymphadenectomy were compared.

Results

Metastasis to non-sentinel basins with tumor-free in sentinel basins was observed in one patient (0.4%). The rate of LN metastasis to non-regional LN stations without regional LN metastasis was 2.5% (6/237). The sensitivity and NPV of SNN were found to be significantly higher than those of regional lymphadenectomy (96.8% vs. 80.6% [p = 0.016] and 99.5% vs. 97.2% [p = 0.021], respectively).

Conclusions

This study showed that regional lymphadenectomy for stomach-preserving surgery, omitting SNN, was insufficient; therefore, SNN is required in stomach-preserving surgery.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-024-15950-1.

Keywords

Stomach neoplasm
Early gastric cancer
Sentinel lymph node
Lymph node metastasis
Lymphadenectomy
Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of KoreaHC20C0155 issue-copyright-statement© Society of Surgical Oncology 2024
==== Body
pmcCurrently, the standard treatment for early gastric cancer (EGC) is endoscopic resection or gastrectomy.1 If the tumor does not meet indications for endoscopic resection, gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy can be performed. Although the lymph node (LN) metastasis rate for EGC is approximately 10.0–16.0%,2–5 a significant extent of gastrectomy and radical LN dissection can be performed for EGC treatment.

Sentinel node navigation surgery (SNNS) is an alternative procedure introduced to reduce extensive lymphadenectomy and preserve the stomach volume and function, thereby improving the quality of life of patients.6 In the recently published SENORITA trial,7–9 laparoscopic sentinel basin dissection and stomach-preserving surgery for EGC treatment reported similar overall survival rates and better quality of life compared with laparoscopic standard gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy.

However, SNNS requires injecting a tracer (radioisotope and dye) around the tumor using pre- and/or intraoperative endoscopy, detecting sentinel basins with the naked eye for dye, fluorescence, or radioactivity with special devices, and isolating the nodes.10 This surgical process is difficult to generalize when considering technical aspects, operation time, and surgical manpower.

In EGC, LN metastasis tends to be located in the closest LN stations (regional LN) based on the location of the primary tumor, but skip metastases are possible. If regional lymphadenectomy could be performed without the more complicated use of SNN, stomach-preserving surgery could be performed more easily. Moreover, regional lymphadenectomy may reduce the risk of missing skip metastases.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of performing regional lymphadenectomy without SNNS using a post hoc analysis of data from the SENORITA randomized controlled trial.

Materials and Methods

Patients

This study obtained data from SENORITA, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial that compared laparoscopic standard gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy and laparoscopic SNNS.7,11 Between March 2013 and December 2016, 580 patients with clinical stage T1N0M0 gastric cancer that was < 3 cm in tumor size and located at least 2 cm apart from the pylorus and cardia were included in the SENORITA trial.10 The patients were randomly allocated into the laparoscopic standard gastrectomy (269 patients) and laparoscopic SNNS (258 patients) groups after excluding 53 patients. In the laparoscopic SNNS group, sentinel navigation procedures were not possible in 21 patients due to the following reasons: suspected T2 or higher, gross LN metastasis, large tumor, tumor location near the pylorus and cardia, newly detected ulcer lesion, and failure to detect the sentinel basin. Finally, 237 patients underwent laparoscopic SNNS.

This study was performed in accordance with the principles of the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. Since this study used anonymized data from patients in the previous study, patient consent was waived. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Cancer Center (approval number NCC. 2023-0190)

Proposed Regional Lymphadenectomy According to the Tumor Location

Clinicopathological characteristics of patients who received laparoscopic SNNS were evaluated. Tumor location was categorized into longitudinal (upper, middle, and lower thirds) and circumferential (anterior wall, greater curvature, lesser curvature, and posterior wall) directions.12 Pathologic tumor-node-metastasis stage was evaluated according to the International Union Against Cancer/American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system.13

The relationship between LN metastases and sentinel and non-sentinel basins according to tumor location was investigated. If the treatment was completed with laparoscopic SNNS due to the absence of LN metastasis in the sentinel basins without recurrence during the follow-up period, these cases were considered negative metastasis in the non-sentinel basins. In contrast, if LN recurrence occurred after laparoscopic SNNS, this was considered metastasis in the non-sentinel basins.

The regional LN area was defined as the peri-gastric nodal station closest to the tumor, considering that nodal metastases were likely to occur (Table 1). We assumed that tumors located on the anterior or posterior side would metastasize to the peri-gastric LNs on both the lesser and greater curvature sides. If LN metastases to the regional LN stations, these were regarded as regional LN metastases, and if LN metastases to stations other than regional LN stations, these were considered non-regional LN metastases. The effectiveness of SNN and regional lymphadenectomy was compared in terms of sensitivity, false negative rate, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).Table 1 Proposed definition of regional lymph node station based on tumor location

	Upper third	Middle third	Lower third	
Lesser curvature	No. 3	No. 3	No. 3	
Greater curvature	No. 4sb	No. 4d	No. 4d, 6	
Anterior and posterior wall	No. 3, 4sb	No. 3, 4d	No. 3, 4d, 6	

Procedures for Sentinel Basin Dissection

The procedures of sentinel basin dissection have been described in detail in the SENORITA protocol.10 Using intraoperative endoscopy, 1 mL each of dual tracers (mixture of indocyanine green and radiolabeled human serum albumin) was injected into four directions of the submucosal layer of the primary tumor. After 15 min from the first injection, the sentinel basins were detected using the naked eye for dye and a gamma probe for radioactivity. Dissected basins were extracted and sentinel basin nodes were harvested in the operating room. These nodes were sent to the pathologist to assess the presence of the tumor using a frozen examination. If sentinel basin nodes were positive in frozen sections, standard gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy should be performed. When sentinel nodes were tumor-free in frozen sections, stomach-preserving surgery could proceed. All sentinel basin nodes and non-sentinel basins were re-evaluated postoperatively.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were presented as medians and interquartile ranges, and categorical variables as numbers and percentages. The diagnostic performance (sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV) was compared using the bootstrapping method with 1000 resamples and expressed as percentages and 95% confidence intervals. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS software version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA).

Results

Clinicopathologic Outcomes of Patients

Of the 237 patients who underwent SNN, over 60% were male, and middle-third tumors were the most common location (59.5%, 141/237) [Table 2]. Regarding tumor sites in circumferential parts of the stomach, the most common were the lesser and greater curvature sides (33.3% each). The median tumor size was 2.0 cm. Regarding the extent of gastric resection, laparoscopic wedge resection (80.2%, 190/237) was more frequently performed. One sentinel basin was detected in 53.6% of patients. The median number of sentinel nodes was eight. Furthermore, 94.5% of patients had pathologic stage I disease (224/237), and 30 patients had nodal metastasis in the pathologic results.Table 2 Clinicopathological characteristics of patients who underwent sentinel node navigation surgery

Variable	Patients [n = 237]	
Age, years [median (IQR)]	55.0 (48.0–64.0)	
BMI, kg/m2 [median (IQR)]	23.0 (22.0–26.0)	
Sex	
  Male	144 (60.8)	
  Female	93 (39.2)	
Longitudinal location of the tumor	
  Upper third	13 (5.5)	
  Middle third	141 (59.5)	
  Lower third	83 (35.0)	
Circumferential location of the tumor	
  Anterior wall	37 (15.6)	
  Greater curvature	79 (33.3)	
  Lesser curvature	79 (33.3)	
  Posterior wall	42 (17.7)	
Tumor size, cm (IQR)	1.7 (1.2–2.0)	
Histology	
  Tubular adenocarcinoma	139 (58.6)	
  Signet ring cell carcinoma	98 (41.4)	
Extent of gastric resection	
  LWR	190 (80.2)	
  LSR	18 (7.6)	
  ESD	2 (0.8)	
  LDG	23 (9.7)	
  LPPG	1 (0.4)	
  LTG	2 (0.8)	
  ODG	1 (0.4)	
Number of sentinel basins	
  1	127 (53.6)	
  2	89 (37.6)	
  3	21 (8.9)	
Total number of sentinel nodes [median (IQR)]	8.0 (4.0–14.0)	
Pathological T classification	
  T1a	141 (59.5)	
  T1b	83 (35.0)	
  T2	8 (3.4)	
  T3	5 (2.1)	
Pathological N classification	
  N0	207 (87.3)	
  N1	23 (9.7)	
  N2	4 (1.7)	
  N3	3 (1.3)	
Pathological stage	
  Ia	200 (84.4)	
  Ib	24 (10.1)	
  IIa	7 (3.0)	
  IIb	5 (2.1)	
  IIIb	1 (0.4)	
Data are expressed as n (%) unless otherwise specified

IQR interquartile range, BMI body mass index, LWR laparoscopic wedge resection, LSR laparoscopic segmental resection, ESD endoscopic submucosal dissection, LDG laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, LPPG laparoscopic pylorus-preserving gastrectomy, LTG laparoscopic total gastrectomy, ODG open distal gastrectomy

Distribution of Lymph Node Metastases to Sentinel Basins and/or Non-Sentinel Basins According to Tumor Location

The distribution of sentinel basins and LN metastases in each LN station according to tumor locations is presented in electronic supplementary Table 1. The rate of LN metastasis in the sentinel basins and/or non-sentinel basins for each tumor location was 13.1% (Table 3). Nodal metastases in the sentinel basins were observed, except for tumors in the upper third and lesser curvature sites. When the tumors were in the middle third and lesser curvature of the stomach, the rate of metastases in both sentinel and non-sentinel basins was 4.0%. In one patient whose tumor was located in the lower third and greater curvature, and tumor free in the sentinel basins (LN #4d), LN recurrence occurred in the non-sentinel LN (LNs #6, #7, and #11p) during the follow-up period (0.4%, 1/237).Table 3 Distribution of lymph node metastases to sentinel basins and/or non-sentinel basins according to tumor location

	Upper-LC [n = 3]	Upper-GC [n = 5]	Upper-AP [n = 5]	Middle-LC [n = 50]	Middle-GC [n = 46]	Middle-AP [n = 45]	Lower-LC [n = 26]	Lower-GC [n = 28]	Lower-AP [n = 29]	
Sentinel basin LNM (−)	3 (100)	4 (80.0)	4 (80.0)	44 (88.0)	39 (84.8)	40 (88.9)	24 (92.3)	23 (82.1)	25 (86.2)	
Sentinel basin LNM (+) only	0 (0)	1 (20.0)	1 (20.0)	4 (8.0)	7 (15.2)	5 (11.1)	2 (7.7)	4 (14.3)	4 (13.8)	
Sentinel basin and non-sentinel LNM (+)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	2 (4.0)	0 (0)	0 (0))	0 (0)	0 (0))	0 (0)	
Non-sentinel LNM (+) only	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	1 (3.6)	0 (0)	
Data are expressed as n (%)

LC lesser curvature, GC greater curvature AP anterior and posterior, LNM lymph node metastasis

Distribution of Lymph Node Metastases to Regional and/or Non-Regional Node Stations According to Tumor Location

The overall incidence of LN metastasis in the regional LN only and regional with non-regional LN was 10.5% (25/237) [Table 4]. Additionally, 9.2% of positive tumors were confirmed in the regional LN stations only (22/237). Tumors located in the middle third and lesser curvature of the stomach were found to metastasize to LNs in both the regional and non-regional LN stations (6.0%). In six cases, metastases were only observed in non-regional LNs (2.5%). One patient whose tumor was located in the upper third and greater curvature of the stomach metastasized to #3, two patients with middle third and greater curvature tumors metastasized to #3, one patient with a middle third and posterior wall-side tumor metastasized to #7, and one patient with a lower third and lesser curvature tumor metastasized to #5. In one patient whose tumor was in the lower third and greater curvature side, LN recurrence was confirmed in LNs #6, 7, and 11p after SNNS.Table 4 Distribution of lymph node metastases to regional and/or non-regional node stations according to tumor location

	Upper-LC [n = 3]	Upper-GC [n = 5]	Upper-AP [n = 5]	Middle-LC [n = 50]	Middle-GC [n = 46]	Middle-AP [n = 45]	Lower-LC [n = 26]	Lower-GC [n = 28]	Lower-AP [n = 29]	
Regional node stations (−)	3 (100)	4 (80.0)	4 (80.0)	44 (88.0)	39 (84.8)	40 (88.9)	24 (92.3)	23 (82.1)	25 (86.2)	
Regional node stations (+) only	0 (0)	0 (0)	1 (20.0)	3 (6.0)	5 (10.9)	4 (8.9)	1 (3.8)	4 (14.3)	4 (13.8)	
Regional and non-regional node stations (+)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	3 (6.0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	
Non-regional node stations (+) only	0 (0)	1 (20.0)	0 (0)	0 (0)	2 (4.3)	1 (2.2)	1 (3.8)	1 (3.6)	0 (0)	
Data are expressed as n (%)

LC lesser curvature, GC greater curvature, AP anterior and posterior

Diagnostic Parameters of Sentinel Node Navigation versus Regional Lymphadenectomy

The sensitivity rates of sentinel basin dissection and regional lymphadenectomy to detect LN metastases were 96.8% and 80.6%, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.016) [Table 5]. The PPV of sentinel basin dissection and regional lymphadenectomy was 6.7% and 12.0%, respectively (p = 0.201), while the NPV of sentinel basin dissection was significantly higher than that of regional lymphadenectomy (99.5% vs. 97.2%, p = 0.021)Table 5 Comparison of the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis by sentinel basin dissection vs. regional lymphadenectomy

	Sensitivity (95% CI)	p value	False negative rate (95% CI)	p value	Specificity (95% CI)	p value	Positive predictive value (95% CI)	p value	Negative predictive value (95% CI)	p value	
Sentinel node navigation surgery	96.8% (88.9–100.0)	0.016	3.2% (0.0–11.1)	0.016	100% (100–100)	> 0.999	6.7% (0.0–16.7)	0.201	99.5% (98.5–100.0)	0.021	
Regional lymphadenectomy	80.6% (65.5–93.1)	19.4% (6.9–34.5)	100% (100–100)	12.0% (0.0–26.9)	97.2% (94.7–99.1)	
CI confidence interval

Discussion

This study proposed the concept of regional lymphadenectomy omitting SNN, and analyzed its diagnostic accuracy. The predefined criteria for regional lymphadenectomy—targeting LNs nearest to the tumor and in high-risk metastatic zones—were less effective in identifying metastatic nodes than those for SNN. Notably, the clinical possibility of regional lymphadenectomy was compared with that of SNN using a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial.

EGC treatment is a continually evolving field, tending towards treatments that balance oncological safety with a patient’s quality of life. Optimal surgical approaches for EGC depend on an intricate understanding of its lymphatic spread. There have been no existing reports on regional lymphadenectomy regarding tumor locations. Kampschöer et al.14 developed the Maruyama computer program for a database of 3843 patients with gastric cancer who were treated by extensive lymphadenectomy. The Maruyama program comprised seven variables, including age, sex, gross type of tumor, presumed depth of primary tumor, tumor location, maximum tumor diameter, and histological type, and can predict the extent of LN dissection required for an individual patient. The accuracy of the Maruyama program was evaluated in several studies, and its high accuracy was proven to be a factor in the possibility of nodal metastasis and the prognostic factor of gastric cancer.15,16 However, the Maruyama database included both early and advanced gastric cancer, and the program showed lower accuracy in peri-gastric nodes than D2 +a (#13–16), and false positive rates.17 Moreover, it is not currently applied in clinical practice because it is complicated. Therefore, we defined the regional LN station for each tumor location in a simple and clinically applicable way.

Numerous studies of SNN have been performed in EGC cases. A meta-analysis of SNN examination with 46 studies, which included 2684 patients with gastric cancer, reported that the sensitivity, PPV, and NPV of SNN were 87.8%, 38.0%, and 91.8%, respectively.6 Another meta-analysis including 38 studies with 2128 patients demonstrated that the sensitivity and NPV of SNN were 93.7% and 76.9%, respectively.18 In that study, using data from the SENORITA trial, sensitivity, PPV, and NPV were 96.8%, 6.7%, and 99.5%, respectively, showing higher diagnostic parameters than previous analyses.

However, SNN requires the management and handling of isotopes, radiation hazards, and technical aspects, including intraoperative endoscopic injection of dual tracer and detection of the sentinel basins using a gamma probe. Even when performing SNN using fluorescence rather than isotope, special laparoscopic equipment is required. This surgical process requires a lot of manpower and longer operating time, which is not realistic regarding clinical practice in most medical centers. To replace the hassle of SNN, the concept of regional lymphadenectomy was introduced in this study. As previously explained, regional lymphadenectomy was defined as the LN area close to the location of each tumor and most likely to metastasize. In one retrospective study including 4929 patients who underwent gastrectomy for EGC, LN metastases were most frequently identified at station #3 (4.85%), followed by station #4 (3.05%).19 In a secondary analysis of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group study (JCOG0912), the relationship between tumor location and nodal station in patients who underwent distal gastrectomy for EGC was analyzed.20 In this study, nodal metastases were commonly found in #3 and #4d stations in the case of tumors located in the lesser and greater curvature sides, respectively. Additionally, anterior and posterior tumors frequently metastasized to #3 and #4d stations. As a result, our hypothesis of regional lymphadenectomy is theoretically consistent with the results of previous studies.

The proportion of metastasis to non-regional LNs was 2.5%, and the false negative rate of regional lymphadenectomy was 19.4%. The inadequacy of regional lymphadenectomy, as evidenced by its lower sensitivity and NPV, indicates a higher likelihood of missing metastatic nodes. These findings make it difficult to precisely pinpoint which LNs might be involved based on the tumor location.

Previous studies reported that larger tumor size and deeper invasion of tumor were associated with a higher false negative rate of sentinel node mapping.21,22 However, no significant factor was related to non-sentinel/non-regional LN metastasis in the present study. The contrary results might be due to lower proportions of patients with a large tumor, and pathologically T2 or higher in this study. In addition, the diagnostic values of SNN and regional lymphadenectomy including only patients with pathological T1 stage were further analyzed. The sensitivity and NPV of SNN were 96.0%, and 99.5%, respectively. Likewise, the sensitivity rate and NPV of regional lymphadenectomy were 84.0% and 98.0%, respectively. Even if only T1 cases were included, the predictive value of two procedures showed similar tendency.

Given this multidirectional lymphatic flow, the concept of regional lymphadenectomy for EGC seems clinically impossible. The variability and unpredictability in lymphatic spread patterns emphasize the need for sentinel node detection and dissection. By directly identifying the sentinel basins and assessing them for metastasis, SNN is a more precise method to determine the extent of lymphadenectomy, ensuring oncological safety.

To reduce the inconvenience of SNN using isotopes, the upcoming SENORITA IV trial is being conducted to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic SNNS using only fluorescence (NCT05978882). If no difference is found in the detection rate of sentinel basins using fluorescence compared with isotope and dye, performing laparoscopic SNNS using fluorescence can improve effectiveness without affecting the oncological safety.

This study had some limitations. First, although the study used data from a multicenter, prospective study, incidences of upper-third tumors were low. Second, the regional lymphadenectomy range is uncertain and depends solely on the surgeon’s decision. Additionally, this study analyzed a small number of patients with LN metastasis. The frequency of each LN station should be identified topographically in a large-scale, prospective study.

Conclusion

While the diagnostic value of sentinel basin dissection was high, selective regional lymphadenectomy according to tumor location was found to be less effective in identifying metastatic nodes than that of SNN. Predicting the extent of lymphadenectomy by performing regional lymphadenectomy in EGC was impossible. Therefore, SNN should be performed in stomach-preserving surgery for EGC to reduce the extent of LN dissection.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.Supplementary file1 (DOCX 20 KB)

Acknowledgment

This research was supported by a Patient-Centered Clinical Research Coordinating Center (PACEN) grant funded by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number: HC20C0155).

Author Contribution

Study conception and design: SHP and KWR. Data acquisition: Y-WK, J-SM, HMY, JYA, BWE, HH, YJL, GSC, Y-KP, MRJ, J-HP, WJH, S-HJ, M-CK, and KWR. Data analysis and interpretation: SHP, MH, B-HN, and KWR. Drafting the article: SHP. Critical revision for important intellectual content: BWE, and KWR. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Funding

Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (HC20C0155).

Disclosures

Woo Jin Hyung reports stocks and ownership interests in Hutom, and research grants from Medtronic, GC Pharma, and SK Hynix. Young-Woo Kim, Jae-Seok Min, Hong Man Yoon, Ji Yeong An, Bang Wool Eom, Hoon Hur, Young Joon Lee, Gyu Seok Cho, Young-Kyu Park, Mi Ran Jung, Ji-Ho Park, Sang-Ho Jeong, Myeong-Cherl Kook, Mira Han, Byung-Ho Nam, and Keun Won Ryu declare they have no conflicts of interest that may be relevant to the contents of this study.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Kim TH Kim IH Kang SJ Korean practice guidelines for gastric cancer 2022: an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach J Gastric Cancer 2023 23 1 3 106 10.5230/jgc.2023.23.e11 36750993
Kim TH, Kim IH, Kang SJ, et al. Korean practice guidelines for gastric cancer 2022: an evidence-based, multidisciplinary approach. J Gastric Cancer. 2023;23(1):3–106. 10.5230/jgc.2023.23.e11.36750993
2. Kim ER Lee H Min BH Effect of rescue surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer Br J Surg 2015 102 11 1394 1401 10.1002/bjs.9873 26313295
Kim ER, Lee H, Min BH, et al. Effect of rescue surgery after non-curative endoscopic resection of early gastric cancer. Br J Surg. 2015;102(11):1394–401. 10.1002/bjs.9873.26313295
3. Hatta W Gotoda T Oyama T A scoring system to stratify curability after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: "eCura system" Am J Gastroentero. 2017 112 6 874 881 10.1038/ajg.2017.95
Hatta W, Gotoda T, Oyama T, et al. A scoring system to stratify curability after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: “eCura system.” Am J Gastroentero. 2017;112(6):874–81. 10.1038/ajg.2017.95.
4. Park SH Yoon HM Ryu KW Kim YW Kook MC Eom BW Risks and benefits of additional surgery for early gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach meeting non-curative resection criteria after endoscopic submucosal dissection World J Surg Oncol 2022 20 1 311 10.1186/s12957-022-02780-2 36155115
Park SH, Yoon HM, Ryu KW, Kim YW, Kook MC, Eom BW. Risks and benefits of additional surgery for early gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach meeting non-curative resection criteria after endoscopic submucosal dissection. World J Surg Oncol. 2022;20(1):311. 10.1186/s12957-022-02780-2.36155115
5. Kawata N Kakushima N Takizawa K Risk factors for lymph node metastasis and long-term outcomes of patients with early gastric cancer after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection Surg Endosc 2017 31 4 1607 1616 10.1007/s00464-016-5148-7 27495338
Kawata N, Kakushima N, Takizawa K, et al. Risk factors for lymph node metastasis and long-term outcomes of patients with early gastric cancer after non-curative endoscopic submucosal dissection. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(4):1607–16. 10.1007/s00464-016-5148-7.27495338
6. Ryu KW Eom BW Nam BH Is the sentinel node biopsy clinically applicable for limited lymphadenectomy and modified gastric resection in gastric cancer? A meta-analysis of feasibility studies J Surg Oncol 2011 104 6 578 584 10.1002/jso.21995 21695700
Ryu KW, Eom BW, Nam BH, et al. Is the sentinel node biopsy clinically applicable for limited lymphadenectomy and modified gastric resection in gastric cancer? A meta-analysis of feasibility studies. J Surg Oncol. 2011;104(6):578–84. 10.1002/jso.21995.21695700
7. Kim YW Min JS Yoon HM Laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery for stomach preservation in patients with early gastric cancer: a randomized clinical trial J Clin Oncol 2022 40 21 2342 2351 10.1200/JCO.21.02242 35324317
Kim YW, Min JS, Yoon HM, et al. Laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery for stomach preservation in patients with early gastric cancer: a randomized clinical trial. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(21):2342–51. 10.1200/JCO.21.02242.35324317
8. Eom BW Yoon HM Kim Y-W Long-term quality of life and nutritional results of stomach-preserving surgery after sentinel node evaluation in patients with early gastric cancer: a multicenter, randomized phase 3 trial (SENORITA) J Clin Oncol 2023 41 16 Suppl 4070 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.4070
Eom BW, Yoon HM, Kim Y-W, et al. Long-term quality of life and nutritional results of stomach-preserving surgery after sentinel node evaluation in patients with early gastric cancer: a multicenter, randomized phase 3 trial (SENORITA). J Clin Oncol. 2023;41(16 Suppl):4070. 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.4070.
9. Hur H Lee YJ Kim YW Clinical efficacy of laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery for stomach preservation in patients with early gastric cancer: 5-year results of the SENORITA trial Ann Surg 2024 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006219 38269605
Hur H, Lee YJ, Kim YW, et al. Clinical efficacy of laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery for stomach preservation in patients with early gastric cancer: 5-year results of the SENORITA trial. Ann Surg. 2024. 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006219.38269605
10. Park JY Kim YW Ryu KW Assessment of laparoscopic stomach preserving surgery with sentinel basin dissection versus standard gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy in early gastric cancer-a multicenter randomized phase III clinical trial (SENORITA trial) protocol BMC Cancer 2016 16 340 10.1186/s12885-016-2336-8 27246120
Park JY, Kim YW, Ryu KW, et al. Assessment of laparoscopic stomach preserving surgery with sentinel basin dissection versus standard gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy in early gastric cancer-a multicenter randomized phase III clinical trial (SENORITA trial) protocol. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:340. 10.1186/s12885-016-2336-8.27246120
11. An JY Min JS Lee YJ Safety of laparoscopic sentinel basin dissection in patients with gastric cancer: an analysis from the senorita prospective multicenter quality control trial J Gastric Cancer 2018 18 1 30 36 10.5230/jgc.2018.18.e6 29629218
An JY, Min JS, Lee YJ, et al. Safety of laparoscopic sentinel basin dissection in patients with gastric cancer: an analysis from the senorita prospective multicenter quality control trial. J Gastric Cancer. 2018;18(1):30–6. 10.5230/jgc.2018.18.e6.29629218
12. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma–2nd English edition Gastric Cancer 1998 1 1 10 24 10.1007/s101209800016 11957040
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma–2nd English edition. Gastric Cancer. 1998;1(1):10–24. 10.1007/s101209800016.11957040
13. Amin MB Greene FL Byrd DR Brookland RK Washington MK Gershenwald JE AJCC cancer staging manual 2017 8 Cham Springer
Amin MB, Greene FL, Byrd DR, Brookland RK, Washington MK, Gershenwald JE, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual. 8th edn. Cham: Springer; 2017.
14. Kampschöer GH Maruyama K van de Velde CJ Sasako M Kinoshita T Okabayashi K Computer analysis in making preoperative decisions: a rational approach to lymph node dissection in gastric cancer patients Br J Surg 1989 76 9 905 908 10.1002/bjs.1800760910 2804584
Kampschöer GH, Maruyama K, van de Velde CJ, Sasako M, Kinoshita T, Okabayashi K. Computer analysis in making preoperative decisions: a rational approach to lymph node dissection in gastric cancer patients. Br J Surg. 1989;76(9):905–8. 10.1002/bjs.1800760910.2804584
15. Hundahl SA Macdonald JS Benedetti J Fitzsimmons T Surgical treatment variation in a prospective, randomized trial of chemoradiotherapy in gastric cancer: the effect of undertreatment Ann Surg Oncol 2002 9 3 278 286 10.1007/BF02573066 11923135
Hundahl SA, Macdonald JS, Benedetti J, Fitzsimmons T. Surgical treatment variation in a prospective, randomized trial of chemoradiotherapy in gastric cancer: the effect of undertreatment. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(3):278–86. 10.1007/BF02573066.11923135
16. Peeters KC Hundahl SA Kranenbarg EK Hartgrink H van de Velde CJ Low Maruyama index surgery for gastric cancer: blinded reanalysis of the Dutch D1–D2 trial World J Surg 2005 29 12 1576 1584 10.1007/s00268-005-7907-9 16317484
Peeters KC, Hundahl SA, Kranenbarg EK, Hartgrink H, van de Velde CJ. Low Maruyama index surgery for gastric cancer: blinded reanalysis of the Dutch D1–D2 trial. World J Surg. 2005;29(12):1576–84. 10.1007/s00268-005-7907-9.16317484
17. Bollschweiler E Boettcher K Hoelscher AH Preoperative assessment of lymph node metastases in patients with gastric cancer: evaluation of the Maruyama computer program Br J Surg 1992 79 2 156 160 10.1002/bjs.1800790221 1555065
Bollschweiler E, Boettcher K, Hoelscher AH, et al. Preoperative assessment of lymph node metastases in patients with gastric cancer: evaluation of the Maruyama computer program. Br J Surg. 1992;79(2):156–60. 10.1002/bjs.1800790221.1555065
18. Wang Z Dong ZY Chen JQ Liu JL Diagnostic value of sentinel lymph node biopsy in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis Ann Surg Oncol 2012 19 5 1541 1550 10.1245/s10434-011-2124-2 22048632
Wang Z, Dong ZY, Chen JQ, Liu JL. Diagnostic value of sentinel lymph node biopsy in gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(5):1541–50. 10.1245/s10434-011-2124-2.22048632
19. Kim SM Lee H Min BH A prediction model for lymph node metastasis in early-stage gastric cancer: toward tailored lymphadenectomy J Surg Oncol 2019 120 4 670 675 10.1002/jso.25628 31301150
Kim SM, Lee H, Min BH, et al. A prediction model for lymph node metastasis in early-stage gastric cancer: toward tailored lymphadenectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2019;120(4):670–5. 10.1002/jso.25628.31301150
20. Akiyama Y Katai H Kitabayashi R Frequency of lymph node metastasis according to tumor location in clinical T1 early gastric cancer: supplementary analysis of the Japan clinical oncology group study (JCOG0912) J Gastroenterol 2023 58 6 519 526 10.1007/s00535-023-01974-z 36867237
Akiyama Y, Katai H, Kitabayashi R, et al. Frequency of lymph node metastasis according to tumor location in clinical T1 early gastric cancer: supplementary analysis of the Japan clinical oncology group study (JCOG0912). J Gastroenterol. 2023;58(6):519–26. 10.1007/s00535-023-01974-z.36867237
21. Kitagawa Y Takeuchi H Takagi Y Sentinel node mapping for gastric cancer: a prospective multicenter trial in Japan J Clin Oncol 2013 31 29 3704 3710 10.1200/JCO.2013.50.3789 24019550
Kitagawa Y, Takeuchi H, Takagi Y, et al. Sentinel node mapping for gastric cancer: a prospective multicenter trial in Japan. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(29):3704–10. 10.1200/JCO.2013.50.3789.24019550
22. Lee SE Lee JH Ryu KW Sentinel node mapping and skip metastases in patients with early gastric cancer Ann Surg Oncol 2009 16 3 603 608 10.1245/s10434-008-0283-6 19127361
Lee SE, Lee JH, Ryu KW, et al. Sentinel node mapping and skip metastases in patients with early gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(3):603–8. 10.1245/s10434-008-0283-6.19127361
