Diagnostic value
of peritoneal lavage fluid cytology findings of peritoneal invasion in patients
with gastric cancer
Moein Moghadam Ahmadi 1, Fatemeh Nejatifar
2, Habib Eslami Kenarsari 3,
Saeed Soroush 4, Amineh Hojati 5*
1 Clinical Research Development Unit
of Poursina Hospital, Guilan University of Medical
Sciences, Rasht, Iran
2 Department of Hematology and Medical
Oncology, Guilan University of Medical Sciences,
Rasht, Iran
3 Clinical Research Development Unit
of Poursina Hospital, Razi Hospital, Guilan
University of Medical, Sciences, Rasht, Iran
4 Student Research Committee, School
of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences,
Rasht, Iran
5 Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease
Research Center, Guilan University of Medical
Science, Rasht, Iran
Corresponding Authors: Amineh Hojati
* Email: amineh_hojati@yahoo.com
Abstract
Introduction: Currently, patients diagnosed with gastric cancer
typically undergo surgical or laparoscopic examination to assess the presence
of metastasis.
Methods: This study involved 35 candidates for gastric adenocarcinoma surgery,
consisting of 21 males and 14 females from medical centers in Rasht, Iran, in
2021. Patients reported initial complaints such as abdominal pain, nausea,
weight loss, loss of appetite, and anemia. All data was analyzed using SPSS
version 21.
Results: Peritoneal lavage cytology results indicated 14 positive cases and 21
negative cases for peritoneal metastasis, while laparoscopic examination during
surgery showed 12 positive cases and 23 negative cases. There was concordance
between the two methods in 23 cases regarding the presence or absence of
peritoneal metastasis, while 12 cases showed inconsistency. Specifically, five
cases had negative peritoneal lavage cytology and positive laparoscopic
examination, and seven had positive peritoneal lavage cytology and negative
laparoscopic examination. Although peritoneal lavage cytology aligned with
intraoperative findings regarding patient feasibility.
Conclusion: The study illustrated that solely on peritoneal lavage cytology
results is not enough for determining peritoneal invasion in patients with
gastric cancer.
Keywords: Gastric Cancer, Peritoneal Lavage, Laparoscopy, Cytology
Introduction
Gastric
cancer is a significant global health concern, accounting for a substantial
proportion of cancer-related morbidity and mortality. It is the fifth most
common cancer worldwide and the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths (1). The incidence of gastric cancer
varies across different regions, with higher rates observed in Eastern Asia,
Eastern Europe, and parts of South America (2). Several risk factors contribute to
the development of gastric cancer, including Helicobacter pylori infection, a
family history of gastric cancer, smoking, and an everyday diet (3). Peritoneal involvement in cancer is usually manifested by abdominal
distension, changes in bowel habits, feeling full after eating, and pain
secondary to ascites accumulation (4,5). The value of peritoneal lavage cytology in stomach, colon, and pancreatic
cancers has always been one of the topics of interest for study, and the
relationship between positive peritoneal lavage cytology and worsening
prognosis has been confirmed (6).
One
critical aspect of managing gastric cancer is accurately assessing the presence
of peritoneal invasion, as it significantly impacts prognosis and treatment
decisions (7). Currently, surgical or
laparoscopic examination is commonly used to investigate the presence of
peritoneal metastasis in patients diagnosed with gastric cancer. However, these
methods can be invasive and may carry certain risks. Therefore, there is a need
for less invasive diagnostic approaches that can provide reliable information
about peritoneal invasion in gastric cancer patients (8–11). Peritoneal lavage cytology
involves collecting and examining fluid samples from the peritoneal cavity and
has emerged as a potential diagnostic tool for peritoneal invasion in gastric
cancer (12,13). This study aimed to evaluate the
diagnostic value of peritoneal lavage fluid cytology findings in determining
peritoneal invasion in patients with gastric cancer.
Methods
In this cross-sectional study, a total number of 35
patients diagnosed with gastric cancer, including those undergoing chemotherapy
and those not receiving chemotherapy, were recruited from medical centers in Rasht, Iran, in 2021. Eligibility for inclusion
in the study was determined based on CT scan findings, following the guidelines
outlined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Specifically,
patients with minimum involvement of the submucosa (T1b, T2, T3, T4a, and T4b),
as indicated by the T score corresponding to tumor
growth rate through the stomach wall, were considered suitable candidates for
laparoscopy. Patients were provided with detailed information about the study
and asked to complete a consent form. Demographical data and clinical
characteristics of the patients were recorded. Diagnostic peritoneal lavage was
performed immediately before the laparoscopy. The peritoneal lavage fluid was
collected, and cytological evaluation was applied to identify the malignant
cells' presence or absence. Subsequently, laparoscopy was performed on each
patient, and tissue samples were obtained for pathological examination to
diagnose peritoneal metastasis. Patients with liver and other organ metastasis
were excluded from the study. All data was analyzed
using SPSS version 21 and reported by numbers and percentages.
Results
According
to the results, about 60% of the patients were males, and most were aged 70-80
(table 1). About 17, 5, 4, and 6 patients had pain, early saturation, vomiting,
weight loss, anemia, or stomachache, respectively. Out of three detected
tumors, 23 were located distal, 10 were proximal, and two were located in the
stomach's body, of which 11, 1, and 5 were well, moderate, and poorly
differentiated, respectively. About 16 patients had no lymph node involvement,
11 had one reactive lymph node, 7 had two, and one had three lymph nodes.
Cytology results were positive in 14 samples while the laparoscopy findings
were positive for 12. About 16 findings were not in agreement with laparoscopy
and cytology findings, in which seven samples were diagnosed as positive for
gastric cancer by cytology missed from laparoscopy findings; and five samples
were diagnosed as positive by laparoscopy findings not confirmed by cytology
examination. Only seven samples were confirmed as positive by both laparoscopy
and cytology findings. According to our results, the cytology and
diagnostic laparotomy agreement rate was 65.7% (Table 2).
Table
1.
Demographical findings of the patients with gastric cancer.
variables |
Frequency n (%) |
|
Gander |
Male |
21 (60.00) |
female |
14 (40.00) |
|
Age |
< 50 year |
3 (8.50) |
50-60 year |
5 (14.28) |
|
60-70 year |
7 (20.00) |
|
70-80 year |
12 (34.2) |
|
>80 year |
8 (22.8) |
Table
2. Diagnostic value of peritoneal lavage fluid cytology in identifying
peritoneal invasion compared to intraoperative findings as the gold standard.
Variables |
Value |
Confidence interval |
Sensitivity |
0.58 |
0.0-35.78 |
Specificity |
0.69 |
0.0-49.9 |
Positive news
value |
0.5 |
0.0-2.7 |
Negative news
value |
0.76 |
0.0-.94 |
Positive agreement |
1.87 |
1.2-28.88 |
Negative agreement |
0.6 |
0.0-36.8 |
Discussion
The value of peritoneal lavage cytology in determining
the prognosis of stomach, colon, and pancreatic cancers has been studied
before, and the relationship between positive peritoneal lavage cytology and
poor prognosis has been confirmed. Also, this method has been used to determine
the recurrence of abdominal cancers, which has yielded beneficial results (14). The
study's findings indicate that cytology and laparoscopy findings showed some discrepancies,
with positive results in both modalities for a limited number of samples. The
agreement rate between cytology and diagnostic laparotomy was reported as
65.7%.
Higaki et al. reported that the outcomes of
gastric cancer patients with positive peritoneal lavage cytology findings vary
due to the diversity of cancer cells. This study aimed to establish diagnostic
criteria for curative resections based on peritoneal lavage cytology. The
presence of specific cytological features, such as signet ring cells, cell
clusters, and isolated cancer cells, predicted poor prognoses. Patients with
these high-risk positive peritoneal lavage cytology findings criteria had
significantly worse survival rates, even without macroscopic peritoneal
metastasis (15). The evaluation of cytological
examination of peritoneal fluid in patients with gastrointestinal cancers,
including stomach and cardia cancer, showed low sensitivity, specificity,
positive predictive value, and negative predictive value, which indicated that
peritoneal lavage fluid cytology is not reliable for determining operability in
gastrointestinal cancer cases. Therefore, alternative indicators should be
explored for accurate diagnosis.
In a study conducted by Abolghasemi
Fakhri et al., the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and
negative predictive value of the cytological examination of peritoneal lavage
fluid in comparison with the findings during the operation as a diagnostic
standard were 59%, 57%, 52%, and 64%, respectively (16). In another study by To et al. (12) to evaluate the diagnostic power of
peritoneal fluid cytology in diagnosing peritoneal involvement in 65 patients
with gastric cancer, the sensitivity was reported as 51.1%, and there were no
false positive cases (6). A study by Wilkimir et al. on 40 patients with
gastric or esophageal cancer illustrated that positive cases in laparoscopy
were significantly more than positive cases in cytology, and false negative
cytology was reported in 45% of cases. They reported that diagnostic laparoscopy
in these patients was sufficient to confirm or reject peritoneal involvement,
and there was no need for cytological examination of peritoneal lavage fluid (17).
Mozhir et al. studied 27 patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. They performed
diagnostic peritoneal lavage before laparoscopy, and a lavage fluid sample was
taken for cytology. A successful diagnosis was reported in 22 patients with
peritoneal lavage, of which 54.5% had a positive cytology result. Compared with
the cytology results of diagnostic laparoscopy samples, the sensitivity of
diagnostic peritoneal lavage was calculated to be 100%, and its specificity was
92%. Compared with the results of direct vision with laparoscopy, the
sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic peritoneal lavage were reported as
54.5% and 100%, respectively. They reported that in patients with gastric
cancer with metastasis, it is possible to predict the presence of metastasis only
based on the cytological findings of peritoneal lavage (18).
Based on the studies, the presence of cancer-free cells
in the peritoneal cavity during surgery can predict the outcome of patients.
However, whether or not it is helpful for the operability of these patients is
still not agreed upon (19,20). Benevolo et al. demonstrated that the immunohistochemical method exhibited
a 14% higher rate of detecting free cancer cells than cytology. Additionally,
when considering patients identified solely through the immunohistochemical
method, they observed comparable rates of recurrence and distant survival
compared to the group of patients with a positive cytological examination (21). Other studies have also confirmed
these findings, reporting an incidence of free cancer cells ranging from 21.4%
to 30% (22–24). The existence of free cancer cells
in the peritoneal lavage of patients with gastric cancer carries significant
negative implications for their prognosis. The survival advantage of radical
surgery in individuals with free cancer cells in the peritoneal lavage is
limited, indicating the importance of including peritoneal lavage examination
in the preoperative assessment for appropriate surgical planning. The presence
of free cancer cells is closely associated with the stage and type of gastric
cancer, and their identification can contribute to better categorization of
patients. This approach aids in identifying individuals who would benefit the
most from aggressive surgical interventions, ultimately leading to improved
long-term survival rates.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the current study, the
examination of peritoneal lavage fluid cytology in patients with gastric cancer
is consistent with the intraoperative findings of whether the patient is
operable or inoperable. However, these results are not significant enough to
rely on peritoneal lavage fluid cytology to determine the patients' operability
alone.
Conflict
of interests
The
authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Acknowledgments
Thanks
to the Clinical Research Development Unit of Poursina Hospital, Rasht, Iran, for their
assistance.
Consent
This
study was approved by the ethics committee of the Guilan
University of Medical Sciences [IR.GUMS.REC.1399.537].
Funding
None.
Authors
contributions
MMA, FN, HEK
and SS did this research, data collection, analysis and wrote the manuscript,
AH guidance and assisted in data collection and analysis of the results.
References
1. Rawla P, Barsouk A. Epidemiology of gastric cancer: global trends,
risk factors and prevention. Prz Gastroenterol.
2019;14(1):26–38.
2. Arnold M, Abnet CC, Neale RE, Vignat J, Giovannucci EL, McGlynn KA, et al. Global Burden
of 5 Major Types of Gastrointestinal Cancer. Gastroenterology [Internet].
2020;159(1):335-349.e15. Available from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016508520304522
3. Yang L, Ying X, Liu S, Lyu G, Xu Z, Zhang X,
et al. Gastric cancer: Epidemiology, risk factors and prevention strategies.
Chin J Cancer Res. 2020 Dec;32(6):695–704.
4. Kanda M, Kodera Y. Molecular mechanisms of
peritoneal dissemination in gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol.
2016;22(30):6829.
5. Kitayama J, Ishigami H, Yamaguchi H, Sakuma
Y, Horie H, Hosoya Y, et al. Treatment of patients with peritoneal metastases
from gastric cancer. Ann Gastroenterol Surg. 2018;2(2):116–23.
6. To EMC, Chan W-Y, Chow C, Ng EK-W, Chung
S-CS. Gastric Cancer Cell Detection in Peritoneal Washing: Cytology Versus
RT-PCR for CEA Transcripts. Diagnostic Mol Pathol
[Internet]. 2003;12(2). Available from:
7. Chen Z, Zhang P, Xi H, Wei B, Chen L, Tang
Y. Recent Advances in the Diagnosis, Staging, Treatment, and Prognosis of
Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Literature Review [Internet]. Vol. 8, Frontiers in Medicine . 2021.
Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2021.744839
8. Wang Z, Chen J, Liu J, Tian L. Issues on
peritoneal metastasis of gastric cancer: an update. World J Surg Oncol
[Internet]. 2019;17(1):215. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1761-y
9. Kubo N, Cho H, Lee D, Yang H, Kim Y, Khalayleh H, et al. Risk prediction model of peritoneal
seeding in advanced gastric cancer: A decision tool for diagnostic laparoscopy.
Eur J Surg Oncol [Internet]. 2023;49(4):853–61.
Available from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0748798322013592
10. Yamamoto H, Watanabe Y, Sato Y, Maehata T, Itoh F. Non-invasive early molecular detection
of gastric cancers. Cancers (Basel). 2020;12(10):1–17.
11. Necula L, Matei L, Dragu D, Neagu AI, Mambet C, Nedeianu S, et al.
Recent advances in gastric cancer early diagnosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2019
May;25(17):2029–44.
12. YUKAWA N, YAMADA T, AOYAMA T, WOO T, UEDA K,
MASTUDA A, et al. Tumor DNA in Peritoneal Lavage as a Novel Biomarker for
Predicting Peritoneal Recurrence in Patients With
Gastric Cancer. Anticancer Res [Internet]. 2023 May 1;43(5):2069 LP – 2076.
13. Gwee YX, Chia DKA,
So J, Ceelen W, Yong WP, Tan P, et al. Integration of Genomic Biology Into
Therapeutic Strategies of Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis. J Clin Oncol Off J Am
Soc Clin Oncol. 2022 Aug;40(24):2830.
14. Cao F, Li J, Li A, Li F. Prognostic
significance of positive peritoneal cytology in resectable
pancreatic cancer:
a systemic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2017
Feb;8(9):15004–13.
15. Higaki E, Yanagi S, Gotohda
N, Kinoshita T, Kuwata T, Nagino M, et al.
Intraoperative peritoneal lavage cytology offers prognostic significance for gastric cancer
patients with curative resection. Cancer Sci. 2017 May;108(5):978–86.
16. Basir M, Fakhri A, Kakaei
F, Halimi M, Manoochehri J, Fouladi DF. Archive of
SID Original Article Diagnostic accuracy of peritoneal fluid lavage cytology in
detection of peritoneal seeding in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma Archive
of SID. 013; 34(4): 7-13
17. Wilkiemeyer MB, Bieligk
SC, Ashfaq R, Jones DB, Rege R V, Fleming JB. Laparoscopy alone is superior to
peritoneal cytology in staging gastric and esophageal carcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2004 May;18(5):852–6.
18. Mezhir JJ, Posner
MC, Roggin KK. Prospective clinical trial of diagnostic peritoneal lavage to
detect positive
peritoneal cytology in patients with gastric cancer. J Surg
Oncol. 2013 Jun;107(8):794–8.
19. Cieśla S, Lisiecki R, Ławnicka
A, Kudliński B, Ostrowska P, Davì
A, et al. Clinical Significance of Peritoneal Fluid Examination for Free Cancer
Cells in Patients
Qualified for Surgery for Gastric Cancer. Front Surg. 2021;8:685868.
20. Hoskovec D, Varga J,
Dytrych P, Konecna E, Matek
J. Peritoneal lavage examination as a prognostic tool in cases of gastric
cancer. Arch Med Sci. 2017 Apr;13(3):612–6.
21. Benevolo M, Mottolese M, Cosimelli M, Tedesco
M, Giannarelli D, Vasselli S, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic value of
peritoneal immunocytology in gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol Off J Am
Soc Clin Oncol. 1998 Oct;16(10):3406–11.
22. Rosenberg R, Nekarda
H, Bauer P, Schenck U, Hoefler H, Siewert JR. Free peritoneal tumour cells are an independent prognostic factor in curatively resected
stage IB gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2006 Mar;93(3):325–31.
23. Vogel P, Rüschoff J,
Kümmel S, Zirngibl H, Hofstädter F, Hohenberger W, et
al. Immunocytology improves prognostic impact of
peritoneal tumour cell detection compared to conventional cytology in
gastric cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol J Eur
Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol. 1999
Oct;25(5):515–9.
24. Nekarda H, Gess C, Stark M, Mueller JD, Fink U, Schenck U, et al.
Immunocytochemically detected free peritoneal tumour
cells (FPTC) are a strong
prognostic factor in gastric carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 1999
Feb;79(3–4):611–9.