Are Palliative Interventions Worth the Risk in Advanced Gastric Cancer? A Systematic Review

Background: Less than 25% of gastric cancers (GC) are discovered early, leading to limited treatment options and poor outcomes (27.8% mortality, 3.7% 5-year survival). Screening programs have improved cure rates, yet post-diagnosis treatment guidelines remain unclear (systemic chemotherapy versus surgery). The optimal type of palliative surgery (palliative gastrectomy (PG), surgical bypass (SB), endoscopic stenting (ES)) for long-term outcomes is also debated. Methods: A literature review was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases along with Google Scholar with the search terms "gastric cancer" and "palliative surgery" for studies post-1985. From the initial 1018 articles, multiple screenings narrowed it to 92 articles meeting criteria such as "metastatic, stage IV GC", and intervention (surgery or chemotherapy). Data regarding survival and other long-term outcomes were recorded. Results: Overall, there was significant variation between studies but there were similarities of the conclusions reached. ES provided quick symptom relief, while PG showed improved overall survival (OS) only with adjuvant chemotherapy in a selective population. PG had higher mortality rates compared to SB, with ES having a reported 0% mortality, but OS improved with chemotherapy across both SB and PG. Conclusions: Less frail patients may experience an improvement in OS with palliative resection under limited circumstances. However, operative intervention without systemic chemotherapy is unlikely to demonstrate a survival benefit. Further research is needed to explore any correlations.