AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Review Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-4861/693
1 Department of General Surgery, H of Magenta (MI), University Statale of Milan (MI), Italy.
2 Department of General Surgery, H of Garbagnate Milanese (MI), Italy.
*Corresponding Author: Francesco D’Urbano, Department of General Surgery, H of Garbagnate Milanese (MI), Italy.
Citation: Aurora Battista, Francesco D’Urbano, (2025), Outcomes and complications of Mini-Invasive Surgery for Gastric Cancer: a Narrative Review, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, 24(2); DOI:10.31579/2690-4861/693
Copyright: © 2025, Francesco D’Urbano. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 20 January 2025 | Accepted: 10 March 2025 | Published: 14 March 2025
Keywords: mininvasive, surgery; laparoscopy; robotic; gastrectomy; outcomes; complications; learning curve
Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become an increasingly adopted approach in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC), with laparoscopic and robotic techniques emerging as viable alternatives to traditional open surgery. This narrative review explores the outcomes and complications associated with MIS in GC treatment, comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LAG), robotic gastrectomy (RG), and open gastrectomy (OG) based on the latest literature.
A search was conducted for the most recent international guidelines, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and narrative reviews on the topic, focusing on the outcomes and complications of the different surgical techniques for treating gastric cancer. This review examines the laparoscopic, robotic, and traditional open approaches, considering factors such as blood loss, length of hospital stay, and the learning curve required to achieve optimal results.
While gastric resection remains the standard treatment for GC, minimally invasive techniques, particularly laparoscopy, have shown significant advantages in reducing postoperative complications such as blood loss and hospital stay length. However, long-term outcomes, including disease recurrence and overall survival, are comparable between laparoscopic and open surgery. Robotic surgery, despite higher costs and longer operative times, offers improved precision and may be a valid option, particularly in high-specialty centers. Additionally, the learning curve is a critical factor for the success of minimally invasive techniques, with a minimum number of cases required to achieve optimal results.
Finally, lymph node dissection and the extent of nodal resection (D1, D2) are key determinants of prognosis and survival, regardless of the surgical approach adopted.
Gastric Cancer: Epidemiology and Etiology
Gastric cancer (GC) is the fifth most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide and the third leading cause of cancer-related deaths [1]. The incidence of GC exhibits significant global variation, with the highest rates observed in Eastern Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, and South America [2]. Notably, its incidence is increasing in both high- and low-risk countries.
Gastric cancer (GC) has a range of risk factors that can vary depending on geographic and individual characteristics. The main risk factors include genetic predisposition, Helicobacter pylori infection, and lifestyle habits [3]. Helicobacter pylori is one of the most studied etiological agents, as it has been significantly associated with the development of gastric cancer, especially in non-cardiac carcinoma. Chronic infection can lead to inflammation, peptic ulcers, and, in the long term, increase the risk of malignant transformation.
In addition to H. pylori infection, several other factors have been identified as potentially oncogenic. These include:
These risk factors are closely related to environmental, lifestyle, and genetic predispositions. In many high-risk areas, primary prevention, such as reducing salt and alcohol consumption, eliminating H. pylori, and promoting healthy dietary habits, could significantly reduce the incidence of gastric cancer.
In Western countries, GC is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, primarily due to inadequate screening protocols [10].
Gastric Cancer: Treatment (11)
Surgical intervention remains the cornerstone of curative treatment for GC, frequently combined with systemic therapies, including novel chemotherapeutic regimens, radiotherapy, and immunomodulatory agents. These treatments are typically tailored to the individual patient and the tumor’s characteristics.
Table 1: synopsis of different surgical approaches
This narrative review aims to critically analyze the outcomes and complications associated with minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of gastric cancer, specifically comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LAG), robotic gastrectomy (RG), and open gastrectomy (OG). Through a synopsis of the latest literature, the review explores the advantages and limitations of each surgical approach in terms of postoperative complications, oncological outcomes, and procedural feasibility. A key focus is the impact of surgical technique on postoperative recovery, morbidity, and long-term survival, with particular attention to the role of the learning curve in achieving optimal outcomes.
Surgical Approach: Description
Extent of Gastric Resection (12-19)
A sufficient resection margin is crucial for curative intent in gastrectomy.
Surgery for T1 Tumors:
T1 tumors that do not meet the criteria for endoscopic resection require surgical intervention, though the procedure can be less extensive than for other gastric cancers. A gross resection margin of at least 2 cm is required. If the tumor border is unclear, preoperative endoscopic marking of the tumor by clips based on biopsy results can help guide the resection.
Lymph node dissection for T1 tumors may be limited to perigastric lymph nodes, including local N2 nodes (D1+ lymphadenectomy), with the specific nodal groups dissected depending on the tumor's site.
Surgery for cN+ or T2-T4a Tumors:
For clinically node-positive (cN+) or T2–T4a tumors, the standard surgical procedure is either total or distal gastrectomy. A proximal margin of 3 cm is recommended for tumors with an expansive growth pattern (including intestinal histotypes) and 5 cm for those with an infiltrative growth pattern (including poorly cohesive/diffuse histotypes). If these guidelines cannot be met, frozen section examination of the entire thickness of the proximal resection margin is recommended.
Distal gastrectomy is chosen if a satisfactory proximal resection margin can be achieved. If this is not possible, total gastrectomy is preferred.
In cases of pancreatic invasion by the tumor requiring pancreatosplenectomy, total gastrectomy is indicated regardless of tumor location. Total gastrectomy with splenectomy should also be considered for tumors located along the greater curvature. For adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction, proximal gastrectomy may be an appropriate option.
LymphNode Dissection in Total Gastrectomy
The extent of nodal dissection in radical gastrectomy has been a subject of considerable debate. D1 resection includes removal of the perigastric lymph nodes and those along the left gastric artery. D1+ and D2 resections involve additional lymph nodes along the proper or common hepatic artery, splenic artery, or celiac axis.
The AJCC/UICC TNM classification (8th edition) recommends excising at least 15 lymph nodes for reliable staging.
For cN+ or ≥ cT2 tumors, D2 lymphadenectomy is indicated, while D1 or D1+ is typically performed for cT1N0 tumors. As preoperative and intraoperative diagnoses regarding tumor invasion and nodal involvement are often unreliable, D2 lymphadenectomy should be performed if nodal involvement cannot be definitively excluded.
In Asian countries, studies have shown that D2 resection results in superior outcomes compared to D1 resection. [13] In Western countries, patients with resectable disease should undergo D2 resection in specialized, high-volume centers with appropriate surgical expertise and postoperative care. [20].
Table 2: Surgical indications according to the clinical stage of the disease. (13)
*not meeting criteria for endoscopic resection.
Surgical Approaches
Open total gastrectomy (OTG) with D2 lymphadenectomy remains the gold standard for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer.
Since the introduction of laparoscopic and robotic techniques for total gastrectomy, these minimally invasive approaches have gained widespread acceptance and are increasingly used worldwide. Despite this, the optimal surgical approach remains a subject of ongoing debate.
A recent nationwide survey from Korea documented a shift from open surgery to minimally invasive approaches. The frequency of open surgery decreased from 49.8% in 2014 to 27.6% in 2019, while laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) increased from 18.2% to 44.3% over the same period. [21-22]
Table 3: definition of LADG and TLG. (18)
Laparoscopic Vs Open Gastrectomy (21-29)
For cStage I gastric cancer
The non-inferiority of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) compared to open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for clinical stage I gastric cancer has been established in phase 3, randomized controlled trials conducted in Japan and Korea (JCOG0912, KLASS01). Additionally, the feasibility of laparoscopy-assisted total or proximal gastrectomy has been confirmed in a single-arm, confirmatory clinical trial (JCOG1401). Recently the update of JCOG1401 trial was published (2024): the long-term outcomes of LATG and LAPG were acceptable and comparable to previous OTG/OPG results, therefore it can be considered one of the standard treatments for cStage I proximal gastric cancer.
The KLASS-07 RCT proved that totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) is comparable to laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy in terms of postoperative morbidities within 30 days when used for clinical stage I gastric cancer treatment and has benefits in terms of reducing ileus (0.9% vs. 5.7%, P= 0.006) and pulmonary complications.
For advanced gastric cancer
International guidelines still consider open total or distal gastrectomy the gold standard for clinically node-positive or T2–T4a tumors. In the meanwhile, for advanced gastric cancer, large-scale randomized clinical trials in Japan, Korea, and China (JLSSG0901, KLASS-02, CLASS-01) have confirmed the safety and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Safety analyses have shown no significant increase in complications with laparoscopic approaches. However, while the JLSSG0901 trial reported a significant reduction in blood loss (to as low as 30 mL), the operation took longer (over 60 minutes) compared to the CLASS and KLASS trials. This difference may reflect variations in surgical techniques across the countries involved.
Further results of the JLSSG0901 trial published in 2023 show that on the basis of 5-year follow-up data, LADG with D2 lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer, when performed by qualified surgeons, was proved noninferior to ODG. This laparoscopic approach could become a standard treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer.
Robotic Gastrectomy [30-33]
Robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) was first introduced by Hashizume et al. in 2002 to address the technical limitations of conventional minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG), such as the restricted range of motion and discomfort due to the surgeon's positioning during the procedure. This innovation allows for a three-dimensional, tenfold magnified view of the operating field, which significantly enhances the precision of the surgery. In addition, the robotic system replicates the natural hand-eye coordination axis through the ergonomically designed surgeon's console, provides a high degree of freedom with its articulating surgical instruments, stabilizes the surgeon's tremor, and scales motion, further improving the accuracy and effectiveness of the procedure.
The widespread adoption of robotic surgery in a relatively short period highlights its growing significance, particularly in countries like Japan and China, where most of the recent studies have been conducted. RG has become an essential tool for curative resection of gastric cancer (GC) in these regions, demonstrating significant advantages over conventional laparoscopic techniques.
The evaluation of surgical procedures is inherently complex, influenced by factors such as the complexity of the surgical techniques, variability in surgeon experience, and differences between hospitals. Furthermore, surgical methods are constantly evolving, and their outcomes may change over time, even after they have been widely implemented in clinical practice.
Recent long-term studies, including IDEAL-3 and IDEAL-4, as well as systematic reviews and meta-analyses, have shown that total or subtotal RAMIG provides favorable or comparable short-term outcomes compared to conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) or open gastrectomy (OG) in patients with cardia and non-cardia gastric cancer. These advantages include reduced intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and fewer postoperative complications. Moreover, many studies have reported that the oncologic outcomes, such as total lymph node yield, radicality of resection, and mortality rates, are either comparable or even improved with RAMIG. However, it does come with some drawbacks, including longer procedural time (approximately 20–50 minutes) and higher costs (approximately 1000–5000 US dollars).
Based on these findings, the technical feasibility and oncological safety of RG seem to be at least comparable to those of LG and, in some cases, may even surpass them.
A randomized controlled trial (JCOG1907) is currently underway to confirm whether robot-assisted gastrectomy can reduce morbidity compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy for clinical T1–2 N0–2 gastric cancer. It is important to note that performing robot-assisted gastrectomy requires the surgeon and facility to meet specific quality standards.
Outcomes
(34; 11; 42)
LAG seems to have a higher recurrence rate compared to OG. On the other hand, RG is considered non-inferior and in some recent studies even slightly superior compared to LAG in terms of 3-years RFS (recurrence free survival).
The latest RCT network meta-analysis shows OC rates of 18/% for OTG and LATG, 17% for TLTG and 16% for RTG.
These results may be theoretically explained by the reduced surgical trauma for minimally invasive gastrectomy with smaller surgical incisions, less surgical stress, and finest surgical dissection determining a lower risk of postoperative SSI and bleeding.
The incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) after total gastrectomy for GC has been previously reported to be up to 6.6%. The latest analysis showed that OTG, LATG, TLTG, and RTG were associated with 8%, 6%, 4%, and 2% AL rates, respectively. The surgical technique used to perform TG seems to have no influence on AL. Contrarily, AL may depend on other factors such as anastomotic tension, malnutrition, inadequate blood supply, and comorbidities.
In particular, rates for wound infection, cardiac complications, respiratory complications, VTE, pancreatic complications, anastomotic leak and stenosis are similar between techniques.
Compared with OG, there is similar perioperative mortality in those undergoing LAG and RG.
OS rates are identical for both OG and LAG. Recent and ongoing studies show a potentially increased OS in RG than LAG and OG.
Compared with OG, there is a significant reduction in morbidity in those undergoing LAG and RG, respectively. Compared with LAG, those undergoing RG have a significant reduction in overall morbidity.
Compared with OG, there is similar major morbidity in those undergoing LAG and RG. Compared with LAG, there is a significant reduction in major morbidity in those undergoing RG.
Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LAG) and robotic gastrectomy (RG) are generally associated with longer intraoperative times compared to open gastrectomy (OG). However, this finding contrasts with the results of Garbarino et al. and Trastulli et al., who reported longer operative times for open gastrectomy than for laparoscopic and robotic approaches. These discrepancies highlight the need for careful interpretation, as the total operative time (OT) for minimally invasive techniques includes both the "effective" surgical time—encompassing the dissection and reconstruction phases—and "non-productive" time, which involves tasks such as setup, docking of the robotic system, and adjustment of surgical instruments.
Liu et al. previously found that the effective operative time for robotic and laparoscopic distal gastrectomy was similar (145.9 minutes vs. 130.6 minutes). In contrast, Omori et al. reported shorter operative times for robotic gastrectomy compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Longer operative durations have been associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications. Specifically, Park et al. identified a cut-off time of 240 minutes, beyond which the risk of complications significantly increases.
It is important to consider that the differences in operative times, particularly for robotic and laparoscopic procedures, may also be influenced by the learning curve associated with these techniques. Surgeons with less experience in robotic or laparoscopic surgery may require additional time to perform the procedure, which could contribute to the observed variability in operative duration.
2. Number Of Lymph Nodes: Impact of learning curve
Compared with OG, LAG shows a significantly decreased LN yield, whereas there is a non-significant difference in LNs harvested for those who undergo RG.
Conversely, Trastulli et al. stated a statistically significant higher number of lymph nodes harvested in robotic vs. open gastrectomy.
3. IBL - Intraoperative Blood Loss
Compared with OG, there is a significant reduction in IBL for those who underwent LAG and the robotic group. Furthermore, there seems to be a non-significant reduction in IBL in those undergoing RG compared with those undergoing LAG.
4. Distance From Proximal And Distal Margin
This distance from the proximal margin is significantly lower in those undergoing LAG compared with OG.
The distance from distal margin is similar to those who underwent LAG and OG.
Minimally invasive techniques have been associated with a trend toward improved postoperative outcomes, including a shorter time to first flatus, earlier initiation of liquid intake, and more rapid ambulation. These findings likely reflect the reduced surgical trauma to the abdominal wall and gastrointestinal tract, which minimizes pain and facilitates earlier mobilization, ambulation, and passage of flatus.
However, it is important to note that there is moderate to high heterogeneity in the results for secondary outcomes. Several factors may contribute to this variability, including the patients' comorbid conditions, body mass index, ASA classification, smoking status, use of postoperative antibiotics, tumor characteristics (such as type and size), techniques for intestinal reconstruction, extent of lymphadenectomy (D1 vs. D1+ vs. D2), type of omentectomy (total, partial, or none), hospital protocols, the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs, the surgeon's level of experience, and hospital case volumes.
When comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LAG) with open gastrectomy (OG), a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay has been observed for LAG patients. However, for patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy (RG), hospital stay is similar to that of OG patients. Additionally, no significant difference in hospital stay has been found between LAG and RG.
In terms of time to first liquid intake, both LAG and RG show a non-significant reduction compared with OG. Similarly, the time to first liquid intake is comparable between RG and LAG.
For the initiation of solid food intake, there is no significant difference.
The time to first passage of flatus is significantly reduced in both LAG and RG compared with OG. In contrast, no significant difference has been observed between RG and LAG in this outcome.
There is no significant difference in the time to first ambulation between LAG or RG compared to OG.
Finally, the rates of readmission seem to be similar.
Table 4: synopsis of outcomes and differences (based on the overall data).
Table 5: The proper technique for the proper patient (based on the overall data).
The Impact of Learning Curve(35- 41)
Laparoscopic gastrectomy is classified as advanced laparoscopic surgery and is associated with a substantial learning curve. The learning curve reflects the process through which a surgeon masters a new procedure, which is considered complete when key monitored parameters reach a steady state.
The learning curve is a critical consideration when evaluating the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy. Multidimensional learning curves, which encompass operation time, conversion rates, major complications, and in-hospital mortality, are particularly valuable for assessing improvements in surgical performance. Additional relevant monitoring parameters in oncological surgery include the achievement of R0 status (absence of residual tumor) and the adequacy of lymph node dissection. The experience of the treating institution and the surgical team are independent prognostic variables that significantly affect the likelihood of locoregional recurrence and overall survival. Both Japanese and Western studies have demonstrated a clear survival benefit associated with systematic lymph node dissection (D2 lymphadenectomy) in the treatment of gastric cancer. Therefore, proficiency in both D1 and D2 lymph node dissection is essential to achieving the oncological objectives of LAG for EGC.
It is generally accepted that surgeons performing LADG with D1 resection must have completed at least 30 laparoscopic gastrectomy procedures to overcome the learning curve.
On the other hand, a minimum of 50 cases of LADG with systemic lymphadenectomy for early gastric cancer is necessary to achieve optimal
proficiency. As a matter of fact, there seems to be a clear reduction in mean operative time in surgeons after that number of cases is achieved.
To ensure continuous improvement and maintain high clinical standards, we recommend the use of Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) charting as a personal audit tool. This method allows surgeons to systematically monitor their clinical parameters, assess their performance, identify emerging trends, evaluate the effects of patient selection, and track success rates in achieving oncological goals. To successfully complete the learning curve while maintaining optimal clinical outcomes, surgeons should delay the introduction of broader surgical indications until they have gained sufficient experience.
Minimally invasive surgery, both laparoscopic and robotic, represents the future of gastric cancer treatment due to its advantages in terms of recovery and reduced complications. However, the choice of technique should be tailored and guided by surgical experience, patient characteristics, and the stage of the disease.
Robotic surgery is emerging as a valid option in highly specialized centers, thanks to its technical advantages. However, costs and the learning curve remain significant obstacles. Laparoscopy, particularly total laparoscopy, represents a well-established choice for both early and advanced tumors with reduced morbidity.
The choice of lymphadenectomy type (D2 vs D1+) is crucial to improving long-term survival. Operative time and surgical volume remain key factors to minimize complications and optimize outcomes.
Table 6: Basic clinical considerations based on the main features of the three approaches as stated in the mentioned studies.
Acknowledgments-
Authors’ contributions
Battista A.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Financial support and sponsorship
None.
Conflicts of interest
All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.
Ethical approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Copyright
© Aurora Battista 2024.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
My article, titled 'No Way Out of the Smartphone Epidemic Without Considering the Insights of Brain Research,' has been republished in the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The review process was seamless and professional, with the editors being both friendly and supportive. I am deeply grateful for their efforts.
To Dear Erin Aust – Editorial Coordinator of Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice! I declare that I am absolutely satisfied with your work carried out with great competence in following the manuscript during the various stages from its receipt, during the revision process to the final acceptance for publication. Thank Prof. Elvira Farina
