Introduction: Nutritional care is a cornerstone of cancer treatment, with the potential to significantly improve patient outcomes by addressing malnutrition and enhancing recovery. Despite growing awareness, the integration of evidence-based nutritional strategies into oncology remains inconsistent. Following a 2020 survey that highlighted critical gaps, the NutriOnc Research Group launched targeted initiatives to raise awareness and improve practices. This study reassesses progress in integrating nutritional care and identifies persistent challenges. Methods: A 29-question survey was conducted in 2024 among 73 early-career oncologists, surgeons, radiation oncologists, and nutrition specialists across Italy. Respondents provided insights into clinical nutrition program availability, multidisciplinary team composition, screening practices, and educational needs. Results: Encouraging advancements were noted, with 80.8% of respondents reporting the presence of clinical nutrition programs, compared to fewer structured efforts in 2020. However, only 26.0% included nutrition specialists in multidisciplinary teams, and barriers such as financial constraints, limited product availability, and the absence of trained professionals persisted. While 82.2% performed nutritional screening, variability in tools and practices highlighted the need for standardization. Strikingly, 98.6% expressed a strong demand for advanced education on clinical nutrition, emphasizing the need for innovative and accessible training programs. Conclusions: This study reveals a landscape of progress tempered by persistent inequities. To close the gap, oncology must embrace standardized protocols, expand access to trained nutrition specialists, and invest in educational initiatives. The findings offer actionable insights for transforming cancer care through nutrition, underscoring its potential to improve survival, quality of life, and overall treatment success.

Gastric cancer is ranked as the fifth most frequently diagnosed type of cancer. Complete resection with adequate lymphadenectomy represents the goal of treatment with curative intent. Quality assurance is a crucial factor in the evaluation of oncological surgical care, and centralization of healthcare in referral hospitals has been proposed in several countries. However, an international agreement about the setting of “high-volume hospitals” as well as “minimum volume standards” has not yet been clearly established. Despite the clear postoperative mortality benefits that have been described for gastric cancer surgery conducted by high-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals, many authors have highlighted the limitations of a non-composite variable to define the ideal postoperative period. The textbook outcome represents a multidimensional measure assessing the quality of care for cancer patients. Transparent and easily available hospital data will increase patients’ awareness, providing suitable elements for a more informed hospital choice.

Surgical site infection occurs with high frequency in gastrointestinal surgery, contributing to the high incidence of morbidity and mortality. The accepted practice worldwide for the prevention of surgical site infection is providing single- or multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis. However, most suitable antibiotic and optimal duration of prophylaxis are still debated. The aim of the systematic review is to assess the efficacy of antimicrobial prophylaxis in controlling surgical site infection rate following esophagogastric surgery. PubMed and Cochrane databases were systematically searched until 31 October 2021, for randomized controlled trials comparing different antimicrobial regimens in prevention surgical site infections. Risk of bias of studies was assessed with standard methods. Overall, eight studies concerning gastric surgery and one study about esophageal surgery met inclusion criteria. No significant differences were detected between single- and multiple-dose antibiotic prophylaxis. Most trials assessed the performance of cephalosporins or inhibitor of bacterial beta-lactamase. Antimicrobial prophylaxis (AMP) is effective in reducing the incidence of surgical site infection. Multiple-dose antimicrobial prophylaxis is not recommended for patients undergoing gastric surgery. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of antimicrobial prophylaxis in esophageal cancer patients.

Super-extended (D2plus) lymphadenectomy after chemotherapy has been reported in only a few studies. This retrospective study evaluates survival outcomes in a Western cohort of locally advanced or oligometastatic gastric cancer patients who underwent D2plus lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A total of 97 patients treated between 2010 and 2022 were included. Of these, 62 had clinical stage II/III disease, and 35 had stage IV disease. Most patients (65%) received preoperative DOC/FLOT chemotherapy. The mean number of lymph nodes harvested was 39. Pathological positive nodes in the posterior/para-aortic stations occurred in 17 (17.5%) patients. Lymphovascular invasion, ypN stage, clinical stage, and perineural invasion were predictive factors for positive posterior/para-aortic nodes. Postoperative complications occurred in 21 patients, whereas severe complications (grade III or more) occurred in 9 cases (9.3%). Mortality rate was 1%. Median overall survival (OS) was 59 months (95% CI: 13–106), with a five-year survival rate of 49 ± 6%; the five-year OS after R0 surgery was 60 ± 7%. In patients with positive posterior/para-aortic nodes, the median OS was 15 months (95% CI: 13–18). D2plus lymphadenectomy after chemotherapy for locally advanced or oligometastatic gastric cancer is feasible and associated with low morbidity/mortality rates. The incidence of pathological metastases in posterior/para-aortic nodes is not negligible even after systemic chemotherapy, with poor long-term survival.

Background: Artificial intelligence is emerging as a promising tool in surgical oncology, with growing evidence suggesting potential applications in diagnostic support, intraoperative guidance, and perioperative risk assessment. In gastric cancer surgery, emerging applications range from AI-assisted endoscopic detection to data-driven perioperative risk prediction, while some technological developments, particularly in robotic autonomy, derive from broader surgical or experimental models that may inform future gastric procedures. Methods: A narrative review was conducted following established methodological standards, including the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA) and the Search–Appraisal–Synthesis–Analysis (SALSA) framework. English-language studies indexed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science up to October 2025 were included. Evidence was synthesized thematically across five domains: AI-assisted anatomical recognition and lymphadenectomy support, autonomous robotic systems, early cancer detection, perioperative predictive and frailty models, and ethical and regulatory considerations. Results: AI-based computer vision and deep learning algorithms have demonstrated promising capabilities for real-time anatomical recognition, surgical phase classification, and intraoperative guidance, although evidence of direct patient-level benefit remains limited. In diagnostic settings, AI-assisted endoscopy and Raman spectroscopy have been shown to improve early lesion detection and reduce dependence on operator experience. Predictive models, including MySurgeryRisk and AI-driven frailty assessments, may support individualized prehabilitation planning and perioperative risk stratification. Persistent limitations include small and heterogeneous datasets, insufficient external validation, and unresolved concerns related to data privacy, algorithmic interpretability, and medico-legal responsibility. Conclusions: Artificial intelligence is progressively emerging as a promising tool in gastric cancer surgery, integrating automation, advanced analytics, and human clinical reasoning. Its safe and ethical adoption requires robust validation, transparent governance, and continuous surgeon oversight. When developed within human-centered and ethically grounded frameworks, AI can augment, rather than replace, surgical expertise, potentially advancing precision, safety, and equity in oncologic care.

Background and Objectives: Hepatolithiasis (HL), or intrahepatic bile duct stone disease, shows regional variation and is a rare condition in Western countries. While cases from East Asia are often linked to chronic biliary infections and brown pigment stones, Western HL more frequently involves cholesterol or black pigment stones, typically in the context of prior cholecystectomy, biliary interventions, or congenital anomalies. The disease is generally associated with significant morbidity, including recurrent cholangitis, biliary strictures, and risk of cholangiocarcinoma. This study aimed to characterize HL disease in an Italian case series. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1450 patients with biliary stone disease treated between 2010 and 2024. HL was diagnosed in 14 patients (0.96%). Clinical records, imaging (ultrasound, CT, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography—MRCP, cholangiography), bile cultures, and stone composition (categorized as cholesterol, brown pigment, black pigment, or mixed using FTIR/XRD) were analyzed. Results: Among the 14 patients (mean age: 60.1 years; 64.3% female), 71.4% presented with recurrent cholangitis, while 28.6% were asymptomatic. Stones were left-sided in 57.1%, right-sided in 21.4%, and bilateral in 21.4%. Stone composition was cholesterol/mixed in 50%, brown pigment in 35.7%, and black pigment in 14.3%. Risk factors for bile stasis were present in 71.4% of cases. Bile cultures (available in nine cases) were positive in 77.8%. MRCP was highly effective for diagnosis. Hepatectomy achieved complete resolution in 35.7% of patients with unilobar disease; endoscopic/percutaneous therapy had a 44.4% recurrence rate. Interestingly, no cholangiocarcinoma was observed over a median follow-up of 4.8 years. Conclusions: Western HL is a rare, heterogeneous disease with distinct features. Cholesterol-predominant, infection-negative cases suggest a metabolic or surgical etiology. Hepatectomy offers durable outcomes in unilobar disease. Advanced imaging (MRCP, cholangioscopy) and personalized strategies are key to effective management.