Moein Moghadam Ahmadi - Clinical Research Development Unit of Poursina Hospital, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Fatemeh Nejatifar - Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Habib Eslami Kenarsari - Clinical Research Development Unit of Poursina Hospital, Razi Hospital, Guilan University of Medical, Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Saeed Soroush - Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran
Amineh Hojati - Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Science, Rasht, Iran

Introduction: Currently, patients diagnosed with gastric cancer typically undergo surgical or laparoscopic examination to assess the presence of metastasis. Methods: This study involved ۳۵ candidates for gastric adenocarcinoma surgery, consisting of ۲۱ males and ۱۴ females from medical centers in Rasht, Iran, in ۲۰۲۱. Patients reported initial complaints such as abdominal pain, nausea, weight loss, loss of appetite, and anemia. All data was analyzed using SPSS version ۲۱.Results: Peritoneal lavage cytology results indicated ۱۴ positive cases and ۲۱ negative cases for peritoneal metastasis, while laparoscopic examination during surgery showed ۱۲ positive cases and ۲۳ negative cases. There was concordance between the two methods in ۲۳ cases regarding the presence or absence of peritoneal metastasis, while ۱۲ 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.Introduction: Currently, patients diagnosed with gastric cancer typically undergo surgical or laparoscopic examination to assess the presence of metastasis. Methods: This study involved ۳۵ candidates for gastric adenocarcinoma surgery, consisting of ۲۱ males and ۱۴ females from medical centers in Rasht, Iran, in ۲۰۲۱. Patients reported initial complaints such as abdominal pain, nausea, weight loss, loss of appetite, and anemia. All data was analyzed using SPSS version ۲۱. Results: Peritoneal lavage cytology results indicated ۱۴ positive cases and ۲۱ negative cases for peritoneal metastasis, while laparoscopic examination during surgery showed ۱۲ positive cases and ۲۳ negative cases. There was concordance between the two methods in ۲۳ cases regarding the presence or absence of peritoneal metastasis, while ۱۲ 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.

Gastric Cancer, Peritoneal Lavage, Laparoscopy, Cytology