The American journal of gastroenterology · 2009
Pouch vs. no pouch following total gastrectomy: meta-analysis and systematic review.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gertler Ralf, Rosenberg Robert, Feith Marcus, Schuster Tibor, Friess Helmut
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Whether reconstruction after total gastrectomy for gastric malignancies should be done with or without a pouch is a controversial issue in clinical research. There is still no consensus on the reconstruction technique of choice. The aim of this report was to assess the value of pouch formation as a gastric substitute after total gastrectomy compared with reconstruction techniques without a pouch.
METHODS: A systematic literature search of the Medline database and the Cochrane Library was carried out and a meta-analysis executed according to the Quality of Reporting Meta-Analyses (QUOROM) statement. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing reconstruction techniques with and without a pouch were eligible for inclusion. All trials were independently assessed by two authors. Data on perioperative parameters, postgastrectomy symptoms, eating capability, body weight, and quality of life were extracted from the RCTs for meta-analysis using random-effects models for the calculation of pooled estimates of treatment effects.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs comparing Roux-en-Y reconstructions with and without pouch and four RCTs comparing jejunal interpositions with and without a pouch were included. The results of the meta-analyses show that additional pouch formation does not significantly increase morbidity or mortality and does not considerably extend the operating time or the hospital stay. Patients with a pouch complained significantly less of dumping and heartburn and showed a significantly better food intake postoperatively. Quality of life was significantly improved in patients with a pouch compared with patients without a pouch. This difference even increased over time from 6 to 12 and 24 months postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis highlights some clinical advantages of pouch reconstruction after total gastrectomy.
METHODS: A systematic literature search of the Medline database and the Cochrane Library was carried out and a meta-analysis executed according to the Quality of Reporting Meta-Analyses (QUOROM) statement. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing reconstruction techniques with and without a pouch were eligible for inclusion. All trials were independently assessed by two authors. Data on perioperative parameters, postgastrectomy symptoms, eating capability, body weight, and quality of life were extracted from the RCTs for meta-analysis using random-effects models for the calculation of pooled estimates of treatment effects.
RESULTS: Nine RCTs comparing Roux-en-Y reconstructions with and without pouch and four RCTs comparing jejunal interpositions with and without a pouch were included. The results of the meta-analyses show that additional pouch formation does not significantly increase morbidity or mortality and does not considerably extend the operating time or the hospital stay. Patients with a pouch complained significantly less of dumping and heartburn and showed a significantly better food intake postoperatively. Quality of life was significantly improved in patients with a pouch compared with patients without a pouch. This difference even increased over time from 6 to 12 and 24 months postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis highlights some clinical advantages of pouch reconstruction after total gastrectomy.