PloS one · 2021
Clinical outcomes of proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A comparison between the double-flap technique and jejunal interposition.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kumamoto Tsutomu, Sasako Mitsuru, Ishida Yoshinori, Kurahashi Yasunori, Shinohara Hisashi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy (PG) has been debatable. Recent reports have shown that the double-flap technique (DFT) provides good outcomes in terms of postoperative nutritional status and quality of life. However, no study has compared the clinical outcomes of the DFT with other reconstruction methods. Here, we evaluated and compared the clinical outcomes between the DFT and jejunal interposition (JI) after PG for gastric cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 34 consecutive patients who had undergone PG for upper third gastric cancer between January 2011 and October 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. The main factors investigated were surgical outcomes, postoperative nutritional status, symptoms, and endoscopic findings 1 year after surgery.
RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enrolled (DFT, 14; JI, 20). The operation time was similar between the two techniques (228 and 246 minutes for DFT and JI, respectively, P = 0.377), as were the rates of anastomotic complications (7% and 0% for DFT and JI, respectively, P = 0.412). Body weight loss was significantly lower in the DFT group than in the JI group (-8.1% vs -16.1%, P = 0.001). Total protein and albumin levels were higher in the DFT group than in the JI group (0% vs -2.9%, P = 0.053, and -0.3% vs -6.1%, P = 0.077, respectively). One patient in the DFT group and no patients in the JI group experienced reflux esophagitis (≥ grade B) (P = 0.393). Anastomotic strictures were not observed as postoperative complications in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical outcomes revealed that the DFT was safe and feasible, similar to JI. In terms of controlling postoperative body weight loss, the DFT is a better reconstruction technique than JI after PG.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 34 consecutive patients who had undergone PG for upper third gastric cancer between January 2011 and October 2016 were reviewed retrospectively. The main factors investigated were surgical outcomes, postoperative nutritional status, symptoms, and endoscopic findings 1 year after surgery.
RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were enrolled (DFT, 14; JI, 20). The operation time was similar between the two techniques (228 and 246 minutes for DFT and JI, respectively, P = 0.377), as were the rates of anastomotic complications (7% and 0% for DFT and JI, respectively, P = 0.412). Body weight loss was significantly lower in the DFT group than in the JI group (-8.1% vs -16.1%, P = 0.001). Total protein and albumin levels were higher in the DFT group than in the JI group (0% vs -2.9%, P = 0.053, and -0.3% vs -6.1%, P = 0.077, respectively). One patient in the DFT group and no patients in the JI group experienced reflux esophagitis (≥ grade B) (P = 0.393). Anastomotic strictures were not observed as postoperative complications in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical outcomes revealed that the DFT was safe and feasible, similar to JI. In terms of controlling postoperative body weight loss, the DFT is a better reconstruction technique than JI after PG.