Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2025
Minimally invasive versus open completion total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: a nationwide propensity score-matched analysis.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Nakazawa Nobuhiro, Sakamoto Takashi, Yamamoto Hiroyuki, Sano Akihiko, Sakai Makoto, Kanaji Shingo, Kikuchi Hirotoshi, Ueno Hideki, Shirabe Ken, Saeki Hiroshi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for gastric cancer; however, its application to remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains technically challenging due to adhesions and altered anatomy. Large-scale comparative data on the safety and effectiveness of MIS versus open surgery for RGC are limited. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of MIS versus open completion total gastrectomy for RGC.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 3337 patients who underwent completion total gastrectomy for RGC between January 2018 and December 2022 using the National Clinical Database of Japan. After applying predefined inclusion criteria, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching to balance baseline characteristics between the MIS and open surgery groups and compared short-term surgical outcomes.
RESULTS: After matching, 540 patient pairs were included in the analysis. MIS was associated with a significantly longer operative time (median 344 vs. 248.5 min; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (median 70 vs. 290 mL; P < 0.001). The incidence of anastomotic leakage was higher in the MIS group (9.8% vs. 6.3%; P = 0.034). Postoperative hospital stay was numerically shorter in the MIS group (median 13 vs. 14 days; P = 0.065). Overall complication, reoperation, and mortality rates were comparable between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: MIS for RGC showed comparable short-term outcomes to those of open surgery in a nationwide analysis, with advantages including reduced blood loss. However, the increased risk of anastomotic leakage highlights the need for careful patient selection and ongoing technical refinement.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 3337 patients who underwent completion total gastrectomy for RGC between January 2018 and December 2022 using the National Clinical Database of Japan. After applying predefined inclusion criteria, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching to balance baseline characteristics between the MIS and open surgery groups and compared short-term surgical outcomes.
RESULTS: After matching, 540 patient pairs were included in the analysis. MIS was associated with a significantly longer operative time (median 344 vs. 248.5 min; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (median 70 vs. 290 mL; P < 0.001). The incidence of anastomotic leakage was higher in the MIS group (9.8% vs. 6.3%; P = 0.034). Postoperative hospital stay was numerically shorter in the MIS group (median 13 vs. 14 days; P = 0.065). Overall complication, reoperation, and mortality rates were comparable between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: MIS for RGC showed comparable short-term outcomes to those of open surgery in a nationwide analysis, with advantages including reduced blood loss. However, the increased risk of anastomotic leakage highlights the need for careful patient selection and ongoing technical refinement.