These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life after undergoing radical proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis and total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis for Siewert type II and III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: A propensity score matching analysis].
    Author: Xu ZW, Zhao K, Hong QQ, Chen YF, Wang HB, Lin HX, Wang TH, Xiao LB, Zhu JT, Yan S, You J.
    Journal: Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2023 Feb 25; 26(2):181-190. PubMed ID: 36797565.
    Abstract:
    Objective: To evaluate the effects on short-term clinical outcomes and long-term quality of life of laparoscopic-assisted radical proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis versus total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction. Methods: This was a propensity score matching, retrospective, cohort study. Clinicopathological data of 184 patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction admitted to two medical centers in China from January 2016 to January 2021 were collected (147 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University and 37 in the Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University). All patients had undergone laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy. They were divided into two groups based on the extent of tumor resection and technique used for digestive tract reconstruction. A proximal gastrectomy with reconstruction by esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group comprised 82 patients and a total gastrectomy with reconstruction by Roux-en-Y anastomosis group comprised 102 patients. These groups differed significantly in the following baseline characteristics: age, preoperative hemoglobin, preoperative albumin, tumor length, tumor differentiation, and tumor TNM stage (all P<0.05). To eliminate potential bias caused by unequal distribution between the two groups, 1∶1 matching was performed by the nearest neighbor matching method. The 13 matched variables comprised sex, age, height, body mass, body mass index, preoperative glucose, preoperative hemoglobin, preoperative total protein, preoperative albumin, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, tumor length, degree of differentiation, and pathological TNM stage. Postoperative complications, postoperative nutritional status, incidence of reflux esophagitis 1 year after surgery, and quality of life were compared between the two groups. Results: After propensity score matching, 60 patients each were enrolled in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis and total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis groups. The baseline characteristics were comparable between these groups (all P>0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in operative time, intraoperative bleeding, time to semifluid diet, postoperative hospital days, tumor length, and total hospital costs (P>0.05). Patients in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group had earlier postoperative gastric tube and abdominal drainage tube removal time than those in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group (t=-2.183, P=0.023 and t=-4.073, P<0.001, respectively). In contrast, significantly fewer lymph nodes were cleared and significantly fewer lymph nodes were positive in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group than in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group (t=-5.754, P<0.001 and t=-2.575, P=0.031, respectively). The incidence of early postoperative complications was 43.3% (26/60) in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group; this is not significantly higher than the 26.7% (16/60) in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group (χ2=3.663，P=0.056). The incidences of pulmonary infection (31.7%, 19/60) and pleural effusion (30.0%, 18/60) were significantly higher in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group than in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group (13.3%, 8/60 and 8.3%, 5/60, respectively); these differences are significant (χ2=8.711, P=0.003 and χ2=11.368, P=0.001, respectively). All early complications were successfully treated before discharge. The incidence of long-term postoperative complications was 20.0% (12/60) in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group and 35.0% (21/60) in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group; this difference is not significant (χ2=3.386，P=0.066). The incidence of reflux esophagitis was 23.3% (14/60) in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group; this is significantly higher than the 1.7% (1/60) in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group (χ2=12.876, P<0.001). Body mass index had decreased significantly in both groups 1 year after surgery compared with preoperatively; however, the difference between the two groups was not significant (P>0.05). The differences in hemoglobin and albumin concentrations between 1 year postoperatively and preoperatively were not significant (both P>0.05). Quality of life was assessed using the Visick grade. Visick grade I dominated in both groups. The percentage of patients with Visick II and III in the total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis group was 11.7% (7/60), which is significantly lower than the 33.3% (20/60) in the proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis group (χ2=8.076, P=0.004). No patients in either group had a grade IV quality of life. Conclusions: Both proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis and total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis laparoscopic-assisted radical surgery for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction are safe and feasible. However, both procedures have their own advantages and disadvantages in terms of postoperative complications. The incidence of reflux esophagitis is higher after proximal gastrectomy with esophageal gastric tube anastomosis, whereas the long-term quality of life is lower than that of patients after total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y anastomosis. 目的： 分析比较食管胃结合部腺癌（AEG）患者行腹腔镜辅助根治性近端胃切除食管管状胃吻合与全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合两种手术方式的术后近期临床疗效以及长期生活质量。 方法： 采用回顾性队列研究方法和倾向性评分匹配方法。收集厦门大学附属第一医院和青海大学附属医院2016年1月至2021年1月期间，收治的184例食管胃结合部腺癌患者的临床病理资料，其中厦门大学附属第一医院147例，青海大学附属医院37例。所有患者均顺利完成腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术，无围手术期死亡病例。按肿瘤切除范围以及消化道重建方式分为两组，行近端胃切除术食管管状胃吻合82例，为近端胃切除管状胃吻合组；行全胃切除食管空肠Roux-en-Y吻合102例，为全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组。两组患者基线资料的比较，年龄、术前血红蛋白、术前白蛋白、肿瘤长径、肿瘤分化程度和肿瘤TNM分期差异有统计学意义（均P<0.05），为消除两组之间由于缺乏平等分布而产生的潜在偏差，按最近邻匹配法进行1∶1匹配，纳入的13项匹配变量包括性别、年龄、身高、体质量、体质指数、术前血糖、术前血红蛋白、术前总蛋白、术前白蛋白、新辅助放化疗、肿瘤最大径、分化程度和病理TNM分期。比较分析两组患者手术后的并发症发生情况、术后营养状态及长期生活质量（术后1年反流性食管炎发生情况和Visick生活质量分级，分级越高说明生活质量越差）。 结果： 经倾向性评分匹配后，近端胃切除管状胃吻合组和全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组各入组60例患者。两组患者基线资料具有可比性（均P>0.05）。两组围手术期包括手术时间、术中出血量、术后半流质饮食恢复时间、术后住院天数、肿瘤长径以及住院总费用方面比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）；近端胃切除管状胃吻合组术后胃管拔除时间和术后腹腔引流管拔除时间早于全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组（分别为t＝-2.183，P=0.023和t=-4.073，P<0.001），淋巴结清扫总数及阳性淋巴结数明显少于全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组（分别为t=-5.754，P<0.001和t=-2.575，P=0.031）。全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组术后早期并发症发生率为43.3%（26/60），高于近端胃切除管状胃吻合组为的26.7%（16/60），但差异未达统计学意义（χ2=3.663，P=0.056）；肺部感染发生率（31.7%，19/60）及胸腔积液发生率（30.0%，18/60）显著高于近端胃切除管状胃吻合组（13.3%，8/60和8.3%，5/60），差异均有统计学意义（分别为χ2=8.711，P=0.003和χ2=11.368，P=0.001）。所有患者的早期并发症在出院前均经对症治疗后痊愈。全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组术后远期并发症发生率20.0%（12/60），近端胃切除管状胃吻合组则为35.0%（21/60），两组比较差异无统计学意义（χ2=3.386，P=0.066），近端胃切除管状胃吻合组反流性食管炎发生率23.3%（14/60），显著高于全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组的1.7%（1/60），差异有统计学意义（χ2=12.876，P<0.001）。两组术后1年体质量较术前均显著下降，但两组之间差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。血红蛋白和白蛋白水平两组术后1年较术前比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。两组患者术后生活质量分级均以Ⅰ级为主；全胃切除Roux-en-Y吻合组Visick生活质量Ⅱ、Ⅲ级的患者所占比例为11.7%（7/60），显著低于近端胃切除管状胃吻合组所占比例的33.3%（20/60），差异有统计学意义（χ2=8.076，P=0.004）；两组均无Ⅳ级患者。 结论： 食管胃结合部腺癌患者行腹腔镜辅助胃癌根治术，近端胃切除食管管状胃吻合和全胃切除食管空肠Roux-en-Y吻合围手术期及术后并发症发生情况各有优劣，但均安全可行。近端胃切除食管管状胃吻合术后反流性食管炎发生率较高，远期生活质量低于全胃切除食管空肠Roux-en-Y吻合术后患者。.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]