4.6 Article

Duodenal stump reinforcement might reduce both incidence and severity of duodenal stump leakage after laparoscopic gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction for gastric cancer

Journal

GASTRIC CANCER
Volume 22, Issue 5, Pages 1053-1059

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10120-019-00946-8

Keywords

Duodenal stump leakage; Duodenal stump reinforcement; Roux-en-Y reconstruction; Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy; Laparoscopic total gastrectomy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Although duodenal stump leakage (DSL) is a relatively rare complication after gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (R-Y) reconstruction, it is difficult to treat and can be fatal. We investigated the impact of duodenal stump reinforcement on DSL after laparoscopic gastrectomy with R-Y reconstruction for gastric cancer. Methods This retrospective study of 965 patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic distal or total gastrectomy (LDG or LTG) with R-Y reconstruction compared surgical outcomes between two groups, the duodenal stump reinforcement group (reinforcement group) (n = 895) and that without duodenal stump reinforcement (non-reinforcement group) (n = 70). Results Mean operative duration was significantly longer in the reinforcement than in the non-reinforcement group (LDG; 291 min versus 258 min, p < 0.001, LTG; 325 min versus 285 min, p < 0.001). DSL occurred less frequently in the reinforcement than in the non-reinforcement group (0.67% vs. 5.71%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, non-reinforcement was an independent risk factor for DSL in multiple logistic regression analysis with adjustment for potential confounding factors. Patients with DSL in the non-reinforcement group all required re-operation, while all but one patient with DSL in the reinforcement group recovered with conservative management. Conclusions Duodenal stump reinforcement in laparoscopic gastrectomy with R-Y reconstruction may reduce the risk of DSL development and minimize its severity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available