4.6 Article

Preservation of the celiac branch of the vagal nerve for pylorus-preserving gastrectomy: is it meaningful?

Journal

GASTRIC CANCER
Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 516-523

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10120-017-0776-8

Keywords

Early gastric cancer; Laparoscopic pyloruspreserving gastrectomy; Celiac branch of the vagal nerve

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Preserving the hepatic and pyloric branches of the vagal nerve in laparoscopic pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (LPPG) is considered necessary to maintain the function of the pyloric cuff. However, the clinical benefits of preservation of the celiac branch of the vagal nerve (CBVN) remain unclear. Methods Of 391 patients who underwent LPPG for early gastric cancer, 116 patients in whom the CBVN was preserved (CBP group) and 58 patients in whom it was not preserved (non-CBP group) were selected through the propensity score-matching method. To evaluate the surgical and oncological safety of preserving the CBVN, postoperative morbidity and mortality were analyzed between these matched groups. Postoperative nutritional status, body weight changes, endoscopic findings, and the incidence of gallstones were compared to evaluate any functional advantages. Results The short-term surgical outcomes in the CBP group were similar to those in the non-CBP group. The number of dissected lymph nodes did not differ (34 vs. 33.5, P = 0.457), and the 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were also similar between both groups (99.1% vs. 97.1%, P = 0.844). There were no significant differences in postoperative nutritional status, body weight changes, or the incidence of gallstones. By endoscopy, 1 year after surgery residual food was frequently observed in both groups; however, there were no significant differences in the frequency of remnant gastritis and esophageal and bile reflux. Conclusions Preserving CBVN in LPPG for early gastric cancer is a feasible procedure. However, no clinical benefits of the preservation of the CBVN after LPPG are identified.

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