4.6 Article

Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction is superior to laparoscopic total gastrectomy for proximal early gastric cancer

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5429-9

关键词

Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy; Double tract reconstruction; Proximal early gastric cancer; Anemia

类别

资金

  1. Korean National Strategic Coordinating Center of Clinical Research [HI10V0084010014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with double tract reconstruction (DTR) is known to reduce reflux symptoms, which is a major concern after proximal gastrectomy. The aim of this study is to compare retrospectively the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing LPG with DTR with those treated by laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). Ninety-two and 156 patients undergoing LPG with DTR and LTG for proximal stage I gastric cancer were retrospectively analyzed for short- and long-term clinical outcomes. There were no significant differences in the demographics, T-stage, N-stage, and complications between the groups. The LPG with DTR group had a shorter operative time and lower estimated blood loss than the LTG group (198.3 vs. 225.4 min, p < 0.001; and 84.7 vs. 128.3 mL p = 0.001). The incidence of reflux symptoms Visick grade II did not significantly differ between the groups during a mean follow-up period of 37.2 months (1.1 vs. 1.9%, p = 0.999). The hemoglobin change was significantly lower in the LPG with DTR group compared to in the LTG group in the first and second postoperative years (5.03 vs. 9.18% p = 0.004; and 3.45 vs. 8.30%, p = 0.002, respectively), as was the mean amount of vitamin B-12 supplements 2 years after operation (0.1 vs. 3.1 mg, p < 0.001). The overall survival rate was similar between the groups. LPG with DTR maintained comparable oncological safety and anastomosis-related late complications compared to LTG and is preferred over LTG in terms of preventing postoperative anemia and vitamin B-12 deficiency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据