Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition for gastric cancer in the proximal third of the stomach: a retrospective comparison with open surgery - PubMed (original) (raw)

Comparative Study

doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2401-6. Epub 2012 Jun 27.

Affiliations

• PMID: 22736285
• DOI: 10.1007/s00464-012-2401-6

Comparative Study

Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition for gastric cancer in the proximal third of the stomach: a retrospective comparison with open surgery

Takahiro Kinoshita et al. Surg Endosc. 2013 Jan.

Abstract

Background: The incidence of cancer in the proximal third of the stomach is increasing. Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) seems an attractive option for the treatment of early-stage proximal gastric cancer but has not gained wide acceptance because of technical difficulties, including the prevention of severe reflux. In this study, we describe our technique for LPG with jejunal interposition (LPG-IP) and evaluate its safety and feasibility.

Methods: In this retrospective analysis, we reviewed the data of patients with proximal gastric cancer who underwent LPG-IP (n = 22) or the same procedure with open surgery (OPG-IP; n = 68) between January 2008 and September 2011. Short-term surgical variables and outcomes were compared between the groups. The reconstruction method was the same in both groups, with creation of a 15 cm, single-loop, jejunal interposition for anastomosis.

Results: There were no differences in patient or tumor characteristics between the groups. Operation time was longer in the LGP-IP group (233 vs. 201 min, p = 0.0002) and estimated blood loss was significantly less (20 vs. 242 g, p < 0.0001). The average number of harvested lymph nodes did not differ between the two groups (17 vs. 20). There also were no differences in the incidence of leakage at the esophagojejunostomy anastomosis (9.1 vs. 7.4%) or other postoperative complications (27 vs. 32%). The number of times additional postoperative analgesia was required was significantly less in the LPG-IP group compared with the OPG-IP group (2 vs. 4, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: LPG-IP has equivalent safety and curability compared with OPG-IP. Our results imply that LPG-IP may lead to faster recovery, better cosmesis, and improved quality of life in the short-term compared with OPG-IP. Because of the limitations of retrospective analysis, a further study should be conducted to obtain definitive conclusions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with oblique jejunogastrostomy.
  Tanaka K, Ebihara Y, Kurashima Y, Nakanishi Y, Asano T, Noji T, Murakami S, Nakamura T, Tsuchikawa T, Okamura K, Shichinohe T, Hirano S. Tanaka K, et al. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017 Sep;402(6):995-1002. doi: 10.1007/s00423-017-1587-4. Epub 2017 May 10. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017. PMID: 28493146
• Superiority of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with hand-sewn esophagogastrostomy over total gastrectomy in improving postoperative body weight loss and quality of life.
  Nishigori T, Okabe H, Tsunoda S, Shinohara H, Obama K, Hosogi H, Hisamori S, Miyazaki K, Nakayama T, Sakai Y. Nishigori T, et al. Surg Endosc. 2017 Sep;31(9):3664-3672. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5403-y. Epub 2017 Jan 11. Surg Endosc. 2017. PMID: 28078458
• Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer.
  Ueda Y, Shiroshita H, Etoh T, Inomata M, Shiraishi N. Ueda Y, et al. Surg Today. 2017 May;47(5):538-547. doi: 10.1007/s00595-016-1401-x. Epub 2016 Aug 22. Surg Today. 2017. PMID: 27549773 Review.
• Laparoscopic gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: a comprehensive review and case series.
  Tsunoda S, Okabe H, Tanaka E, Hisamori S, Harigai M, Murakami K, Sakai Y. Tsunoda S, et al. Gastric Cancer. 2016 Jan;19(1):287-92. doi: 10.1007/s10120-014-0451-2. Epub 2014 Dec 13. Gastric Cancer. 2016. PMID: 25503677 Review.

Cited by

• How much progress has been made in minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Korea?: a viewpoint from Korean prospective clinical trials.
  Kim KH, Kim SH, Kim MC. Kim KH, et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2014 Dec;93(28):e233. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000233. Medicine (Baltimore). 2014. PMID: 25526443 Free PMC article. Review.
• Minimally invasive surgery in gastric cancer.
  Son SY, Kim HH. Son SY, et al. World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Oct 21;20(39):14132-41. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i39.14132. World J Gastroenterol. 2014. PMID: 25339802 Free PMC article. Review.
• Reconstruction methods after radical proximal gastrectomy: A systematic review.
  Wang S, Lin S, Wang H, Yang J, Yu P, Zhao Q, Li M. Wang S, et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Mar;97(11):e0121. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010121. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018. PMID: 29538208 Free PMC article. Review.
• Various Kinds of Functional Digestive Tract Reconstruction Methods After Proximal Gastrectomy.
  Lu S, Ma F, Zhang Z, Peng L, Yang W, Chai J, Liu C, Ge F, Ji S, Luo S, Chen X, Hua Y. Lu S, et al. Front Oncol. 2021 Aug 3;11:685717. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.685717. eCollection 2021. Front Oncol. 2021. PMID: 34414108 Free PMC article. Review.
• A novel method of delta-shaped intracorporeal double-tract reconstruction in totally laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.
  Hong J, Qian L, Wang YP, Wang J, Hua LC, Hao HK. Hong J, et al. Surg Endosc. 2016 Jun;30(6):2396-403. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4490-5. Epub 2015 Sep 28. Surg Endosc. 2016. PMID: 26416371

References

1. 1. Gastric Cancer. 2011 Jun;14(2):113-23 - PubMed
2. 1. Surg Endosc. 2008 May;22(5):1161-4 - PubMed
3. 1. Br J Surg. 2003 Jul;90(7):850-3 - PubMed
4. 1. J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Sep;209(3):344-51 - PubMed
5. 1. Br J Surg. 2010 Apr;97(4):558-62 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

• Full Text Sources

  • Springer

• Medical

  • MedlinePlus Health Information