Literature DB >> 18484229

Complications with laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy: multivariate analysis of 300 consecutive cases.

Jong-Min Park1, Sung-Ho Jin, Sang-Rim Lee, Hong Kim, In Ho Jung, Yong Kwan Cho, Sang-Uk Han.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Complications associated with laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy (LAG) are not significantly different from those associated with open gastrectomy. However, additional risks related to abdominal access, pneumoperitoneum, and special electrosurgical instruments result in an increased incidence of complications with LAG. This study analyzed the causes and risk factors linked to postoperative morbidity.
METHODS: A retrospective review analyzed the data of 300 patients who underwent consecutive LAG for gastric cancer in our department from May 2003 to October 2006. Among the 300 patients, total gastrectomy was performed for 42 patients, distal gastrectomy for 258 patients, and proximal gastrectomy for 3 patients. The clinical and operative data obtained included body mass index, medical comorbidities, history of previous abdominal surgery, operative time, type of surgery, extent of lymph node dissection according to the Japanese Guideline, number of retrieved lymph nodes and lymph node metastases, additional operative procedure, depth of tumor invasion, and disease stage. The outcome data consisted of mortality, major morbidities, and postoperative hospital stay. The 300 cases were divided into two periods: 50 cases in the first period and 250 cases in the second period.
RESULTS: Postoperative complications developed in 61 cases (20.3%), wound infection in 21 cases (7%), intraabdominal abscess in 3 cases (1%), bleeding in 12 cases (4%), stenosis in 13 cases (4.3%), leakage in 3 cases (1%), acute pancreatitis in 2 cases (0.7%), pulmonary complication in 4 cases (1.3%), renal complication in 4 cases (1.3%), and cardiac complication in 2 cases (0.7%). The 30-day mortality rate was 0.7% (n=2). Univariate analysis proved that gender, operative period, comorbidity, and operative times were important risk factors. Multivariate analysis proved that cormobidity and operative period were important risk factors.
CONCLUSION: The data suggest that LAG can be performed with acceptable perioperative complication rates. The surgeon's experience and careful patient selection determined optimal patient outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18484229     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-008-9962-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  23 in total

1.  Complications and the learning curve for a laparoscopic nephrectomy at a single institution.

Authors:  Toru Kanno; Yasumasa Shichiri; Tomoyuki Oida; Hiroshi Kanamaru; Noriyasu Takao; Yosuke Shimizu
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.369

2.  Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy with extraperigastric lymph node dissection for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Min-Chan Kim; Ghap-Joong Jung; Hyung-Ho Kim
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2007-01-09       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 3.  Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted by conventional open distal gastrectomy and extraperigastric lymph node dissection in early gastric cancer.

Authors:  Min-Chan Kim; Ki-Han Kim; Hyung-Ho Kim; Ghap-Joong Jung
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2005-07-01       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report.

Authors:  Seigo Kitano; Norio Shiraishi; Kyuzo Fujii; Kazuhiro Yasuda; Masafumi Inomata; Yosuke Adachi
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.982

5.  A multicenter study on oncologic outcome of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early cancer in Japan.

Authors:  Seigo Kitano; Norio Shiraishi; Ichiro Uyama; Kenichi Sugihara; Nobuhiko Tanigawa
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Clinical outcomes and learning curve of a laparoscopic adrenalectomy in 103 consecutive cases at a single institute.

Authors:  Masatoshi Eto; Masahiko Harano; Hirofumi Koga; Masatoshi Tanaka; Seiji Naito
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 3.369

7.  Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy.

Authors:  S Kitano; Y Iso; M Moriyama; K Sugimachi
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc       Date:  1994-04

8.  The usefulness of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy in comparison with that of open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer.

Authors:  H Yano; T Monden; M Kinuta; Y Nakano; T Tono; S Matsui; T Iwazawa; T Kanoh; S Katsushima
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.370

Review 9.  Current status of laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer in Japan.

Authors:  S Kitano; N Shiraishi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-12-29       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Comparison of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for malignant disease.

Authors:  K J Weber; C D Reyes; M Gagner; C M Divino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-03-28       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  22 in total

1.  A totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with gastroduodenostomy (TLDG) for improvement of the early surgical outcomes in high BMI patients.

Authors:  Min Gyu Kim; Hironori Kawada; Beom Su Kim; Tae Hwan Kim; Kap Choong Kim; Jeong Hwan Yook; Byung Sik Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-09-11       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Comparison of the outcomes for laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by the same surgeon between a low-volume hospital and a high-volume center.

Authors:  Min Gyu Kim; Sung Joon Kwon
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Long-term comparison of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy and open distal gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer.

Authors:  Andrew C Gordon; Kazuyuki Kojima; Mikito Inokuchi; Keiji Kato; Kenichi Sugihara
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  β-Shaped intracorporeal Roux-en-Y reconstruction after totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

Authors:  Kazuo Motoyama; Kazuyuki Kojima; Mikiko Hayashi; Keiji Kato; Mikito Inokuchi; Kenichi Sugihara
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 7.370

Review 5.  Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: the future standard of care.

Authors:  Keisuke Koeda; Satoshi Nishizuka; Go Wakabayashi
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  A practical way to overcome the learning period of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Min Gyu Kim; Kap Choong Kim; Jeong Hwan Yook; Beom Su Kim; Tae Hwan Kim; Byung Sik Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-06-09       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Pancreas-related complications following gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus minimally invasive surgery.

Authors:  Francesco Guerra; Giuseppe Giuliani; Martina Iacobone; Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Andrea Coratti
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Subtotal gastrectomy with D2 dissection by minimally invasive surgery for distal adenocarcinoma of the stomach: results and 5-year survival.

Authors:  Raffaele Pugliese; Dario Maggioni; Fabio Sansonna; Andrea Costanzi; Giovanni Carlo Ferrari; Stefano Di Lernia; Carmelo Magistro; Paolo De Martini; Francesco Pugliese
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-04-23       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Post-gastrectomy acute pancreatitis in a patient with gastric carcinoma and pancreas divisum.

Authors:  I-Ming Kuo; Frank Wang; Keng-Hao Liu; Yi-Yin Jan
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-09-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Process of Pancreas Head as a Risk Factor for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula in Laparoscopic Gastric Cancer Surgery.

Authors:  Nao Kobayashi; Hisashi Shinohara; Shusuke Haruta; Yu Ohkura; Aya Mizuno; Masaki Ueno; Harushi Udagawa; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.