OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the surgical, oncologic safety and the nutritional, functional benefit of laparoscopy-assisted pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (LAPPG) with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for middle-third early gastric cancers (EGC). BACKGROUND: Of those patients with middle-third EGC, it is still difficult to determine which procedure is better between LADG and LAPPG despite alleged advantages of LAPPG. METHODS: For middle-third EGC, a retrospective analysis was performed comparing those who underwent LADG and those who underwent LAPPG. To evaluate surgical and oncologic safety, clinicopathologic differences including the postoperative morbidity, the pattern of lymph node metastasis and recurrence were analyzed. Postoperative protein, albumin, quantification of abdominal fat area using abdomen computed tomography, and the incidence of postoperative gallstone were compared for the evaluation of functional advantages. RESULTS: The overall postoperative morbidity rate was similar between LADG (n = 176) and LAPPG (n = 116). Delayed gastric emptying was less frequent in LADG than in LAPPG (1.7% vs 7.8%); however, the rates of all the other complications were significantly higher in LADG than in LAPPG (17.0% vs 7.8%). The number of examined lymph nodes and metastatic lymph nodes at each lymph node station was not significantly different and 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were also similar between LADG and LAPPG (98.8% vs 98.2%). Decreases in serum protein and albumin in postoperative 1 to 6 months and abdominal fat area in postoperative 1 year were significantly greater in LADG than in LAPPG. The 3-year cumulative incidence of gallstone was significantly higher in LADG than in LAPPG (6.5% vs 0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: For middle-third EGC, LAPPG can be considered as a better treatment option than LADG in terms of nutritional advantage and lower incidence of gallstone.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the surgical, oncologic safety and the nutritional, functional benefit of laparoscopy-assisted pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (LAPPG) with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for middle-third early gastric cancers (EGC). BACKGROUND: Of those patients with middle-third EGC, it is still difficult to determine which procedure is better between LADG and LAPPG despite alleged advantages of LAPPG. METHODS: For middle-third EGC, a retrospective analysis was performed comparing those who underwent LADG and those who underwent LAPPG. To evaluate surgical and oncologic safety, clinicopathologic differences including the postoperative morbidity, the pattern of lymph node metastasis and recurrence were analyzed. Postoperative protein, albumin, quantification of abdominal fat area using abdomen computed tomography, and the incidence of postoperative gallstone were compared for the evaluation of functional advantages. RESULTS: The overall postoperative morbidity rate was similar between LADG (n = 176) and LAPPG (n = 116). Delayed gastric emptying was less frequent in LADG than in LAPPG (1.7% vs 7.8%); however, the rates of all the other complications were significantly higher in LADG than in LAPPG (17.0% vs 7.8%). The number of examined lymph nodes and metastatic lymph nodes at each lymph node station was not significantly different and 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were also similar between LADG and LAPPG (98.8% vs 98.2%). Decreases in serum protein and albumin in postoperative 1 to 6 months and abdominal fat area in postoperative 1 year were significantly greater in LADG than in LAPPG. The 3-year cumulative incidence of gallstone was significantly higher in LADG than in LAPPG (6.5% vs 0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: For middle-third EGC, LAPPG can be considered as a better treatment option than LADG in terms of nutritional advantage and lower incidence of gallstone.
Authors: Arja Gerritsen; Thijs de Rooij; Marcel G Dijkgraaf; Olivier R Busch; Jacques J Bergman; Dirk T Ubbink; Peter van Duijvendijk; G Willemien Erkelens; Mariël Klos; Philip M Kruyt; Dirk Jan Bac; Camiel Rosman; Adriaan C Tan; I Quintus Molenaar; Jan F Monkelbaan; Elisabeth M Mathus-Vliegent; Marc G Besselink Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 10.864