Literature DB >> 24590434

Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS)-45 and changes in body weight are useful tools for evaluation of reconstruction methods following distal gastrectomy.

Masanori Terashima1, Kazuaki Tanabe, Masashi Yoshida, Hiroshi Kawahira, Takao Inada, Hiroshi Okabe, Takashi Urushihara, Yoshiyuki Kawashima, Norimasa Fukushima, Koji Nakada.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Billroth-I (BI) and Roux-en-Y (RY) are well-known reconstruction methods that are conducted following distal gastrectomy. However, the relative merits of these 2 methods are not well documented. The newly developed Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS)-45 is an integrated questionnaire consisting of 45 items, including 8 items from the 8-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-8), 15 items from the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale, and 22 items selected by gastric surgeons. Postoperative QOL ratings were evaluated for each reconstruction method using PGSAS-45.
METHODS: The PGSAS-45 questionnaire was distributed to 2,922 patients who underwent gastrectomies at 52 medical institutions. Among the questionnaires distributed, 2520 (86 %) were retrieved and 2368 (81 %) met eligibility requirements. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare 1,384 of the eligible questionnaires, including responses from patients who underwent BI (n = 909) and RY (n = 475) procedures.
RESULTS: BI procedures were associated with significantly longer postoperative periods, a significantly greater size of gastric remnants, and a higher frequency of laparoscopic approaches and celiac branch preservation. Postoperative QOL analysis indicated that BI procedures resulted in significantly lower postoperative weight loss and significantly higher esophageal reflux symptoms than RY procedures. There was no significant difference between the two groups on other outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS: Although weight loss was significantly lower following BI procedures, esophageal reflux symptoms were significantly higher. Either BI or RY procedures may be recommended based on the individual patient's condition after distal gastrectomy. The newly developed QOL questionnaire, PGSAS-45 and changes in body weight proved useful for evaluation of QOL following gastrectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24590434     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3583-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  21 in total

1.  Quality of life and nutritional consequences after aboral pouch reconstruction following total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: randomized controlled trial CCG1101.

Authors:  Yuichi Ito; Takaki Yoshikawa; Michitaka Fujiwara; Hiroshi Kojima; Takanori Matsui; Yoshinari Mochizuki; Haruhiko Cho; Toru Aoyama; Seiji Ito; Kazunari Misawa; Hiroshi Nakayama; Yuki Morioka; Akiharu Ishiyama; Chie Tanaka; Satoshi Morita; Junichi Sakamoto; Yasuhiro Kodera
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 7.370

Review 2.  Quality of life: A critical outcome for all surgical treatments of gastric cancer.

Authors:  Michael D McCall; Peter J Graham; Oliver F Bathe
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery for early gastric cancer.

Authors:  Shinichi Kinami; Takeo Kosaka
Journal:  Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2017-05-09

4.  Classification of remnant stomach shape after distal gastrectomy with Billroth-I reconstruction and a comparison of the postoperative outcomes.

Authors:  Sachiko Kaida; Tsuyoshi Yamaguchi; Katsushi Takebayashi; Satoshi Murata; Toru Miyake; Hiroya Iida; Hiromichi Sonoda; Tomoharu Shimizu; Masaji Tani
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 2.549

5.  Assessment of postoperative quality of life following pylorus-preserving gastrectomy and Billroth-I distal gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients: results of the nationwide postgastrectomy syndrome assessment study.

Authors:  Junya Fujita; Masazumi Takahashi; Takashi Urushihara; Kazuaki Tanabe; Yasuhiro Kodera; Takeyoshi Yumiba; Hideo Matsumoto; Akinori Takagane; Chikara Kunisaki; Koji Nakada
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2015-01-31       Impact factor: 7.370

6.  Comparison between laparoscopic uncut Roux-en-Y and Billroth II with Braun anastomosis after distal gastrectomy: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ya-Jun Jiao; Ting-Ting Lu; De-Ming Liu; Xue Xiang; Liu-Li Wang; Shi-Xun Ma; Yong-Feng Wang; Ya-Qiong Chen; Ke-Hu Yang; Hui Cai
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2022-06-27

7.  Evaluation of postgastrectomy symptoms after distal gastrectomy with Billroth-I reconstruction using the Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale-45 (PGSAS-45).

Authors:  Kazunari Misawa; Masanori Terashima; Yoshikazu Uenosono; Shuichi Ota; Hiroaki Hata; Hiroshi Noro; Kentaro Yamaguchi; Hiroshi Yajima; Toshikatsu Nitta; Koji Nakada
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 7.370

Review 8.  Roux-en-Y versus Billroth-I reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Authors:  Daisuke Nishizaki; Riki Ganeko; Nobuaki Hoshino; Koya Hida; Kazutaka Obama; Toshi A Furukawa; Yoshiharu Sakai; Norio Watanabe
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-15

9.  Factors affecting the quality of life of patients after gastrectomy as assessed using the newly developed PGSAS-45 scale: A nationwide multi-institutional study.

Authors:  Koji Nakada; Masazumi Takahashi; Masami Ikeda; Shinichi Kinami; Masashi Yoshida; Yoshikazu Uenosono; Yoshiyuki Kawashima; Sayumi Nakao; Atsushi Oshio; Yoshimi Suzukamo; Masanori Terashima; Yasuhiro Kodera
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Predictive factors for body weight loss and its impact on quality of life following gastrectomy.

Authors:  Kazuaki Tanabe; Masazumi Takahashi; Takashi Urushihara; Yoichi Nakamura; Makoto Yamada; Sang-Woong Lee; Shinnosuke Tanaka; Akira Miki; Masami Ikeda; Koji Nakada
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.