| Literature DB >> 28970956 |
Hoon Hur1, Chang Wook Ahn2, Cheul Su Byun3, Ho Jung Shin1, Young Bae Kim4, Sang-Yong Son1, Sang-Uk Han1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although Roux-en-Y (R-Y) reconstruction after distal gastrectomy has several advantages, such as prevention of bile reflux into the remnant stomach, it is rarely used because of the technical difficulty. This prospective randomized clinical trial aimed to show the efficacy of a novel method of R-Y reconstruction involving the use of 2 circular staplers by comparing this novel method to Billroth-I (B-I) reconstruction.Entities:
Keywords: Circular stapler; Distal gastrectomy; Gastric cancer; Roux en Y reconstruction
Year: 2017 PMID: 28970956 PMCID: PMC5620095 DOI: 10.5230/jgc.2017.17.e32
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Gastric Cancer ISSN: 1598-1320 Impact factor: 3.720
Fig. 1Surgical procedure for R-Y reconstruction included (A) division of the proximal jejunum and mesentery, (B) insertion of a 21-mm anvil into the resected distal jejunum, (C) insertion of the stapler body into the resected proximal jejunum, (D) anastomosis of jejunojejunostomy using a 21-mm circular stapler, (E) insertion of a 29-mm anvil into the proximal jejunum, and (F) anastomosis of the gastrojejunostomy by using the Tonado method with a 29-mm circular stapler.
R-Y = Roux-en-Y.
Fig. 2Histological findings of biopsied tissues in the remnant stomach. (A) The tissue received a score of 0 on evaluation, as per the grading system suggested by Dixon et al. [14]. (B) The tissue received a score of 12.
Fig. 3Study design according to the CONSORT diagram.
CONSORT = Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; B-I = Billroth-I; B-II = Billroth-II; R-Y = Roux-en-Y.
Demographic and clinical characteristics of included patients according to the performed procedure
| Haracteristics | B-I (n=56) | R-Y (n=58) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (yr) | 57.11±12.30 | 57.57±12.04 | 0.840 | |
| Sex | 0.321 | |||
| Male | 36 (64.3) | 32 (55.2) | ||
| Female | 20 (35.7) | 26 (44.8) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.89±2.90 | 23.40±3.00 | 0.376 | |
| Comorbidity | 0.321 | |||
| Yes | 20 (35.7) | 26 (44.8) | ||
| None | 36 (64.3) | 32 (55.2) | ||
| Approach | 0.500 | |||
| Open | 7 (12.5) | 5 (8.6) | ||
| Laparoscopy-assisted | 49 (87.5) | 53 (91.4) | ||
| LN dissection | 0.039 | |||
| D1 or D1+ | 34 (60.7) | 24 (41.4) | ||
| D2 or D2+ | 22 (39.3) | 34 (58.6) | ||
| Stage (AJCC, 7th Edition) | 0.920 | |||
| I | 48 (85.7) | 51 (87.9) | ||
| II | 5 (8.9) | 4 (6.9) | ||
| III | 3 (5.4) | 3 (5.2) | ||
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%).
B-I = Billroth-I; R-Y = Roux-en-Y; BMI = body mass index; LN = lymph node; AJCC = American Joint Committee on Cancer.
Surgical outcomes of patients according to performed procedure
| Characteristics | B-I (n=56) | R-Y (n=58) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bleeding (cm3) | 189.1±141.6 | 185.1±123.9 | 0.874 |
| Operation time (min) | 159.4±40.7 | 172.0±43.2 | 0.112 |
| Anastomosis time (min) | 29.0±6.7 | 34.3±8.4 | <0.001 |
| Length to PRM (cm) | 5.8±3.3 | 5.9±3.2 | 0.904 |
| Time to soft diet (day) | 5.5±0.9 | 5.6±1.4 | 0.577 |
| Length of hospital stay (day) | 7.4±1.6 | 7.8±2.4 | 0.295 |
| Complication (cases) | 7 (12.5) | 6 (8.6) | 0.500 |
| Severe complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3; cases) | - | 1 (1.7) | 0.324 |
| Description of complication (No. of cases) | Postoperative ileus | Postoperative ileus (3) | - |
| Pneumonia | Pneumonia | ||
| Intraabdominal fluid | Leakage | ||
| Cholecystitis | Wound seroma | ||
| Voiding difficulty | Voiding difficulty | ||
| Unknown fever (2) |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%).
B-I = Billroth-I; R-Y = Roux-en-Y; PRM = proximal resection margin.
Change in quality of life of patients who were followed up 6 months postoperatively using EORTC questionnaires
| Questionnaires | B-I (n=51) | R-Y (n=55) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EORTC QLQ-C30 | ||||
| Physical | 0.97±0.24 | 1.02±0.26 | 0.354 | |
| Role | 1.00±0.37 | 1.09±0.45 | 0.287 | |
| Pain | 1.01±0.43 | 0.94±0.33 | 0.358 | |
| Fatigue | 0.97±0.43 | 1.07±0.40 | 0.220 | |
| Nausea and vomiting | 0.98±0.36 | 1.03±0.47 | 0.559 | |
| Emotional | 0.98±0.48 | 0.92±0.37 | 0.429 | |
| Cognitive | 1.06±0.37 | 0.97±0.30 | 0.168 | |
| Social | 1.04±0.56 | 0.94±0.41 | 0.298 | |
| Financial | 1.19±0.79 | 0.98±0.55 | 0.103 | |
| Global | 1.15±0.38 | 1.17±0.32 | 0.702 | |
| Single symptoms | 0.96±0.39 | 0.99±0.41 | 0.748 | |
| QLQ-STO22 | ||||
| Dysphasia | 1.13±0.39 | 1.08±0.27 | 0.400 | |
| Pain | 0.97±0.46 | 0.91±0.31 | 0.391 | |
| Restriction | 1.00±0.30 | 0.94±0.29 | 0.280 | |
| Upper GI symptoms | 1.05±0.42 | 1.08±0.38 | 0.742 | |
| GI emotional | 1.06±0.35 | 1.15±0.41 | 0.242 | |
| GI single symptoms | 1.05±0.43 | 1.05±0.43 | 0.995 | |
Continuous variables were calculated as the ratio of score of the postoperative 6-month score to the preoperative score and presented as mean±standard deviation.
EORTC = European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer; B-I = Billroth-I; R-Y = Roux-en-Y; QLQ-C30 = Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30; QLQ-STO22 = Quality of Life Questionnaire-Stomach Cancer Module 22; GI = gastrointestinal.
Gastroscopic findings for patients who were followed up 6 months postoperatively using the RGB score
| Findings | B-I (n=51) | R-Y (n=55) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residual food | 0.117 | |||
| 0 | 13 (25.5) | 23 (41.8) | ||
| 1 | 21 (41.2) | 12 (21.8) | ||
| 2 | 8 (15.7) | 5 (9.1) | ||
| 3 | 3 (5.9) | 6 (10.9) | ||
| 4 | 6 (11.8) | 9 (16.4) | ||
| Gastritis | 0.016 | |||
| 0 | 0 (0.0) | 2 (3.6) | ||
| 1 | 10 (19.6) | 16 (29.1) | ||
| 2 | 13 (25.5) | 22 (40.0) | ||
| 3 | 23 (45.1) | 15 (27.3) | ||
| 4 | 5 (9.8) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| Reflux | <0.001 | |||
| 0 | 19 (37.3) | 42 (76.4) | ||
| 1 | 32 (62.7) | 13 (23.6) | ||
| Total score* | 4.45±2.18 | 3.53±2.39 | 0.041 | |
Values are presented as number (%).
RGB = residue, gastritis, bile; B-I = Billroth-I; R-Y = Roux-en-Y.
*Total score was calculated as the sum of scores from each group, and was presented as mean±standard deviation.
Histological findings for the remnant stomach in patients who were followed up 6 months postoperatively using the scoring system suggested by Dixon et al. [14]
| Findings | B-I (n=38) | R-Y (n=41) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laminar hyperplasia | 0.166 | |||
| 0 | 8 (21.1) | 9 (22.0) | ||
| 1 | 19 (50.0) | 28 (68.3) | ||
| 2 | 7 (18.4) | 3 (7.3) | ||
| 3 | 4 (10.5) | 1 (2.4) | ||
| Laminar congestion | 0.113 | |||
| 0 | 5 (13.2) | 8 (19.5) | ||
| 1 | 23 (60.5) | 30 (73.2) | ||
| 2 | 9 (23.7) | 2 (4.9) | ||
| 3 | 1 (2.6) | 1 (2.4) | ||
| Acute inflammation | 0.061 | |||
| 0 | 5 (13.2) | 9 (22.0) | ||
| 1 | 20 (52.6) | 28 (68.3) | ||
| 2 | 12 (31.6) | 4 (9.8) | ||
| 3 | 1 (2.6) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| Chronic inflammation | 0.783 | |||
| 0 | 10 (26.3) | 14 (34.1) | ||
| 1 | 8 (21.1) | 10 (24.4) | ||
| 2 | 11 (28.9) | 10 (24.4) | ||
| 3 | 9 (23.7) | 7 (17.1) | ||
| Total score* | 5.05±2.35 | 3.93±2.05 | 0.026 | |
Values are presented as number (%).
B-I = Billroth-I; R-Y = Roux-en-Y
*Total score was calculated as the sum for each group and was presented as mean±standard deviation.