Min Seo Kim1, Yeongkeun Kwon2, Eun Pyung Park1, Liang An1, Haeyeon Park1, Sungsoo Park3. 1. Division of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea. 2. Department of Family Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Division of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Inchon-ro 73, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea. kugspss@korea.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this modern era, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) has largely replaced open distal gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer; however, a quantitative review of reconstruction methods applied exclusively using LDG has not yet been published. Thereafter, we compared three reconstruction methods (Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en Y) using the data derived solely from LDG patients. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using electronic bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase), for articles that compared reconstruction methods in LDG, published within the last decade. A systematic review comparing 12 outcome parameters and sensitivity analyses were performed to increase the statistical power and minimize the inconsistency and heterogeneity of results. RESULTS: Twenty-three clinical trials involving 5797 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the postoperative recovery and intraoperative parameters, except for operation time. B1 demonstrated a significantly shorter operation time when compared with B2 and RY by 21.6 min (P < 0.0001) and 44.69 min (P < 0.0001), respectively. In terms of postoperative endoscopic symptoms, RY was significantly superior to B1 and B2 for bile reflux (P < 0.001) and remnant gastritis (P < 0.001). For postoperative complications, B1 showed a significantly lower rate of postoperative morbidity than did RY and B2 (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0005, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first meta-analysis comparing anastomoses in LDG and introduces novel criteria for consideration when selecting reconstructions in LDG. Considering the significant differences in postoperative complications and endoscopic symptoms, these two parameters lay reasonable groundwork for guiding the surgeon's choice of reconstruction.
BACKGROUND: In this modern era, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) has largely replaced open distal gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer; however, a quantitative review of reconstruction methods applied exclusively using LDG has not yet been published. Thereafter, we compared three reconstruction methods (Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en Y) using the data derived solely from LDG patients. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted using electronic bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase), for articles that compared reconstruction methods in LDG, published within the last decade. A systematic review comparing 12 outcome parameters and sensitivity analyses were performed to increase the statistical power and minimize the inconsistency and heterogeneity of results. RESULTS: Twenty-three clinical trials involving 5797 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the postoperative recovery and intraoperative parameters, except for operation time. B1 demonstrated a significantly shorter operation time when compared with B2 and RY by 21.6 min (P < 0.0001) and 44.69 min (P < 0.0001), respectively. In terms of postoperative endoscopic symptoms, RY was significantly superior to B1 and B2 for bile reflux (P < 0.001) and remnant gastritis (P < 0.001). For postoperative complications, B1 showed a significantly lower rate of postoperative morbidity than did RY and B2 (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0005, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first meta-analysis comparing anastomoses in LDG and introduces novel criteria for consideration when selecting reconstructions in LDG. Considering the significant differences in postoperative complications and endoscopic symptoms, these two parameters lay reasonable groundwork for guiding the surgeon's choice of reconstruction.
Authors: Jun-Jie Xiong; Kiran Altaf; Muhammad A Javed; Quentin M Nunes; Wei Huang; Gang Mai; Chun-Lu Tan; Rajarshi Mukherjee; Robert Sutton; Wei-Ming Hu; Xu-Bao Liu Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-02-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Rafael C Katayama; Carlos H Arasaki; Fernando A M Herbella; Ricardo A Neto; Gaspar de Jesus Lopes Filho Journal: J Obes Metab Syndr Date: 2021-12-30