Literature DB >> 36208365

Is single tract jejunal interposition better than double tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy?

Shuaibing Lu1, Fei Ma1, Wei Yang1, Liangqun Peng1, Yawei Hua2.   

Abstract

Double tract reconstruction (DTR) is the main digestive tract reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy (PG). Single tract jejunal interposition (STJI) derived from the double tract reconstruction is also increasingly used in clinical practice. However, there is still a great controversy as to which of the two reconstruction methods can achieve better results. In this study, we systematically reviewed studies on DTR and STJI after PG and performed a meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for clinical studies comparing DTR and STJI after PG to December 2021 without language restriction. Review Manager (version5.4) software was used to perform meta-analysis on operative outcomes, postoperative complications and nutritional outcomes. The protocol for this meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022301455). Five randomized controlled trials involving 453 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between DTR and STJI in terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, incidence of reflux esophagitis, anastomotic complications and total complications. The operation time of STJI group was longer than that of DTR group [WMD - 0.79; 95% CI (- 1.55, - 0.03)] [heterogeneity: χ2 = 4.94, df = 3 (P = 0.18); I2 = 39%, test for overall effect: Z = 2.04 (P = 0.04)]. The body weight of STJI group was significantly higher than that of DTR group at 6 months after surgery [WMD 3.90; 95% CI (0.56, 7.23)] [heterogeneity: τ2 = 7.67, χ2 = 19.76, df = 2 (P < 0.0001); I2 = 90%, test for overall effect: Z = 2.29 (P = 0.02)]. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of DTR and STJI after PG. There were no significant differences in operative outcomes and postoperative complications between DTR and STJI after PG. Although STJI prolonged the operation time compared to DTR, postoperative nutritional outcomes of patients in the STJI group was significantly better than that in the DTR group. Therefore, compared to DTR, STJI may be more suitable for the vast majority of patients undergoing PG due to its better postoperative nutritional status.
© 2022. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG); Double tract reconstruction (DTR); Proximal gastrectomy (PG); Proximal gastric cancer; Single tract jejunal interposition (STJI)

Year:  2022        PMID: 36208365     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01393-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  28 in total

Review 1.  Surgery for gastric cancer: 10-year experience worldwide.

Authors:  Y Adachi; S Kitano; K Sugimachi
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.370

2.  Long-Term Outcomes of Proximal Gastrectomy versus Total Gastrectomy for Upper-Third Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Myoung Won Son; Yong Jin Kim; Gui Ae Jeong; Gyu Seok Cho; Moon Soo Lee
Journal:  J Gastric Cancer       Date:  2014-12-26       Impact factor: 3.720

3.  Robotic Double Tract Reconstruction After Proximal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Toshiyasu Ojima; Masaki Nakamura; Keiji Hayata; Hiroki Yamaue
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Comparisons of Postoperative Complications and Nutritional Status After Proximal Laparoscopic Gastrectomy with Esophagogastrostomy and Double-Tract Reconstruction.

Authors:  Wataru Miyauchi; Tomoyuki Matsunaga; Yuji Shishido; Kozo Miyatani; Takehiko Hanaki; Kyoichi Kihara; Manabu Yamamoto; Naruo Tokuyasu; Shuichi Takano; Teruhisa Sakamoto; Soichiro Honjo; Hiroaki Saito; Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2020-11-24       Impact factor: 1.641

5.  Long-term quality-of-life comparison of total gastrectomy and proximal gastrectomy by postgastrectomy syndrome assessment scale (PGSAS-45): a nationwide multi-institutional study.

Authors:  Nobuhiro Takiguchi; Masazumi Takahashi; Masami Ikeda; Satoshi Inagawa; Shugo Ueda; Takayuki Nobuoka; Manabu Ota; Yoshiaki Iwasaki; Nobuyuki Uchida; Yasuhiro Kodera; Koji Nakada
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 7.370

6.  Long-term outcomes of patients who underwent limited proximal gastrectomy.

Authors:  Daisuke Ichikawa; Shuhei Komatsu; Takeshi Kubota; Kazuma Okamoto; Atsushi Shiozaki; Hitoshi Fujiwara; Eigo Otsuji
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 7.370

7.  Proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal early gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yixin Xu; Yulin Tan; Yibo Wang; Cheng Xi; Nianyuan Ye; Xuezhong Xu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.

Authors:  Matthew J Page; Joanne E McKenzie; Patrick M Bossuyt; Isabelle Boutron; Tammy C Hoffmann; Cynthia D Mulrow; Larissa Shamseer; Jennifer M Tetzlaff; Elie A Akl; Sue E Brennan; Roger Chou; Julie Glanville; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Manoj M Lalu; Tianjing Li; Elizabeth W Loder; Evan Mayo-Wilson; Steve McDonald; Luke A McGuinness; Lesley A Stewart; James Thomas; Andrea C Tricco; Vivian A Welch; Penny Whiting; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2021-03-29

9.  Multicenter prospective trial of total gastrectomy versus proximal gastrectomy for upper third cT1 gastric cancer.

Authors:  Makoto Yamasaki; S Takiguchi; T Omori; M Hirao; H Imamura; K Fujitani; S Tamura; Y Akamaru; K Kishi; J Fujita; T Hirao; K Demura; J Matsuyama; A Takeno; C Ebisui; K Takachi; O Takayama; H Fukunaga; K Okada; S Adachi; S Fukuda; N Matsuura; T Saito; T Takahashi; Y Kurokawa; M Yano; H Eguchi; Y Doki
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2020-10-29       Impact factor: 7.370

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.