Open Total Gastrectomy For Gastric Cancer Research Articles

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes of Hand-Sewn Versus Stapled Esophago-jejunal Anastomosis During Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in 72 Patients: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study in Poland.

BACKGROUND Mechanical stapling is a commonly used alternative to hand-sewn technique for esophago-jejunal anastomosis in total gastrectomy (TG). Some studies report reduction in postoperative complications in the stapler group. This retrospective study aimed to compare short- and long-term surgical outcomes between the groups with stapled and hand-sewn esophago-jejunal anastomosis (EJA) during open TG for gastric cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study included 72 adult patients with gastric cancer who underwent TG in the Department of Digestive TractSurgery in Katowice between May 2018 and December 2021. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the technique of EJA: stapled (44 cases) or hand-sewn (28 cases). We compared the groups in terms of the duration of the surgery, length of hospital stay, and occurrence of complications (focusing on anastomotic leakage, stricture and abdominal abscess). RESULTS There were no significant differences in duration of the surgery (P=0.6), blood loss (P=0.7), or length of postoperative hospital stay (P=0.2) among the groups. Early postoperative complications rates were 9.1% (4/44) in the stapler group and 17.9% (5/28) in the hand-sewn group (P=0.27). The most frequent complication was anastomotic leakage, with 2 cases in each group (P=0.76). The mean follow-up time was 1.8±0.9 (0.3-3.6) years. During this period the anastomotic stricture occurred in 7 (15.9%) cases with stapled anastomosis and in 5 (17.9%) cases with hand-sewn anastomosis (P=0.52). CONCLUSIONS In this study there were no significant differences in mortality, morbidity, and surgery duration between stapled and hand-sewn esophago-jejunal anastomosis in total gastrectomy.

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using the modified overlap method and conventional open total gastrectomy: A comparative study

BACKGROUNDAlthough several methods of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) have been reported. The best anastomosis technique for LTG has not been established.AIMTo investigate the effectiveness and surgical outcomes of TLTG using the modified overlap method compared with open total gastrectomy (OTG) using the circular stapled method.METHODSWe performed 151 and 131 surgeries using TLTG with the modified overlap method and OTG for gastric cancer between March 2012 and December 2018. Surgical and oncological outcomes were compared between groups using propensity score matching. In addition, we analyzed the risk factors associated with postoperative complications.RESULTSPatients who underwent TLTG were discharged earlier than those who underwent OTG [TLTG (9.62 ± 5.32) vs OTG (13.51 ± 10.67), P < 0.05]. Time to first flatus and soft diet were significantly shorter in TLTG group. The pain scores at all postoperative periods and administration of opioids were significantly lower in the TLTG group than in the OTG group. No significant difference in early, late and esophagojejunostomy (EJ)-related complications or 5-year recurrence free and overall survival between groups. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that body mass index [odds ratio (OR), 1.824; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.029-3.234, P = 0.040] and American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score (OR, 3.154; 95%CI: 1.084-9.174, P = 0.035) were independent risk factors of early complications. Additionally, age was associated with ≥ 3 Clavien-Dindo classification and EJ-related complications.CONCLUSIONAlthough TLTG with the modified overlap method showed similar complication rate and oncological outcome with OTG, it yields lower pain score, earlier bowel recovery, and discharge. Surgeons should perform total gastrectomy cautiously and delicately in patients with obesity, high ASA scores, and older ages.

Laparoscopic versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis

ObjectiveTo expand the current knowledge on the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer in comparison with open total gastrectomy (OTG).BackgroundAdditional studies comparing laparoscopic versus open total gastric resection have been published, and it is necessary to update the meta-analysis of this subject.MethodsOriginal articles compared LTG and OTG for gastric cancer, which published in English from January 1990 to July 2013 were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge by two reviewers independently. Operative time, blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, analgesic medication, first flatus day, first oral intake, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, hospital mortality, 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared using STATA version 10.1.Results17 studies were selected in this analysis, which included a total of 2313 patients (955 in LTG and 1358 in OTG). LTG showed longer operative time, less blood loss, fewer analgesic uses, earlier passage of flatus, quicker resumption of oral intake, earlier hospital discharge, and reduced postoperative morbidity. The number of harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, hospital mortality, 5-year OS and DFS were similar.ConclusionLTG had the benefits of less blood loss, less postoperative pain, quicker bowel function recovery, shorter hospital stay and lower postoperative morbidity, at the price of longer operative time. There were no statistical differences in lymph node dissection, resection margin, hospital mortality, and long-term outcomes, which indicated the similar oncological safety with OTG. A positive trend was indicated towards LTG. So LTG can be performed as an alternative to OTG by the experienced surgeons in high-volume centers. Whereas, due to the relative small sample size of long-term outcomes and lack of randomized control trials, more studies are required.

Laparoscopy-Assisted Versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-analysis

It remains controversial whether laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) is a safe or better alternative to open total gastrectomy (OTG) for the treatment of gastric cancer. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LATG by pooling comparative studies of LATG and OTG in a meta-analysis. Original articles comparing LATG and OTG for gastric cancer, published in the English language since 1990, were searched for in PubMed, Embase, Medline, and the Cochrane Library. The outcome variables analyzed were number of harvested lymph nodes, postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, 5-year survival, operative time, blood loss, time of analgesic use, first flatus day, and postoperative hospital stay. Eight studies were considered suitable for the meta-analysis, for a total of 1161 patients (409 LATG and 752 OTG). Compared with OTG, LATG showed a similar number of lymph nodes harvested, morbidity, and postoperative mortality. There was also no difference in 5-year overall and disease-specific survival between groups, according to two enrolled studies where such data were available. LATG required longer operative times than OTG but also resulted in significantly less blood loss, earlier return of bowel function, less time of analgesics use, and shorter postoperative hospital stay. This meta-analysis suggests that LATG in the treatment of gastric cancer is similar in safety and efficacy to OTG. LATG has the advantages of less blood loss and faster postoperative recovery, at the expense of a longer operative time.