Comparison of clinical efficacy between proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction and total gastrectomy with Roux?en?Y reconstruction for proximal gastric cancer
Junyan Fan,Feng Qian,Jiajia Liu,Junyan Liu,Bin Wu,Yixi Wu,Peiwu Yu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0274.2019.08.012
2019-01-01
Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of proximal gastrectomy with double tract reconstruction (PG?DT) and total gastrectomy with Roux?en?Y reconstruction (TG?RY) for proximal gastric cancer. Methods The retrospective study was conducted. Clinicopathological data of 132 patients with proximal gastric cancer confirmed by pathology who underwent PG?DT (n=51) or TG?RY (n=81) by the same surgeon team in Southwest Hospital of Army Military Medical University between January 2006 and December 2016 were collected. Patients with preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, non?R0 resection and non?adenocarcinoma confirmed by pathology were excluded. Observation indicators included intraoperative (operation time and blood loss); postoperative (time to flatus, hospital stay, total complications, metastasis of lymph nodes around distal side of stomach from cases undergoing TG?RY), follow?up (long?term hemoglobin level, incidence of anemia, and survival) parameters. Survival analysis was conducted using the Kaplan?Meier method, and Log?rank test was used to compare survival difference between two groups. Results No statistically significant differences were found between two groups in the baseline data, including age, gender, BMI, hemoglobin level before operation, postoperative TNM stage, tumor size and histological differentiation between two groups (all P>0.05). There were no significant differences between PG?DT and TG?RY in intraoperative blood loss [200 (200) ml vs. 200 (195) ml, Z=-1.860, P=0.063], time to flatus [(2.7±1.0) days vs. (2.6±1.1) days, t=0.225, P=0.823], postoperative hospital stay [10(3) days vs. 10 (4) days, Z=-0.449, P=0.654] and morbidity of perioperative complications [5.9% (3/51) vs. 8.6% (7/81), χ2=0.081, P=0.775]. Compared with the TG?RY group, PG?DT group had longer total operative time [294 (97) minutes vs. 255 (71) minutes, Z=–3.148, P=0.002]. The hemoglobin data of 42 patients with PG?DT and 56 patients with TG?RY were collected 1 year after operation. The incidence of anemia in PG?DT group was lower than that of TG?RY group [64.2%(27/42) vs. 82.1% (46/56), χ2=4.072, P=0.045], and PG?DT group had higher level of hemoglobin than TG?RY group [(114.4 ± 16.3) g/L vs. (106.6±15.0) g/L, t=2.435, P=0.017]. There were 4 cases (4/81, 4.9%) with metastasis of lymph nodes around distal side of stomach in TG?RY group. All of these 4 tumors were T4 in depth and were more than 5 cm in diameter. The median follow?up period was 26 (1 to 110) months. One?year, 3?year and 5?year survival rates were 93.2%, 65.3% and 55.0% in PG?DT group, and 85.8%, 63.8% and 47.2% in TG?RY group, respectively without significant difference (χ2=0.890, P=0.345). Conclusions Compared with TG?RY, PG?DT has the same safety and feasibility for proximal gastric cancer. Although the operative time is a little longer than TG?RY, PG?DT has advantages in improving the postoperative hemoglobin level.