Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of Reconstruction Methods After Distal Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials.

IF 3.2 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Jae-Seok Min, Rock Bum Kim, Kyung Won Seo, Sang-Ho Jeong
{"title":"Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of Reconstruction Methods After Distal Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Jae-Seok Min,&nbsp;Rock Bum Kim,&nbsp;Kyung Won Seo,&nbsp;Sang-Ho Jeong","doi":"10.5230/jgc.2022.22.e9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To analyze the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of 2 reconstruction methods after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three keywords, \"gastric neoplasm,\" \"distal gastrectomy,\" and \"reconstruction,\" were used to search PubMed. We selected only randomized controlled trial that compared the anastomosis methods. A total of 11 papers and 8 studies were included in this meta-analysis. All statistical analyses were performed using the R software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among short-term clinical outcomes, a shorter operation time, reduced morbidity, and shorter hospital stay were found for Billroth type I (B-I) than for Roux-en-Y (RNY) reconstruction in the meta-analysis (P<0.001, P=0.048, P<0.001, respectively). When comparing Billroth type II (B-II) to RNY, the operation time was shorter for B-II than for RNY (P<0.019), but there were no differences in morbidity or length of hospital stay (P=0.500, P=0.259, respectively). Regarding long-term clinical outcomes related to reflux, there were significantly fewer incidents of reflux esophagitis, reflux gastritis, and bile reflux (P=0.035, P<0.001, P=0.019, respectively) for RNY than for B-I in the meta-analysis, but there was no difference between the 2 methods in residual food (P=0.545). When comparing B-II to RNY, there were significantly fewer incidents of reflux gastritis (P<0.001) for RNY than for B-II, but the amount of residual food and patient weight gain showed no difference.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>B-I had the most favorable short-term outcomes, but RNY was more advantageous for long-term outcomes than for other methods. Surgeons should be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of each type of anastomosis and select the appropriate method.</p>","PeriodicalId":56072,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastric Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/63/25/jgc-22-83.PMC9091459.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastric Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5230/jgc.2022.22.e9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To analyze the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of 2 reconstruction methods after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods: Three keywords, "gastric neoplasm," "distal gastrectomy," and "reconstruction," were used to search PubMed. We selected only randomized controlled trial that compared the anastomosis methods. A total of 11 papers and 8 studies were included in this meta-analysis. All statistical analyses were performed using the R software.

Results: Among short-term clinical outcomes, a shorter operation time, reduced morbidity, and shorter hospital stay were found for Billroth type I (B-I) than for Roux-en-Y (RNY) reconstruction in the meta-analysis (P<0.001, P=0.048, P<0.001, respectively). When comparing Billroth type II (B-II) to RNY, the operation time was shorter for B-II than for RNY (P<0.019), but there were no differences in morbidity or length of hospital stay (P=0.500, P=0.259, respectively). Regarding long-term clinical outcomes related to reflux, there were significantly fewer incidents of reflux esophagitis, reflux gastritis, and bile reflux (P=0.035, P<0.001, P=0.019, respectively) for RNY than for B-I in the meta-analysis, but there was no difference between the 2 methods in residual food (P=0.545). When comparing B-II to RNY, there were significantly fewer incidents of reflux gastritis (P<0.001) for RNY than for B-II, but the amount of residual food and patient weight gain showed no difference.

Conclusion: B-I had the most favorable short-term outcomes, but RNY was more advantageous for long-term outcomes than for other methods. Surgeons should be aware of the advantages and disadvantages of each type of anastomosis and select the appropriate method.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

胃远端切除术后重建方法的临床效果比较:基于随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
背景:分析胃癌远端胃切除术后2种重建方式的近期和长期临床效果。方法:使用“胃肿瘤”、“远端胃切除术”、“重建”三个关键词在PubMed中进行检索。我们只选择随机对照试验比较吻合方法。本meta分析共纳入11篇论文和8项研究。所有统计分析均采用R软件进行。结果:在短期临床结果中,meta分析发现Billroth I型(B-I)比Roux-en-Y (RNY)重建术具有更短的手术时间、更低的发病率和更短的住院时间(结论:B-I具有最有利的短期结果,但RNY比其他方法更有利于长期结果)。外科医生应了解每种吻合方式的优缺点,选择合适的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Gastric Cancer
Journal of Gastric Cancer Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Cancer Research
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
12.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The Journal of Gastric Cancer (J Gastric Cancer) is an international peer-reviewed journal. Each issue carries high quality clinical and translational researches on gastric neoplasms. Editorial Board of J Gastric Cancer publishes original articles on pathophysiology, molecular oncology, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of gastric cancer as well as articles on dietary control and improving the quality of life for gastric cancer patients. J Gastric Cancer includes case reports, review articles, how I do it articles, editorials, and letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信