The Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted Proximal Gastrectomy with Double-Tract Reconstruction versus Laparoscopy-Assisted Total Gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y Reconstruction for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Multicenter Study Based on Propensity Score Matching Analysis

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Zhiwen Xu, Wei Lin, Su Yan, Shaoqin Chen, Jinping Chen, Qingqi Hong, Hexin Lin, Liangbin Xiao, Jingtao Zhu, Haoyu Bai, Xuejun Yu, Jun You
{"title":"The Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted Proximal Gastrectomy with Double-Tract Reconstruction versus Laparoscopy-Assisted Total Gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y Reconstruction for Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Multicenter Study Based on Propensity Score Matching Analysis","authors":"Zhiwen Xu, Wei Lin, Su Yan, Shaoqin Chen, Jinping Chen, Qingqi Hong, Hexin Lin, Liangbin Xiao, Jingtao Zhu, Haoyu Bai, Xuejun Yu, Jun You","doi":"10.1155/2024/5517459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<i>Purpose</i>. To compare the antireflux effect, long-term nutritional levels, and quality of life (QoL) between laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (LPG-DTR) and laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (LTG-RY) for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). <i>Methods</i>. This multicenter retrospective cohort study collected clinicopathological and follow-up data of AEG patients from January 2016 to January 2021 at five high-volume surgery centers. The study included patients who underwent digestive tract reconstruction with LPG-DTR or LTG-RY after tumor resection. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to minimize confounding factors. The comparison after PSM included postoperative complications, reflux esophagitis, long-term nutritional levels, and QoL. <i>Results</i>. A total of 151 consecutive patients underwent either LPG-DTR or LTG-RY. After PSM, 50 patients from each group were included in the analysis. The frequency of reflux esophagitis and Clavien–Dindo classification did not significantly differ between the two groups (<span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -8.6359 19.289 9.2729\" width=\"19.289pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.658,0)\"></path></g></svg><span></span><span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"22.8711838 -8.6359 21.918 9.2729\" width=\"21.918pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.921,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,29.161,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,32.125,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.365,0)\"></path></g></svg>).</span></span> At 1 year after surgery, the LPG-DTR group showed significantly higher weight and hemoglobin levels than the LTG-RY group (<span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -8.6359 19.289 9.2729\" width=\"19.289pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-81\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.658,0)\"></path></g></svg><span></span><span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"22.8711838 -8.6359 21.918 9.2729\" width=\"21.918pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.921,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,29.161,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-47\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,32.125,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.365,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-54\"></use></g></svg>).</span></span> The overall postoperative Visick grade differed significantly between the groups (<span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -8.6359 19.289 9.2729\" width=\"19.289pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-81\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.658,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g117-91\"></use></g></svg><span></span><span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"22.8711838 -8.6359 21.918 9.2729\" width=\"21.918pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.921,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,29.161,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-47\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,32.125,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.365,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-54\"></use></g></svg>),</span></span> but there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with Visick≥III (<span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -8.6359 19.289 9.2729\" width=\"19.289pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-81\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.658,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g117-92\"></use></g></svg><span></span><span><svg height=\"9.2729pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.6370001pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"22.8711838 -8.6359 21.918 9.2729\" width=\"21.918pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,22.921,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,29.161,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-47\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,32.125,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-49\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,38.365,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-54\"></use></g></svg>).</span></span> <i>Conclusion</i>. Both LPG-DTR and LTG-RY are safe and feasible methods for digestive tract reconstruction in patients with AEG. Both methods have similar antireflux effects and postoperative QoL. However, LPG-DTR resulted in superior nutritional levels compared to LTG-RY. Therefore, LPG-DTR is considered a relatively effective method for digestive tract reconstruction in AEG patients.","PeriodicalId":12597,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology Research and Practice","volume":"2016 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/5517459","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose. To compare the antireflux effect, long-term nutritional levels, and quality of life (QoL) between laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (LPG-DTR) and laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (LTG-RY) for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Methods. This multicenter retrospective cohort study collected clinicopathological and follow-up data of AEG patients from January 2016 to January 2021 at five high-volume surgery centers. The study included patients who underwent digestive tract reconstruction with LPG-DTR or LTG-RY after tumor resection. Propensity score matching (PSM) was utilized to minimize confounding factors. The comparison after PSM included postoperative complications, reflux esophagitis, long-term nutritional levels, and QoL. Results. A total of 151 consecutive patients underwent either LPG-DTR or LTG-RY. After PSM, 50 patients from each group were included in the analysis. The frequency of reflux esophagitis and Clavien–Dindo classification did not significantly differ between the two groups (). At 1 year after surgery, the LPG-DTR group showed significantly higher weight and hemoglobin levels than the LTG-RY group (). The overall postoperative Visick grade differed significantly between the groups (), but there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with Visick≥III (). Conclusion. Both LPG-DTR and LTG-RY are safe and feasible methods for digestive tract reconstruction in patients with AEG. Both methods have similar antireflux effects and postoperative QoL. However, LPG-DTR resulted in superior nutritional levels compared to LTG-RY. Therefore, LPG-DTR is considered a relatively effective method for digestive tract reconstruction in AEG patients.
食管胃交界处腺癌的腹腔镜辅助近端胃切除术加双袢重建与腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术加Roux-en-Y重建的短期和长期疗效对比:基于倾向评分匹配分析的多中心研究
目的比较腹腔镜辅助近端胃切除术加双韧带重建术(LPG-DTR)和腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术加 Roux-en-Y 重建术(LTG-RY)治疗食管胃交界处腺癌(AEG)的抗反流效果、长期营养水平和生活质量(QoL)。方法。这项多中心回顾性队列研究收集了2016年1月至2021年1月期间五家大容量外科中心的AEG患者的临床病理和随访数据。研究对象包括肿瘤切除后接受 LPG-DTR 或 LTG-RY 消化道重建的患者。研究采用倾向评分匹配法(PSM),以尽量减少混杂因素。PSM 后的比较包括术后并发症、反流性食管炎、长期营养水平和 QoL。结果。共有 151 名患者连续接受了 LPG-DTR 或 LTG-RY。经过PSM后,每组各有50名患者纳入分析。两组患者发生反流性食管炎的频率和 Clavien-Dindo 分级无明显差异()。术后 1 年,LPG-DTR 组的体重和血红蛋白水平明显高于 LTG-RY 组()。两组患者术后的 Visick 分级有显著差异(),但 Visick≥III 级患者的比例没有显著差异()。结论LPG-DTR 和 LTG-RY 都是 AEG 患者进行消化道重建的安全可行的方法。两种方法的抗反流效果和术后生活质量相似。不过,LPG-DTR 的营养水平优于 LTG-RY。因此,LPG-DTR 被认为是 AEG 患者消化道重建的一种相对有效的方法。
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
Gastroenterology Research and Practice
Gastroenterology Research and Practice GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Gastroenterology Research and Practice is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal which publishes original research articles, review articles and clinical studies based on all areas of gastroenterology, hepatology, pancreas and biliary, and related cancers. The journal welcomes submissions on the physiology, pathophysiology, etiology, diagnosis and therapy of gastrointestinal diseases. The aim of the journal is to provide cutting edge research related to the field of gastroenterology, as well as digestive diseases and disorders. Topics of interest include: Management of pancreatic diseases Third space endoscopy Endoscopic resection Therapeutic endoscopy Therapeutic endosonography.
×
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