Morbidity and Mortality After Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy to Treat Gastric Cancer: An Interim Report: A Phase III Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Trial (The KLASS-07 Trial).

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Han Hong Lee, Chang Min Lee, Moon-Soo Lee, In Ho Jeong, Myoung Won Son, Chang Hyun Kim, Moon-Won Yoo, Sung Jin Oh, Young-Gil Son, Sung Il Choi, Mi Ran Jung, Sang Hyuk Seo, Shin-Hoo Park, Seong Ho Hwang, Jae-Seok Min, Sungsoo Park
{"title":"Morbidity and Mortality After Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy to Treat Gastric Cancer: An Interim Report: A Phase III Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Trial (The KLASS-07 Trial).","authors":"Han Hong Lee, Chang Min Lee, Moon-Soo Lee, In Ho Jeong, Myoung Won Son, Chang Hyun Kim, Moon-Won Yoo, Sung Jin Oh, Young-Gil Son, Sung Il Choi, Mi Ran Jung, Sang Hyuk Seo, Shin-Hoo Park, Seong Ho Hwang, Jae-Seok Min, Sungsoo Park","doi":"10.5230/jgc.2024.24.e22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We conducted a randomized prospective trial (KLASS-07 trial) to compare laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) for gastric cancer. In this interim report, we describe short-term results in terms of morbidity and mortality.</p><p><strong>Methods and methods: </strong>The sample size was 442 participants. At the time of the interim analysis, 314 patients were enrolled and randomized. After excluding patients who did not undergo planned surgeries, we performed a modified per-protocol analysis of 151 and 145 patients in the LADG and TLDG groups, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The baseline characteristics, including comorbidity status, did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. Blood loss was somewhat higher in the LADG group, but statistical significance was not attained (76.76±72.63 vs. 62.91±65.68 mL; P=0.087). Neither the required transfusion level nor the operation or reconstruction time differed between the 2 groups. The mini-laparotomy incision in the LADG group was significantly longer than the extended umbilical incision required for specimen removal in the TLDG group (4.79±0.82 vs. 3.89±0.83 cm; P<0.001). There were no between-group differences in the time to solid food intake, hospital stay, pain score, or complications within 30 days postoperatively. No mortality was observed in either group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Short-term morbidity and mortality rates did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. The KLASS-07 trial is currently underway.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03393182.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11224718/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5230/jgc.2024.24.e22","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We conducted a randomized prospective trial (KLASS-07 trial) to compare laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) for gastric cancer. In this interim report, we describe short-term results in terms of morbidity and mortality.

Methods and methods: The sample size was 442 participants. At the time of the interim analysis, 314 patients were enrolled and randomized. After excluding patients who did not undergo planned surgeries, we performed a modified per-protocol analysis of 151 and 145 patients in the LADG and TLDG groups, respectively.

Results: The baseline characteristics, including comorbidity status, did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. Blood loss was somewhat higher in the LADG group, but statistical significance was not attained (76.76±72.63 vs. 62.91±65.68 mL; P=0.087). Neither the required transfusion level nor the operation or reconstruction time differed between the 2 groups. The mini-laparotomy incision in the LADG group was significantly longer than the extended umbilical incision required for specimen removal in the TLDG group (4.79±0.82 vs. 3.89±0.83 cm; P<0.001). There were no between-group differences in the time to solid food intake, hospital stay, pain score, or complications within 30 days postoperatively. No mortality was observed in either group.

Conclusions: Short-term morbidity and mortality rates did not differ between the LADG and TLDG groups. The KLASS-07 trial is currently underway.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03393182.

腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术和全腹腔镜远端胃切除术治疗胃癌后的发病率和死亡率:中期报告:一项 III 期多中心、前瞻性、随机试验(KLASS-07 试验)。
目的:我们进行了一项随机前瞻性试验(KLASS-07 试验),比较腹腔镜辅助远端胃切除术(LADG)和全腹腔镜远端胃切除术(TLDG)治疗胃癌的效果。在这份中期报告中,我们描述了发病率和死亡率方面的短期结果:样本量为 442 人。在进行中期分析时,有 314 名患者被随机纳入。在排除未按计划接受手术的患者后,我们分别对 LADG 组和 TLDG 组的 151 名和 145 名患者进行了修改后的按方案分析:结果:LADG 组和 TLDG 组的基线特征(包括合并症状况)没有差异。LADG 组失血量稍高,但未达到统计学意义(76.76±72.63 对 62.91±65.68 mL;P=0.087)。两组所需的输血量、手术或重建时间均无差异。LADG 组的小切口明显长于 TLDG 组移除标本所需的延长脐切口(4.79±0.82 cm vs. 3.89±0.83 cm;P=0.087):LADG 组和 TLDG 组的短期发病率和死亡率没有差异。KLASS-07试验目前正在进行中:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT03393182。
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
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
×
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