Minimally invasive versus open completion total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: a nationwide propensity score-matched analysis.

IF 5.1 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Nobuhiro Nakazawa, Takashi Sakamoto, Hiroyuki Yamamoto, Akihiko Sano, Makoto Sakai, Shingo Kanaji, Hirotoshi Kikuchi, Hideki Ueno, Ken Shirabe, Hiroshi Saeki
{"title":"Minimally invasive versus open completion total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: a nationwide propensity score-matched analysis.","authors":"Nobuhiro Nakazawa, Takashi Sakamoto, Hiroyuki Yamamoto, Akihiko Sano, Makoto Sakai, Shingo Kanaji, Hirotoshi Kikuchi, Hideki Ueno, Ken Shirabe, Hiroshi Saeki","doi":"10.1007/s10120-025-01663-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for gastric cancer; however, its application to remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains technically challenging due to adhesions and altered anatomy. Large-scale comparative data on the safety and effectiveness of MIS versus open surgery for RGC are limited. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of MIS versus open completion total gastrectomy for RGC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed data from 3337 patients who underwent completion total gastrectomy for RGC between January 2018 and December 2022 using the National Clinical Database of Japan. After applying predefined inclusion criteria, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching to balance baseline characteristics between the MIS and open surgery groups and compared short-term surgical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After matching, 540 patient pairs were included in the analysis. MIS was associated with a significantly longer operative time (median 344 vs. 248.5 min; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (median 70 vs. 290 mL; P < 0.001). The incidence of anastomotic leakage was higher in the MIS group (9.8% vs. 6.3%; P = 0.034). Postoperative hospital stay was numerically shorter in the MIS group (median 13 vs. 14 days; P = 0.065). Overall complication, reoperation, and mortality rates were comparable between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>MIS for RGC showed comparable short-term outcomes to those of open surgery in a nationwide analysis, with advantages including reduced blood loss. However, the increased risk of anastomotic leakage highlights the need for careful patient selection and ongoing technical refinement.</p>","PeriodicalId":12684,"journal":{"name":"Gastric Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastric Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-025-01663-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is increasingly used for gastric cancer; however, its application to remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains technically challenging due to adhesions and altered anatomy. Large-scale comparative data on the safety and effectiveness of MIS versus open surgery for RGC are limited. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of MIS versus open completion total gastrectomy for RGC.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from 3337 patients who underwent completion total gastrectomy for RGC between January 2018 and December 2022 using the National Clinical Database of Japan. After applying predefined inclusion criteria, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching to balance baseline characteristics between the MIS and open surgery groups and compared short-term surgical outcomes.

Results: After matching, 540 patient pairs were included in the analysis. MIS was associated with a significantly longer operative time (median 344 vs. 248.5 min; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (median 70 vs. 290 mL; P < 0.001). The incidence of anastomotic leakage was higher in the MIS group (9.8% vs. 6.3%; P = 0.034). Postoperative hospital stay was numerically shorter in the MIS group (median 13 vs. 14 days; P = 0.065). Overall complication, reoperation, and mortality rates were comparable between groups.

Conclusions: MIS for RGC showed comparable short-term outcomes to those of open surgery in a nationwide analysis, with advantages including reduced blood loss. However, the increased risk of anastomotic leakage highlights the need for careful patient selection and ongoing technical refinement.

微创与开放式全胃切除术治疗残余胃癌:一项全国性倾向评分匹配分析。
背景:微创手术(MIS)越来越多地用于胃癌;然而,由于粘连和解剖结构的改变,其在残胃癌(RGC)中的应用在技术上仍然具有挑战性。对于RGC, MIS与开放手术的安全性和有效性的大规模比较数据是有限的。本回顾性研究旨在评估RGC的MIS与开放式完成全胃切除术的短期结果。方法:我们回顾性分析了2018年1月至2022年12月期间接受RGC完成全胃切除术的3337例患者的数据,数据来自日本国家临床数据库。在应用预定义的纳入标准后,我们进行了一对一倾向评分匹配,以平衡MIS组和开放手术组之间的基线特征,并比较了短期手术结果。结果:经配对,540对患者纳入分析。结论:在一项全国性的分析中,RGC的MIS与开放手术的短期结果相当,其优势包括减少失血。然而,吻合口漏的风险增加,需要仔细选择患者并不断改进技术。
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
Gastric Cancer
Gastric Cancer 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
14.70
自引率
2.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gastric Cancer is an esteemed global forum that focuses on various aspects of gastric cancer research, treatment, and biology worldwide. The journal promotes a diverse range of content, including original articles, case reports, short communications, and technical notes. It also welcomes Letters to the Editor discussing published articles or sharing viewpoints on gastric cancer topics. Review articles are predominantly sought after by the Editor, ensuring comprehensive coverage of the field. With a dedicated and knowledgeable editorial team, the journal is committed to providing exceptional support and ensuring high levels of author satisfaction. In fact, over 90% of published authors have expressed their intent to publish again in our esteemed journal.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信