腹腔镜胃近端切除术后消化道重建:双道重建还是双瓣技术?

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Lindi Cai, Guanglin Qiu, Mengke Zhu, Shangning Han, Pengwei Zhao, Panxing Wang, Xiaowen Li, Xinhua Liao, Xiangming Che, Lin Fan
{"title":"腹腔镜胃近端切除术后消化道重建:双道重建还是双瓣技术?","authors":"Lindi Cai,&nbsp;Guanglin Qiu,&nbsp;Mengke Zhu,&nbsp;Shangning Han,&nbsp;Pengwei Zhao,&nbsp;Panxing Wang,&nbsp;Xiaowen Li,&nbsp;Xinhua Liao,&nbsp;Xiangming Che,&nbsp;Lin Fan","doi":"10.1002/ags3.12857","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>The reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy (PG) are varied but not standardized. This study was performed to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes between double tract reconstruction (DTR) and double flap technique (DFT).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We retrospectively reviewed and collected data of patients who underwent DTR and DFT after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG), respectively, between January 2020 and March 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline data of the two groups, then we compared their short-term clinical outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 72 patients (48 and 24 patients in the DTR and DFT groups, respectively) were included. The anastomosis time was significantly longer in the DFT group than that in the DTR group (70.1 vs. 52.7 min, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). DFT was associated with shorter times of gas-passing, start of diet, and postoperative length of hospital stay (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of early and late postoperative complications (<i>p</i> = 0.710, <i>p</i> = 1.000, respectively). DFT was superior to DTR in maintaining body weight (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), total protein (<i>p</i> = 0.011) and albumin levels (<i>p</i> = 0.018). As for QOL, DTR showed better results in the meal-related distress subscale (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). However, DFT was superior to DTR in terms of reducing diarrhea, constipation, and dumping related symptoms (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Double flap technique emerged as a superior alternative to DTR in terms of facilitating early postoperative recovery, sustaining nutritional status, and improving QOL. DFT could potentially be the preferred reconstruction method following laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":8030,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery","volume":"9 1","pages":"98-108"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11693543/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digestive tract reconstruction after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy: Double tract reconstruction or double flap technique?\",\"authors\":\"Lindi Cai,&nbsp;Guanglin Qiu,&nbsp;Mengke Zhu,&nbsp;Shangning Han,&nbsp;Pengwei Zhao,&nbsp;Panxing Wang,&nbsp;Xiaowen Li,&nbsp;Xinhua Liao,&nbsp;Xiangming Che,&nbsp;Lin Fan\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ags3.12857\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Aim</h3>\\n \\n <p>The reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy (PG) are varied but not standardized. This study was performed to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes between double tract reconstruction (DTR) and double flap technique (DFT).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We retrospectively reviewed and collected data of patients who underwent DTR and DFT after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG), respectively, between January 2020 and March 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline data of the two groups, then we compared their short-term clinical outcomes.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>A total of 72 patients (48 and 24 patients in the DTR and DFT groups, respectively) were included. The anastomosis time was significantly longer in the DFT group than that in the DTR group (70.1 vs. 52.7 min, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). DFT was associated with shorter times of gas-passing, start of diet, and postoperative length of hospital stay (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of early and late postoperative complications (<i>p</i> = 0.710, <i>p</i> = 1.000, respectively). DFT was superior to DTR in maintaining body weight (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), total protein (<i>p</i> = 0.011) and albumin levels (<i>p</i> = 0.018). As for QOL, DTR showed better results in the meal-related distress subscale (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). However, DFT was superior to DTR in terms of reducing diarrhea, constipation, and dumping related symptoms (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Double flap technique emerged as a superior alternative to DTR in terms of facilitating early postoperative recovery, sustaining nutritional status, and improving QOL. DFT could potentially be the preferred reconstruction method following laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"98-108\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11693543/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ags3.12857\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ags3.12857","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

摘要

目的:胃近端切除术后重建方法多样,但不规范。本研究旨在评估双束重建术(DTR)与双瓣技术(DFT)的短期临床效果。方法:我们回顾性分析并收集了2020年1月至2023年3月期间腹腔镜近端胃切除术(LPG)后分别行DTR和DFT的患者数据。采用倾向评分匹配法(PSM)平衡两组基线数据,比较两组近期临床结果。结果:共纳入72例患者(DTR组48例,DFT组24例)。DFT组吻合时间明显长于DTR组(70.1 min vs. 52.7 min, p p p = 0.710, p = 1.000)。DFT在维持体重(p = 0.011)和白蛋白水平(p = 0.018)方面优于DTR。在生活质量方面,DTR在膳食相关窘迫分量表中表现出更好的效果(p p)。结论:双瓣技术在促进术后早期恢复、维持营养状态和提高生活质量方面优于DTR。DFT可能是腹腔镜胃近端切除术后首选的重建方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Digestive tract reconstruction after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy: Double tract reconstruction or double flap technique?

Aim

The reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy (PG) are varied but not standardized. This study was performed to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes between double tract reconstruction (DTR) and double flap technique (DFT).

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed and collected data of patients who underwent DTR and DFT after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG), respectively, between January 2020 and March 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline data of the two groups, then we compared their short-term clinical outcomes.

Results

A total of 72 patients (48 and 24 patients in the DTR and DFT groups, respectively) were included. The anastomosis time was significantly longer in the DFT group than that in the DTR group (70.1 vs. 52.7 min, p < 0.001). DFT was associated with shorter times of gas-passing, start of diet, and postoperative length of hospital stay (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of early and late postoperative complications (p = 0.710, p = 1.000, respectively). DFT was superior to DTR in maintaining body weight (p < 0.001), total protein (p = 0.011) and albumin levels (p = 0.018). As for QOL, DTR showed better results in the meal-related distress subscale (p < 0.001). However, DFT was superior to DTR in terms of reducing diarrhea, constipation, and dumping related symptoms (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Double flap technique emerged as a superior alternative to DTR in terms of facilitating early postoperative recovery, sustaining nutritional status, and improving QOL. DFT could potentially be the preferred reconstruction method following laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery
Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
98
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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