Ji-Ho Park, Sang-Ho Jeong, Young-Joon Lee, Sang-Kyung Choi, Soon-Chan Hong, Eun-Jung Jung, Chi-Young Jeong, Young-Tae Ju, Woo-Song Ha
{"title":"韩国胃癌手术中抗粘剂使用现状的问卷调查","authors":"Ji-Ho Park, Sang-Ho Jeong, Young-Joon Lee, Sang-Kyung Choi, Soon-Chan Hong, Eun-Jung Jung, Chi-Young Jeong, Young-Tae Ju, Woo-Song Ha","doi":"10.4174/jkss.2013.84.3.160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate the current status of the use of antiadhesive agents (AAdAs) via a questionnaire and to discuss the availability of AAdAs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was sent to a list of members that was approved by the Korean Gastric Association. The survey included questions on AAdA use by surgeons, the type of AAdAs used, and the reasons for not using AAdAs. Surgeons were also asked to describe complications related to AAdAs, and the reliability of its use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 21%. The rates of frequent use stratified by procedure were 26.9% (14/52) for open gastrectomy, 5.9% (3/51) for laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 31.5% (17/54) for surgery for postoperative bowel obstruction (P < 0.01). After including data from the occasional use group, the corresponding values were 51.9% (27/52), 19.6% (10/51), and 70.4% (38/54), respectively (P < 0.01). Sefrafilm and Guardix were most commonly used for open procedures. Guardix and Interceed were most commonly used for laparoscopic surgery. The primary reasons for nonuse of AAdAs were ineffectiveness and high cost. Ten percent (4/40) of surgeons observed complications associated with AAdAs. A minority (17.3%, 9/52) had positive attitudes toward AAdAs. The majority of respondents expressed neutral (73.1%, 38/52) or negative (9.6%, 5/52) attitudes toward AAdAs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The low use rates of AAdAs in gastric cancer surgery may be attributable to perceptions that AAdAs are ineffective, unreliable, and costly. We anticipate the emergence of promising antiadhesive strategies that reach far beyond the limitations of current products.</p>","PeriodicalId":49991,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society","volume":"84 3","pages":"160-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4174/jkss.2013.84.3.160","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Current status of the use of antiadhesive agents for gastric cancer surgery: a questionnaire survey in South Korea.\",\"authors\":\"Ji-Ho Park, Sang-Ho Jeong, Young-Joon Lee, Sang-Kyung Choi, Soon-Chan Hong, Eun-Jung Jung, Chi-Young Jeong, Young-Tae Ju, Woo-Song Ha\",\"doi\":\"10.4174/jkss.2013.84.3.160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate the current status of the use of antiadhesive agents (AAdAs) via a questionnaire and to discuss the availability of AAdAs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The survey was sent to a list of members that was approved by the Korean Gastric Association. The survey included questions on AAdA use by surgeons, the type of AAdAs used, and the reasons for not using AAdAs. Surgeons were also asked to describe complications related to AAdAs, and the reliability of its use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The response rate was 21%. The rates of frequent use stratified by procedure were 26.9% (14/52) for open gastrectomy, 5.9% (3/51) for laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 31.5% (17/54) for surgery for postoperative bowel obstruction (P < 0.01). After including data from the occasional use group, the corresponding values were 51.9% (27/52), 19.6% (10/51), and 70.4% (38/54), respectively (P < 0.01). Sefrafilm and Guardix were most commonly used for open procedures. Guardix and Interceed were most commonly used for laparoscopic surgery. The primary reasons for nonuse of AAdAs were ineffectiveness and high cost. Ten percent (4/40) of surgeons observed complications associated with AAdAs. A minority (17.3%, 9/52) had positive attitudes toward AAdAs. The majority of respondents expressed neutral (73.1%, 38/52) or negative (9.6%, 5/52) attitudes toward AAdAs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The low use rates of AAdAs in gastric cancer surgery may be attributable to perceptions that AAdAs are ineffective, unreliable, and costly. We anticipate the emergence of promising antiadhesive strategies that reach far beyond the limitations of current products.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society\",\"volume\":\"84 3\",\"pages\":\"160-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4174/jkss.2013.84.3.160\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2013.84.3.160\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/2/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Surgical Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2013.84.3.160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/2/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Current status of the use of antiadhesive agents for gastric cancer surgery: a questionnaire survey in South Korea.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the current status of the use of antiadhesive agents (AAdAs) via a questionnaire and to discuss the availability of AAdAs.
Methods: The survey was sent to a list of members that was approved by the Korean Gastric Association. The survey included questions on AAdA use by surgeons, the type of AAdAs used, and the reasons for not using AAdAs. Surgeons were also asked to describe complications related to AAdAs, and the reliability of its use.
Results: The response rate was 21%. The rates of frequent use stratified by procedure were 26.9% (14/52) for open gastrectomy, 5.9% (3/51) for laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 31.5% (17/54) for surgery for postoperative bowel obstruction (P < 0.01). After including data from the occasional use group, the corresponding values were 51.9% (27/52), 19.6% (10/51), and 70.4% (38/54), respectively (P < 0.01). Sefrafilm and Guardix were most commonly used for open procedures. Guardix and Interceed were most commonly used for laparoscopic surgery. The primary reasons for nonuse of AAdAs were ineffectiveness and high cost. Ten percent (4/40) of surgeons observed complications associated with AAdAs. A minority (17.3%, 9/52) had positive attitudes toward AAdAs. The majority of respondents expressed neutral (73.1%, 38/52) or negative (9.6%, 5/52) attitudes toward AAdAs.
Conclusion: The low use rates of AAdAs in gastric cancer surgery may be attributable to perceptions that AAdAs are ineffective, unreliable, and costly. We anticipate the emergence of promising antiadhesive strategies that reach far beyond the limitations of current products.