Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double-flap technique versus laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for proximal early gastric cancer

Safety of robotic double-flap technique following proximal gastrectomy in the introductory phase compared with laparoscopic procedure: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Proximal gastrectomy (PG) is recommended for upper-third gastric cancer and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer, preserving organ function while reducing postoperative symptoms. The double-flap technique (DFT) is one approach to minimize reflux after PG. However, laparoscopic PG with DFT (LPG-DFT) has drawbacks of increased complexity, such as hand sutures for anastomosis. Robotic surgery offers potential advantages for DFT reconstruction, but the safety of robotic DFT following PG (RPG-DFT) in the introductory phase is unknown.

METHODS

This retrospective study compared the outcomes of RPG-DFT with LPG-DFT. Data from 402 patients (321 LPG-DFT, 81 RPG-DFT) between 2009 and 2023 were analyzed. Propensity score matching balanced patient demographics and tumor characteristics. Surgical parameters, complications, and long-term outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

The surgery time of LPG-DFT has stabilized in patients since 2016. Thus, LPG-DFT from 2016 was defined as a stable procedure. RPG-DFT was started in 2019, after minimally invasive DFT reconstruction had been mastered at our center. Therefore, we compared the surgical outcomes of introductory RPG-DFT with stable LPG-DFT. Matched analysis revealed that RPG-DFT in the introductory phase had significantly longer surgery times but less bleeding and shorter reconstruction times and hospital stays than stable LPG-DFT. Frequencies of short-term complications and reflux esophagitis were comparable in both groups. Although RPG-DFT in the introductory phase exhibited higher incidence of anastomotic stenosis than stable LPG-DFT, the incidence of anastomotic stenosis decreased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the safety of RPG-DFT in the introductory phase for EGJ and upper-third stomach tumors, with outcomes comparable to stable LPG-DFT. RPG-DFT offers shorter reconstruction time and less blood loss compared with LPG-DFT. However, anastomotic stenosis is a complication to monitor in early robotic surgery.

Clinical efficacy and safety of double-channel anastomosis and tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis in gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

With the continuous progress of surgical technology and improvements in medical standards, the treatment of gastric cancer surgery is also evolving. Proximal gastrectomy is a common treatment, but double-channel anastomosis and tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis have attracted much attention in terms of surgical options. Each of these two surgical methods has advantages and disadvantages, so it is particularly important to compare and analyze their clinical efficacy and safety.

AIM

To compare the surgical safety, clinical efficacy, and safety of double-channel anastomosis and tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis in proximal gastrectomy.

METHODS

The clinical and follow-up data of 99 patients with proximal gastric cancer who underwent proximal gastrectomy and were admitted to our hospital between January 2018 and September 2023 were included in this retrospective cohort study. According to the different anastomosis methods used, the patients were divided into a double-channel anastomosis group (50 patients) and a tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis group (49 patients). In the double-channel anastomosis, Roux-en-Y anastomosis of the esophagus and jejunum was performed after proximal gastric dissection, and then side-to-side anastomosis was performed between the residual stomach and jejunum to establish an antireflux barrier and reduce postoperative gastroesophageal reflux. In the tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis group, after the proximal end of the stomach was cut, tubular gastroplasty was performed on the distal stump of the stomach and a linear stapler was used to anastomose the posterior wall of the esophagus and the anterior wall of the stomach tube. The main outcome measure was quality of life 1 year after surgery in both groups, and the evaluation criteria were based on the postgastrectomy syndrome assessment scale. The greater the changes in body mass, food intake per meal, meal quality subscale score, and total measures of physical and mental health score, the better the condition; the greater the other indicators, the worse the condition. The secondary outcome measures were intraoperative and postoperative conditions, the incidence of postoperative long-term complications, and changes in nutritional status at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

In the double-channel anastomosis cohort, there were 35 males (70%) and 15 females (30%), 33 (66.0%) were under 65 years of age, and 37 (74.0%) had a body mass index ranging from 18 to 25 kg/m2. In the group undergoing tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis, there were eight females (16.3%), 21 (42.9%) individuals were under the age of 65 years, and 34 (69.4%) had a body mass index ranging from 18 to 25 kg/m2. The baseline data did not significantly differ between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all), with the exception of age (P = 0.021). The duration of hospitalization, number of lymph nodes dissected, intraoperative blood loss, and perioperative complication rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all). Patients in the dual-channel anastomosis group scored better on quality of life measures than did those in the tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis group. Specifically, they had lower scores for esophageal reflux [2.8 (2.3, 4.0) vs 4.8 (3.8, 5.0), Z = 3.489, P < 0.001], eating discomfort [2.7 (1.7, 3.0) vs 3.3 (2.7, 4.0), Z = 3.393, P = 0.001], total symptoms [2.3 (1.7, 2.7) vs 2.5 (2.2, 2.9), Z = 2.243, P = 0.025], and other aspects of quality of life. The postoperative symptoms [2.0 (1.0, 3.0) vs 2.0 (2.0, 3.0), Z = 2.127, P = 0.033], meals [2.0 (1.0, 2.0) vs 2.0 (2.0, 3.0), Z = 3.976, P < 0.001], work [1.0 (1.0, 2.0) vs 2.0 (1.0, 2.0), Z = 2.279, P = 0.023], and daily life [1.7 (1.3, 2.0) vs 2.0 (2.0, 2.3), Z = 3.950, P < 0.001] were all better than those of the tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis group. The group that underwent tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis had a superior anal exhaust score [3.0 (2.0, 4.0) vs 3.5 (2.0, 5.0) (Z = 2.345, P = 0.019] compared to the dual-channel anastomosis group. Hemoglobin, serum albumin, total serum protein, and the rate at which body mass decreased one year following surgery did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

The safety of double-channel anastomosis in proximal gastric cancer surgery is equivalent to that of tubular gastric surgery. Compared with tubular gastric surgery, double-channel anastomosis is a preferred surgical technique for proximal gastric cancer. It offers advantages such as less esophageal reflux and improved quality of life.

Digestive tract reconstruction after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: A systematic review

The incidence of gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma has gradually increased. Proximal gastrectomy or total gastrectomy is recommended for early gastric cancer of the upper third of the stomach. Because total gastrectomy is often accompanied by body mass loss and nutrient absorption disorders, such as severe hypoproteinemia and anemia, Proximal gastrectomy is more frequently recommended by researchers for early upper gastric cancer (T1N0M0) and Siewert II gastroesophageal junction cancer less than 4 cm in length. Although some functions of the stomach are retained after proximal gastrectomy, the anatomical structure of the gastroesophageal junction can be destroyed, and the anti-reflux effect of the cardia is lost. In recent years, as various reconstruction methods for anti-reflux function have been developed, some functions of the stomach are retained, and serious reflux esophagitis is avoided after proximal gastrectomy. In this article, we summarized the indications, advantages, and disadvantages of various classic reconstruction methods and latest improved reconstruction method including esophageal and residual stomach anastomosis, tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis, muscle flap anastomosis, jejunal interposition, and double-tract reconstruction.

Surgery Matters: Progress in Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

The surgical treatment of gastric carcinoma has progressed significantly in the past few decades. A major milestone was the establishment of multimodal therapies for locally advanced tumours. Improvements in the technique of endoscopic resection have supplanted surgery in the early stages of many cases of gastric cancer. In cases in which an endoscopic resection is not possible, surgical limited resection procedures for the early stages of carcinoma are an equal alternative to gastrectomy in the field of oncology. Proximal gastrectomy is extensively discussed in this context. Whether proximal gastrectomy leads to a better quality of life and better nutritional well-being than total gastrectomy depends on the reconstruction chosen. The outcome cannot be conclusively assessed at present. For locally advanced stages, total or subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is now the global standard. A subtotal gastrectomy requires sufficiently long tumour-free proximal resection margins. Recent data indicate that proximal margins of at least 3 cm for tumours with an expansive growth pattern and at least 5 cm for those with an infiltrative growth pattern are sufficient. The most frequently performed reconstruction worldwide following gastrectomy is the Roux-en-Y reconstruction. However, there is evidence that pouch reconstruction is superior in terms of quality of life and nutritional well-being. Oncological gastric surgery is increasingly being performed laparoscopically. The safety and oncological equivalency were first demonstrated for early carcinomas and then for locally advanced tumours, by cohort studies and RCTs. Some studies suggest that laparoscopic procedures may be advantageous in early postoperative recovery. Robotic gastrectomy is also increasing in use. Preliminary results suggest that robotic gastrectomy may have added value in lymphadenectomy and in the early postoperative course. However, further studies are needed to substantiate these results. There is an ongoing debate about the best treatment option for gastric cancer with oligometastatic disease. Preliminary results indicate that certain patient groups could benefit from resection of the primary tumour and metastases following chemotherapy. However, the exact conditions in which patients may benefit have yet to be confirmed by ongoing trials.

Laparoscopic Function-Preserving Gastrectomy for Proximal Gastric Cancer or Esophagogastric Junction Cancer: A Narrative Review

Function-preserving procedures to maintain postoperative quality of life are an important aspect of treatment for early gastric cancer. Laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) and laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with a small remnant stomach, namely laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LsTG), are alternative function-preserving procedures for laparoscopic total gastrectomy of early proximal gastric cancer. In LPG, esophagogastrostomy with techniques to prevent reflux and double-tract and jejunal interposition including esophagojejunostomy is usually chosen for reconstruction. The double-flap technique is currently a preferred reconstruction technique in Japan as an esophagogastrostomy approach to prevent reflux esophagitis. However, standardized reconstruction methods after LPG have not yet been established. In LsTG, preservation of the esophagogastric junction and the fundus prevents reflux and malnutrition, which may maintain quality of life. However, whether LsTG is an oncologically and nutritionally acceptable procedure compared with laparoscopic total gastrectomy or LPG is a concern. In this review, we summarize the status of reconstruction in LPG and the oncological and nutritional aspects of LsTG as a function-preserving gastrectomy for early proximal gastric or esophagogastric junction cancer.

Advantages of Function-Preserving Gastrectomy for Older Patients With Upper-Third Early Gastric Cancer: Maintenance of Nutritional Status and Favorable Survival

PURPOSE

The incidence of early gastric cancer is increasing in older patients alongside life expectancy. For early gastric cancer of the upper third of the stomach, laparoscopic function-preserving gastrectomy (LFPG), including laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) and laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSTG), is expected to be an alternative to laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). However, whether LFPG has advantages over LTG in older patients remains unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data of consecutive patients aged ≥75 years who underwent LTG, LPG, or LSTG for cT1N0M0 gastric cancer between 2005 and 2019. Surgical and nutritional outcomes, including blood parameters, percentage body weight (%BW) and percentage skeletal muscle index (%SMI) were compared between LTG and LPG or LSTG. Survival outcomes were also compared between LTG and LFPG groups.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients who underwent LTG (n=39), LPG (n=48), and LSTG (n=24) were enrolled in this study. To match the surgical indications, LTG was further categorized into "LTG for LPG" (LTG-P) and "LTG for LSTG" (LTG-S). No significant differences were identified in the incidence of postoperative complications among the procedures. Postoperative nutritional parameters, %BW and %SMI were better after LPG and LSTG than after LTG-P and LTG-S, respectively. The survival outcomes of LFPG were better than those of LTG.

CONCLUSIONS

LFPG is safe for older patients and has advantages over LTG in terms of postoperative nutritional parameters, body weight, skeletal muscle-sparing, and survival. Therefore, LFPG for upper early gastric cancer should be considered in older patients.

Study protocol for comparing the efficacy of left-open single-flap technique versus double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy: A multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Proximal gastrectomy has gradually gained more attention due to its superiority in retaining the function of part of the stomach. The inevitable loss of the antireflux barrier and postoperative complications resulting from proximal gastrectomy can severely affect the quality of life. Continuous improvements in digestive tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy have yielded the development of a variety of methods with antireflux functions. Recently, our center attempted the left-open single-flap technique and initiated a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial for patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy to reduce the difficulty of surgical anastomosis and the incidence of perioperative complications compared with the double-flap technique. These findings will provide more evidence-based medical research for the development of clinical guidelines.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial. We plan to recruit 250 patients who are eligible for proximal gastrectomy. After informed consent is obtained, patients will be randomly assigned to the trial group (left-open single-flap technique) and the control group (double-flap technique) in a 1:1 allocation ratio.

DISCUSSION

Increasingly, clinical studies have focused on the improvement of reconstruction modalities after proximal gastrectomy. Among these methods, the double-flap technique is a clinically effective method. The purpose of this study is to establish a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of the left-open single-flap technique versus the double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy, aiming to provide more evidence-based medical studies for digestive tract reconstruction in proximal gastrectomy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier [NCT05418920].

Current status of function-preserving gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Early gastric cancer (EGC) has excellent postoperative survival outcomes; thus, one of the recent keywords in the treatment of EGC is "function-preserving gastrectomy (FPG)." FPG reduces the extent of lymphadenectomy and gastric resection without compromising the long-term prognosis. Proximal gastrectomy (PG) is an alternative to total gastrectomy (TG) for EGC in the upper-third of the stomach, in which the gastric reservoir, gastric acid secretion, and intrinsic factors are maintained. Distal gastrectomy (DG) with a small remnant stomach, namely subtotal gastrectomy (STG), is another option for upper EGC, where the function of the cardia and fundus is preserved. Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (PPG) is a good alternative to DG for EGC in the middle-third of the stomach, where pyloric function is preserved. Following elucidation of the markedly low incidences of possible metastasis to lymph node stations where dissection is omitted, the oncological safety of these FPG procedures was clarified. Nutritional advantages of PG or STG over TG have been reported; however, the standardized reconstruction methods after PG are yet to be established, and it is important to devise methods to prevent postoperative gastroesophageal reflux and anastomotic complications regardless of the reconstruction method. Nutritional benefits of PPG compared with DG have also been clarified, in which reducing postoperative gastric stasis is important. For the further spread of these FPG procedures, several issues, such as precise evaluation of preserved function, confirmation of oncological safety, and standardization of the technique, should be addressed in future prospective randomized controlled trials.

Proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database analysis

Aims: To addresses whether surgical procedure (proximal gastrectomy [PG] vs total gastrectomy [TG]) influences survival outcomes. Methods: Patients were selected from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program (SEER) database. Survival curve was used to evaluate the differences in overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Results: No significant difference was detected in OS and CSS time between PG and TG groups. Also, no significant differences were observed in OS and CSS times between the two groups with respect to clinical stage, tumor stage, node stage, age, gender and tumor differentiation. Tumor differentiation, tumor size, tumor stage, node stage and age were independent prognostic factors in patients with proximal gastric cancer. Conclusions: TG was not necessary for proximal gastric cancer patients, and PG may be considered as an ideal surgery approach.

Current status of proximal gastrectomy for gastric and esophagogastric junctional cancer: A review

Proximal gastrectomy (PG) is one of the function-preserving surgical methods for the treatment of upper gastric cancer. Favorable postoperative results have been reported in comparison with total gastrectomy. However, because there are challenges, such as postoperative reflux esophagitis, anastomotic stenosis, and residual food, appropriate selection of a reconstruction method is crucial. Some methods include esophagogastric anastomosis, including simple esophagogastrostomy, tube-like stomach esophagogastrostomy, side overlap with fundoplication by Yamashita, and double-flap technique, and reconstruction using the small intestine, including double-tract methods, jejunal interposition, and jejunal pouch interposition. However, standard reconstruction methods are yet to be established. PG has also been employed in early gastric cancer of the upper third of the stomach, and indications have also been extended to esophagogastric junction cancer, which has shown an increase in recent years. Although many retrospective studies have revealed the functional benefits or oncological safety of PG, the characteristics of each surgical procedure should be understood so that an appropriate reconstruction method, with a reflux prevention mechanism and minimal postoperative injury, can be selected.

Effects of reconstruction techniques after proximal gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Additional studies comparing several reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy have been published; of note, it is necessary to update systematic reviews and meta-analysis from the current evidence-based literature.

AIM

To expand the current knowledge on feasibility and safety, and also to analyze postoperative outcomes of several reconstructive techniques after proximal gastrectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, and Medline databases were searched for original studies, and relevant literature published between the years 1966 and 2019 concerning various reconstructive techniques on proximal gastrectomy were selected. The postoperative outcomes and complications of the reconstructive techniques were assessed. Meta-analyses were performed using Rev-Man 5.0. A total of 29 studies investigating postoperative outcomes of double tract reconstruction, jejunal pouch interposition, jejunal interposition, esophagogastrostomy, and double flap reconstruction were finally selected in the quantitative analysis.

RESULT

Pooled incidences of reflux esophagitis for double tract reconstruction, jejunal pouch interposition, jejunal interposition esophagogastrostomy, and double flap reconstruction were 8.6%, 13.8%, 13.8%, 19.3%, and 8.9% respectively. Meta-analysis showed a decreased length of hospital in the JI group as compared to the JPI group (heterogeneity: Chi2 = 1.34, df = 1 (P = 0.25); I2 = 26%, test for overall effect: Z = 2.22 (P = 0.03). There was also a significant difference between JI and EG in length of hospital stay with heterogeneity: Chi2 = 1.40, df = 3 (P = 0.71); I2 = 0%, test for overall effect: Z = 5.04 (P < 0.00001). Operative time was less in the EG group as compared to the JI group (heterogeneity: Chi2 = 31.09, df = 5 (P < 0.00001); I2 = 84%, test for overall effect: Z = 32.35 (P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Although current reconstructive techniques present excellent anti-reflux efficacy, the optimal reconstructive method remains to be determined. The double flap reconstruction proved to lower the rate of complication, but the DTR, JI, JPI, and EG groups showed higher incidence of complications in anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, and residual food. In the meta-analysis result, the complications between the JI, JPI, and EG were comparable but the EG group showed to have better postoperative outcomes concerning the operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay.