Comparison of double-flap and OrVil techniques of laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy in preventing gastroesophageal reflux: a retrospective cohort study

Remnant Stomach Influx Reduces Esophageal Reflux and Malnutrition After Proximal Gastrectomy With Double Tract Reconstruction

Background/Aim

Remnant stomach influx (RSI) from the anastomotic jejunal-remnant stomach, a physiological food passage, develops after proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction (PGDT). Sometimes, food passes into the jejunal-loop (JL). We investigated the association of the food passage route in PGDT (RSI/JL) with postoperative esophageal reflux and malnutrition.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively collected data for 50 patients with upper-third gastric cancer and esophagogastric junction cancer with PGDT. Using one-year postoperative fluoroscopy findings, 40 propensity score-matched patients were classified into RSI and JL groups (n=20/group), respectively. The groups were comparatively evaluated for: clinicopathological characteristics [age, sex, body mass index (BMI), visceral fat index (VFI), subcutaneous fat index (SFI), skeletal muscle index, pathological stage]; perioperative factors [approach, postoperative complications ≥ Clavien-Dindo Grade 2, postoperative food passage); and esophageal reflux (reflux esophagitis frequency ≥ Grade A, degree of reflux based on fluoroscopy findings). Univariate and multivariate analysis identified predictive factors for post-operative malnutrition in all 50 patients.

Results

After propensity score matching, grade of reflux esophagitis and degree of reflux was significantly lower (p=0.014, p<0.001) in the RSI versus JL group. The RSI group showed significantly attenuated percent decrease in BMI, VFI, and SFI (p=0.049, p=0.002, p=0.006). Multivariate analysis identified food passage route (JL) and pathological stage as predictive factors for postoperative malnutrition.

Conclusion

Postoperative esophageal reflux and malnutrition were attenuated by food passage mainly via the RSI after PGDT. Improved jejunal-remnant stomach is requisite to ensure satisfactory remnant stomach influx.

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.

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.

Safety and short-term outcomes of a modified valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy versus gastric tube anastomosis after laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

There is no optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy. The valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy can reduce postoperative reflux esophagitis, but it is technically complex with a long operation time. The gastric tube anastomosis is technically simple, but the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture are higher.

METHODS

We have devised a modified valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy after laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy (LAPG), the arch-bridge anastomosis. After reviewing our prospectively maintained gastric cancer database, 43 patients who underwent LAPG from November 2021 to April 2023 were included in this cohort study, with 25 patients received the arch-bridge anastomosis and 18 patients received gastric tube anastomosis. The short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups to evaluate the efficacy of the arch-bridge anastomosis. Reporting was consistent with the STROCSS 2021 guideline.

RESULTS

The median operation time was 180 min in the arch-bridge group, significantly shorter than the gastric tube group (p = 0.003). In the arch-bridge group, none of the 25 patients experienced anastomotic leakage, while one patient (4%) experienced anastomotic stricture requiring endoscopic balloon dilation. The postoperative length of stay was shorter in the arch-bridge group (9 vs. 11, p = 0.034). None of the patients in the arch-bridge group experienced gastroesophageal reflux and used proton pump inhibitor (PPI), while four (22.2%) patients in the gastric tube group used PPI (p = 0.025). The incidence of reflux esophagitis (Los Angeles grade B or more severe) by endoscopy was lower in the arch-bridge group (0% vs. 25.0%).

CONCLUSION

The arch-bridge anastomosis is a safe, time-saving, and feasible reconstruction method. It can reduce postoperative reflux and anastomotic stricture incidences in a selected cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy.

Anastomotic stenosis following proximal gastrectomy with single flap valvulopasty successfully managed with endoscopic stricturotomy: a case report

Background

Due to its nutritional advantages over total gastrectomy, proximal gastrectomy (PG) with anti-reflux techniques has gained significant attention in East Asian countries in recent years. The double flap technique (DFT) and modified side overlap and fundoplication by Yamashita (mSOFY) are two promising anti-reflux interventions following PG. However, anastomotic stenosis after DFT and gastroesophageal reflux after mSOFY have been reported in several patients. To address these concerns, a hybrid reconstruction procedure was designed, namely, right-sided overlap with single flap valvulopasty (ROSF), for proximal gastrectomy, with the aim of reducing anastomotic stricture and reflux. Among the 38 patients who underwent ROSF at our hospital, one developed Stooler grade II anastomotic stenosis. Herein, we present the successful management of this patient through endoscopic stricturotomy (ES).

Case summary

A 72-year-old female complaining of "epigastric pain and discomfort for more than 1 month" was diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (Siewert type II). She underwent laparoscopic-assisted PG and ROSF procedures at our hospital and recovered well after surgery. However, she started experiencing progressive difficulty in eating and vomiting approximately 3 weeks after the intervention. Endoscopy revealed Stooler grade II esophagogastric anastomotic stenosis. ES with insulated tip (IT) Knife nano was eventually performed, and the patient was able to resume a normal diet without experiencing any discomfort during the 5-month follow-up period.

Conclusion

Endoscopic stricturotomy using IT Knife nano successfully treated anastomotic stenosis following ROSF with no associated complications. Thus, ES to treat anastomotic stenosis after PG with valvulopasty can be considered a safe option and should be performed in centers with the required expertise.

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.

Comparison of changes in body-fat mass and reflux esophagitis among reconstruction methods for proximal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Although proximal gastrectomy (PG) is a function-preserving surgical option, it remains unclear as to which reconstruction method can prevent reflux and maintain body composition.

METHODS

Patients who underwent PG at Keio University between April 2011 and November 2018 were analyzed. Changes in the subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissues were comparatively assessed before and after a year of surgery for three common reconstruction methods. We also compared the endoscopic findings of reflux esophagitis and the number of patients prescribed with proton-pump inhibitor after a year of surgery.

RESULTS

This study included 76 patients, of which 33 patients underwent esophagogastrostomy with a circular stapler (CS), 35 under double flap (DF) reconstruction, and 8 underwent double tract (DT) reconstruction. Comparing esophagogastrostomy (CS and DF) and DT showed that esophagogastrostomy could significantly preserve both subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissues (P < 0.001 and P = 0.04, respectively). However, the change in the subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissues was comparable between CS and DF. As for reflux esophagitis, DF showed the lowest incidence rate for esophagitis and the least number of patients who were prescribed a proton-pump inhibitor.

CONCLUSION

DF is a relatively better reconstruction method for preserving fat mass and preventing reflux among the three common reconstruction methods.

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].

Simple modifications of conventional esophagogastrostomy after proximal gastrectomy adequately reduces the postoperative reflux esophagitis: a retrospective analysis of posterolateral fundoplication

PURPOSE

While proximal gastrectomy is being performed increasingly frequently for the treatment of gastric cancer, a standard reconstruction method to obtain optimal postoperative quality of life (QOL) still remains to be established. We modified the original esophagogastrostomy technique by introducing an additional posterolateral fundoplication (PLF) technique to minimize the risk of reflux esophagitis in patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy. The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical benefit of PLF.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the database was conducted to evaluate the effects of PLF. The data were compared between 44 patients in whom PLF was performed (PLF group) and 17 patients in whom conventional esophagogastrostomy without PLF was performed (C group). A number of incidence of postoperative reflux esophagitis and symptoms were assessed by findings of endoscopic examination and the PGSAS-45 questionnaire, respectively.

RESULTS

The incidence of grade B or worse esophagitis after surgery was significantly lower in the PLF group than in the C group (0% vs. 58.8%, P < 0.01). The score for the esophageal reflux subscale, as the main outcome measure of PGSAS-45, was significantly better in the PLF group (PLF: 1.5 vs C: 2.4, P < 0.01). Cohen's d value was 1.75, which suggested a rather large effect size. Postoperative benign anastomotic stricture was encountered in 10 cases (22.7%) of the PLF group and 4 cases (23.5%) of the C group, all of whom were successfully treated by brief endoscopic mechanical dilatation.

CONCLUSION

PLF is an expedient procedure for reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy.

Modified side overlap esophagogastrostomy after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy

We report a new method of esophagogastrostomy after proximal gastrectomy, side overlap with fundoplication by Yamashita (SOFY) in 2017. Recently, even better treatment results can be obtained by modifying the SOFY method. We describe the technical details of the modified SOFY (mSOFY) after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy. The stomach was dissected in the short axis direction and the esophagus was dissected in the left and right direction. After the proximal gastrectomy, the bilateral diaphragmatic crus were dissected to enhance gastric elevation. After confirming that the esophagus overlapped more than 5 cm at the center of the remnant stomach (we call it SOFY check), the remnant stomach was suture-fixed to the dissected diaphragmatic crus. The right wall of the esophageal stump and the remnant stomach were anastomosed using the full length of a 45 mm-linear stapler. The entry hole was closed in a direction that did not widen the anastomotic hole. Both sides of the esophagus, remnant stomach, and diaphragmatic crus were suture-fixed on the cranial side 1-2 cm away from the anastomosis. Moreover, the left wall and lower end of the esophagus was suture-fixed to the remnant stomach. The preserved dorsal esophageal wall is pressed and flattened by pressure from the pseudofornix, which is the reflux prevention mechanism. The mSOFY method had favorable treatment outcomes. In conclusion, mSOFY can be one of the safe and feasible reconstruction methods after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for gastroesophageal reflux disease 2021

In Japan, with the increasing prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and growing public interest, the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology issued Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for GERD (1st edition) in 2009 and a revised 2nd edition in 2015. A number of studies on GERD were subsequently conducted in Japan and abroad, and vonoprazan, a potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB), became available for the first time in Japan in February 2015. The revised 3rd edition (Japanese edition), which incorporates new findings and information, was published in April 2021. These guidelines are summarized herein, particularly sections related to the treatment of GERD. The important clinical issues addressed in the present revision are (i) the introduction of treatment algorithms that classify GERD into reflux esophagitis and non-erosive reflux disease, (ii) the clarification of treatment algorithms based on to the severity of reflux esophagitis, and (iii) the positioning of vonoprazan in the treatment for GERD. The present guidelines propose vonoprazan as the initial/maintenance treatment for severe reflux esophagitis. They also recommend vonoprazan or PPI as an initial treatment for mild reflux esophagitis and recommended PPI and proposed vonoprazan as maintenance treatment. These updated guidelines offer the best clinical strategies for GERD patients in Japan and hope that they will be of global use for the diagnosis and treatment for GERD.

Is proximal gastrectomy indicated for locally advanced cancer in the upper third of the stomach?

AIM

To treat upper third gastric cancer, proximal gastrectomy (PG), a function-preserving procedure, is recommended for early lesions when at least half the distal stomach can be preserved, while total gastrectomy (TG) is standard for locally advanced lesions. Oncological feasibility, when applying PG for such lesions, remains unknown.

METHODS

We reviewed patients undergoing TG for clinical (c) T2-T4 upper third gastric cancer between 2006 and 2015. Preoperative tumor locations were further classified into the cardia, fornix, and gastric body based on endoscopic findings. The metastatic rate and therapeutic value index for lymph node (LN) dissection were determined, and characteristics of patients with distal LN (No. 4d, 5, and 6) metastasis (DLNM) were reviewed. In addition, patients with pathological tumor invasion to the middle third (M) region were investigated.

RESULTS

We studied 167 patients. There were 8 (4.8%) with DLNM and 41 (24.6%) with pathological tumor invasion to the M region. As to regional stations, therapeutic indices for LN dissection at stations No. 4d, 5, 6, and 12a were zero or extremely low. No DLNM was detected in cT2 lesions or cT3/T4 lesions located within the cardia and/or the fornix. In addition, none of the lesions located within the cardia and/or the fornix by preoperative endoscopy extended to the M region in the pathological specimen.

CONCLUSIONS

For upper third gastric cancer, PG without No. 12a dissection might be acceptable for cT2-T4 lesions located within the cardia and/or the fornix when considering the risk of DLNM and cancer-positivity in the distal stump.

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.

Comparison of the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open total or proximal gastrectomy using the transorally inserted anvil (OrVilTM) for the proximal reconstruction: a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic and open total/proximal gastrectomy using transorally inserted anvil (OrVil^TM).

METHOD

Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer and underwent total or proximal gastrectomy using OrVil^TM for reconstruction were included. Clinical and pathological characteristics, as well as postoperative outcomes, were analyzed. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline factors.

RESULTS

From April 2012 to April 2020, 199 patients at our center were included. A total of 166 underwent open total or proximal gastrectomy (OTG/OPG), and 33 underwent laparoscopic total or proximal gastrectomy (LTG/LPG). Twenty-seven patients from each group were paired with propensity score matching. The operation time was significantly shorter in the OTG/OPG group after matching. The overall complication rate and the incidence of each complication did not show significant differences between the two groups before and after matching.

CONCLUSION

LTG/LPG and OTG/OPG using OrVil^TM for the alimentary tract reconstruction are both feasible and can achieve similar short-term outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of gastric tube reconstruction following laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach: experience with 100 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Gastric tube reconstruction is a form of esophagogastrostomy performed after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG). It is a simple and safe technique, but it may cause reflux esophagitis (RE) and impair postsurgical QOL. For several years, we have developed the gastric tube reconstruction and performed it on more than 100 patients. This study aimed to determine whether gastric tube reconstruction can be a feasible choice after LPG in regard to surgical safety and postoperative nutritional status.

METHODS

The subjects consisted of 171 patients who underwent LPG (n = 102) or laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) (n = 69). We compared the two groups in terms of surgical outcomes, incidence rate of RE, and nutritional status including postoperative weight loss and hemoglobin levels.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences with regard to the surgical duration and blood loss between the two groups. The incidence of RE was not significantly higher with LPG than with LTG (16.7% vs. 10.1%, respectively; P = 0.07). Later than 2 years and 6 months after surgery, the body weight percentage of preoperative body weight in the LPG group was significantly higher than that in the LTG group. Hemoglobin and ferritin levels in the LPG group were significantly higher than those in the LTG group, later than one after surgery. The overall survival rates were similar between the two groups (5-year survival rates: 97.1% vs. 94.2% in the LPG and LTG groups, respectively; P = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Gastric tube reconstruction after LPG is simple and had better outcomes than LTG in terms of postoperative nutritional status.

Postoperative nutritional outcomes and quality of life-related complications of proximal versus total gastrectomy for upper-third early gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

Although proximal gastrectomy (PG) provides superior nutritional outcomes over total gastrectomy (TG) in upper-third early gastric cancer (EGC), surgeons are reluctant to perform PG due to the high rate of postoperative reflux. This meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively compare operative outcomes, nutritional outcomes, and quality of life-related complications between TG and PG performed with esophagogastrostomy (EG), jejunal interposition, or double-tract reconstruction (DTR) to reduce reflux after PG. After searching PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science databases, 25 studies comparing PG with TG in upper-third EGC published up to October 2020 were identified. PG with DTR was similar to TG regarding operative outcomes. Patients who underwent PG with DTR had less weight reduction (weighted mean difference [WMD] 4.29; 95% confidence interval [0.51–8.07]), reduced hemoglobin loss (WMD 5.74; [2.56–8.93]), and reduced vitamin B₁₂ supplementation requirement (odds ratio [OR] 0.06; [0.00–0.89]) compared to patients who underwent TG. PG with EG caused more reflux (OR 5.18; [2.03–13.24]) and anastomotic stenosis (OR 3.94; [2.40–6.46]) than TG. However, PG with DTR was similar to TG regarding quality of life-related complications including reflux, anastomotic stenosis, and leakage. Hence, PG with DTR can be recommended for patients with upper-third EGC considering its superior postoperative nutritional outcomes.

Comparisons of Postoperative Complications and Nutritional Status After Proximal Laparoscopic Gastrectomy with Esophagogastrostomy and Double-Tract Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative complications and nutritional status between esophagogastrostomy and double-tract reconstruction in patients who underwent laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy, and assess the advantages of both surgical procedures.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2018, 47 cases underwent proximal gastrectomy with esophagogastrostomy (n = 23) or double-tract reconstruction (n = 24) at our institution for the treatment of clinical T1N0 adenocarcinoma located in the upper third of the stomach. Patient clinical characteristics, short-term outcomes, nutrition status, and skeletal muscle index were compared among the two groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between esophagogastrostomy and double-tract reconstruction in terms of operation time, blood loss, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Reflux symptoms and anastomotic stenosis were significantly higher in the esophagogastrostomy group compared with the double-tract reconstruction group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). There was no significant difference in anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, and pancreatic fistula. For the nutritional status, the decrease rate of cholinesterase was significantly higher in the esophagogastrostomy group compared with the double-tract reconstruction group at 6 months (P = 0.008) There was no significant difference in the decrease rate of skeletal muscle mass index at 1 year after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Compared with esophagogastrostomy, double-tract reconstruction tends to have better short-term nutritional status and postoperative outcomes in terms of preventing the occurrence of gastroesophageal reflux and anastomosis stenosis. These findings suggest that double-tract reconstruction may be a useful method in laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.

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.

Nutrition update in gastric cancer surgery

Patients with gastric cancer are often malnourished during tumor progression. Malnutrition is a risk factor for postoperative complications and a poor prognosis. Early evaluation and management of nutrition can improve these outcomes. Various combined indices in which albumin is the primary component are used to evaluate the nutritional status, including the Prognostic Nutritional Index, Glasgow Prognostic Score, and Controlling Nutritional Status score. Both the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism guidelines recommend immediate and early oral/enteral nutrition. However, few reports have described the additional effects of preoperative immunonutrition on clinical outcomes of gastric cancer surgery. Gastrectomy types and reconstruction methods that consider the postoperative nutritional status have been used when oncologically acceptable. Total gastrectomy has recently tended to be avoided because of its negative impact on nutritional status. New findings obtained from the emergence of continuous glucose measurement, such as glucose fluctuation and nocturnal hypoglycemia, may affect nutritional management after gastrectomy. Some prospective clinical studies on perioperative nutritional intervention have set postoperative body weight loss as a primary endpoint. It seems important to continue oral nutritional supplement, even in small doses, to reduce body weight loss after gastrectomy. Evidence generated by prospective, well-developed randomized controlled studies must be disseminated so that nutritional therapy is widely recognized as an important multimodal therapy in patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery.

Digestive tract reconstruction options after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

In addition to the popularity of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), many reconstructive procedures after LG have been reported. Surgical resection and lymphatic dissection determine long-term survival; however, the election of a reconstruction procedure determines the postoperative quality of life for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Presently, no consensus exists regarding the optimal reconstructive procedure. In this review, the current state of digestive tract reconstruction after LG is reviewed. According to the determining influence of the tumor site on the procedures of surgical resection and reconstruction, we divide these reconstruction procedures into three categories consistent with the resection procedures. We focus on the technical tips of every reconstruction procedure and examine the surgical outcomes (length of surgery and blood loss) and postoperative complications (anastomotic leakage and stricture) to facilitate gastrointestinal surgeons to understand the merits and demerits of every reconstruction procedure.