Linear or circular stapler? A propensity score-matched, multicenter analysis of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy following totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy

A Modified Purse-String Stapling Technique for Intracorporeal Circular Stapled Esophagojejunostomy During Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy: Comparison with Extracorporeal Reconstruction Technique

Background: Intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EJ) in the context of laparoscopic total gastrectomy remains a complex and technically demanding procedure. We have previously introduced a novel method of intracorporeal circular stapled EJ utilizing a conventional purse-string suture instrument. Since May 2018, we have refined this technique, and the aim of this study was to assess its safety and efficacy. Methods: Between May 2018 and June 2022, we enrolled 92 patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy with the modified intracorporeal reconstruction method. In addition, between March 2014 and June 2022, we enrolled 121 patients who underwent the procedure with the extracorporeal reconstruction method. We retrospectively collected and compared the clinical data of these 2 patient cohorts. Results: Intracorporeal reconstruction group experienced lower postoperative pain scores (2.7 ± 1.3 versus 4.5 ± 1.4, P = .032), reduced administration of analgesics (3.1 ± 2.2 versus 5.0 ± 3.5, P = .041), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (4.9 ± 2.3 versus 6.3 ± 3.5, P = .045) compared with the extracorporeal reconstruction group. In addition, anastomotic time and postoperative pain score were not increased in the overweight patients in the intracorporeal reconstruction group. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 2 (2.2%) patients in the intracorporeal reconstruction group and 4 (3.3%) patients in the extracorporeal reconstruction group. Anastomotic stricture occurred in 1 (1.1% and 0.8%) patient in each group. There was no significant difference in the overall postoperative complication rate between the 2 groups. Conclusions: The modified intracorporeal purse-string stapling technique for EJ during laparoscopic total gastrectomy is a safe and viable option, exhibiting less invasiveness and comparable outcomes to the extracorporeal reconstruction method, especially suitable for obese patients.

Evaluation of Alternate Laparoscopic Stapling Device for Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

As laparoscopic bariatric surgical techniques have matured, the incidence of complications has decreased over time. Surgical stapling devices are commonly used for resection and anastomosis of gastric tissue during bariatric surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess and compare complication rates and clinical outcomes between patient cohorts using 2 different approved stapling devices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical outcomes were retrospectively compared for patients undergoing bariatric surgery between April 2019 and December 2020 using laparoscopic surgical stapling device A (LSSD-A) against outcomes between January 2017 and September 2018 using laparoscopic surgical stapling device B (LSSD-B). Tradenames for LSSD-A and LSSD-B were AEON Endostapler and Endo GIA with Tri-Staple Technology, respectively.

RESULTS

In all, 814 patients underwent laparoscopic bariatric operation using LSSD-A and 1034 using LSSD-B. Laparoscopic surgery included sleeve gastrectomy (n=1359, 73.5%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n=425, 23.0%), and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy with gastric sleeve (n=64, 3.5%). Stapler-related complications were evenly distributed over the 20.9-month LSSD-B study period. No stapler-related complications were seen in the last 13 months of the LSSD-A study period, during which time 428 (52.5%) laparoscopic bariatric operations were performed. One staple line leak was observed, occurring in the LSSD-B group. Patients undergoing laparoscopic RYGB with LSSD-A had fewer overall complications, fewer transfusions, and fewer reoperations for staple line bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Both LSSD-A and LSSD-B were safe and effective in the performance of laparoscopic bariatric operations with low complication rates and comparable clinical performance in sleeve gastrectomy and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy with gastric sleeve. Statistically significant differences in complication rates were observed in RYGB favoring LSSD-A.

Different Methods of Minimally Invasive Esophagojejunostomy After Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Outcomes from Two Experienced Centers

BACKGROUND

Esophagojejunostomy after minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG) for gastric cancer (GC) is technically challenging. Failure of the esophagojejunal anastomosis can lead to significant morbidity, leading to short- and long-term quality of life (QoL) impairment or mortality. The optimal reconstruction method following MITG remains controversial. We evaluated outcomes of minimally invasive esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic or robotic total gastrectomies.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed MITG patients between 2015 and 2020 at two high-volume centers in China and the United States. Eligible patients were divided into groups by different reconstruction methods. We compared clinicopathologic characteristics, postoperative outcomes, including complication rates, overall survival rate (OS), disease-free survival rate (DFS), and patient-reported QoL.

RESULTS

GC patients (n = 105) were divided into intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (IEJ, n = 60) and extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EEJ, n = 45) groups. EEJ had higher incidence of wound infection (8.3% vs 13.3%, P = 0.044) and pneumonia (21.7% vs 40.0%, P = 0.042) than IEJ. The linear stapler (LS) group was inferior to the circular stapler (CS) group in reflux [50.0 (11.1-77.8) vs 44.4 (0.0-66.7), P = 0.041] and diarrhea [33.3 (0.0-66.7) vs 0.0 (0.0-66.7), P = 0.045] while LS was better than CS for dysphagia [22.2 (0.0-33.3) vs 11.1 (0.0-33.3), P = 0.049] and eating restrictions [33.3 (16.7-58.3) vs 41.7 (16.7-66.7), P = 0.029] at 1 year. OS and DFS did not differ significantly between LS and CS.

CONCLUSIONS

IEJ anastomosis generated better results than EEJ. LS was associated with a better patient eating experience, but more diarrhea and reflux compared with CS. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes show the superiority of IEJ with the LS reconstruction method in MITG for GC.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery with Open Surgery for Remnant Gastric Cancer: A Multi-institutional Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Despite growing evidence of the effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for primary gastric cancer, MIS for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains controversial due to the rarity of the disease. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncological outcomes of MIS for radical resection of RGC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with RGC who underwent surgery between 2005 and 2020 at 17 institutions were included, and a propensity score matching analysis was performed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of MIS with open surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 327 patients were included in this study and 186 patients were analyzed after matching. The risk ratios for overall and severe complications were 0.76 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45, 1.27] and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.32, 1.29), respectively. The MIS group had significantly less blood loss [mean difference (MD), -409 mL; 95% CI: -538, -281] and a shorter hospital stay (MD, -6.5 days; 95% CI: -13.1, 0.1) than the open surgery group. The median follow-up duration of this cohort was 4.6 years, and the 3-year overall survival were 77.9% and 76.2% in the MIS and open surgery groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.78; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.36]. The 3-year relapse-free survival were 71.9% and 62.2% in the MIS and open surgery groups, respectively (HR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.44, 1.16).

CONCLUSIONS

MIS for RGC showed favorable short- and long-term outcomes compared to open surgery. MIS is a promising option for radical surgery for RGC.

A novel method of anvil placement of circular stapler for esophagojejunostomy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: results of consecutive 200 cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer is still a demanding operation because of technical difficulties, especially of intracorporeal esophago-jejunal anastomosis.

METHODS

We introduced a newly designed method of anvil placement of circular stapling devices (CS) for laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy (EJS). A small incision was made on the anterior wall of the stomach, from which the anvil was inserted into the stomach and proceeded to the thoracic esophagus. Then, the abdominal esophagus was transected by a linear stapler, and the anvil into the esophagus was drawn back to the esophageal stump by pulling out the cotton tape pre-attached to the anvil. Intracorporeal EJS by Roux-en-Y reconstruction was performed by CS inserted into the abdominal cavity from the umbilical wound.

RESULTS

A total of consecutive 200 gastric cancer patients underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy using this method. There was no operative mortality. Anastomotic complications occurred in 12 cases (6.0%): 9 cases of stenosis (4.5%) and 3 cases of bleedings (1.5%). Anastomotic leakage was not observed. As for non-anastomotic complications, there occurred 2 pulmonary complications (1.0%), 3 pancreatic leakages (1.5%), and 8 bowel obstructions due to internal hernia (4.0%). With a median follow-up period of 47.1 months, 5-year overall survival for assessable patients (n = 193) was 60.3% (95% CI 52.6-67.2). The total rate of peritoneal recurrence was 9.8%.

CONCLUSION

Our new method of anvil placement for laparoscopic EJS with CS is safe and feasible with favorable survival outcomes. It eliminates the need for suturing, and will promote the clinical application of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

CLINICAL TRIALS

UMIN000046119.

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.

Jejunal Mesentery Preservation Reduces Leakage at Esophagojejunostomy After Minimally Invasive Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

PURPOSE

The mesentery of the jejunum (MJ) of the Roux limb is conventionally divided when Roux-en-Y reconstruction is performed after total gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC). However, the impact of dividing or preserving the MJ on anastomotic leakage (AL) at the esophagojejunostomy (EJS) site after minimally invasive total gastrectomy for GC is unclear.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study enrolled 226 patients with GC who underwent EJS after laparoscopic or robotic total gastrectomy, including preservation of the MJ (n = 87) and division of the MJ (n = 137). The prevalence of anastomotic complications at the EJS and short-term outcomes were compared between groups using propensity score (PS) matching.

RESULTS

After PS matching, 69 patients were selected for the preserving and dividing MJ groups. There were no significant intergroup differences in patient backgrounds, including oncological stage, body mass index, and gender ratio. After PS matching, overall and severe complications after surgery were compared between the preserving and dividing MJ groups (21.7% vs. 27.5%, p = 0.554 and 8.7% vs. 13.8%, p = 0.137, respectively). However, the rate of AL at the EJS was significantly lower in the preserving than that in the dividing MJ group (1.4% vs. 13.0%, p = 0.017). In addition, the median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the preserving than that in the dividing MJ group (13.0 days vs. 16.0 days, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Preserving the MJ significantly reduced AL at the EJS after minimally invasive total gastrectomy for GC.

Modified -shaped esophagojejunostomy in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a report of 40 consecutive cases from a single center

Objective

Intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy remains a challenging technique in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) because of the lack of an established standard anastomosis method. However, π-shaped esophagojejunostomy in TLTG is reportedly safe and feasible. Therefore, we evaluated the short-term surgical outcomes of our modified π-shaped esophagojejunostomy in TLTG.

Methods

This study involved patients without neoadjuvant therapy diagnosed with gastric cancer who underwent TLTG by the same surgeon with modified π-shaped esophagojejunostomy from April 2018 to October 2019. Clinicopathologic data were collected and retrospectively analyzed.

Results

Forty patients diagnosed with gastric cancer were included. The mean operative time and estimated blood loss were 264.6 ± 56.9 minutes and 68.5 ± 53.3 mL, respectively. Postoperative flatus occurred at 4.6 ± 1.7 days. The mean time to resumption of diet was 7.4 ± 1.7 days postoperatively. One patient was diagnosed with anastomotic leakage and managed with conservative therapy. Pleural effusion was the most common complication, occurring in four (10%) patients. One patient developed intra-abdominal bleeding that required reoperation. Other complications were atrial fibrillation and wound infection. No mortality occurred during the 6-month follow-up.

Conclusions

Modified π-shaped esophagojejunostomy is safe and feasible for intracorporeal anastomosis in TLTG and showed favorable surgical outcomes in this study.

Mesenteric closure after laparoscopic total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction is effective for prevention of internal hernia: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Internal hernia (IH) is one of the critical complications after gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction, which can be prevented by closing mesenteric defects. However, only few studies have investigated the incidence of IH after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with Roux-en-Y reconstruction for gastric cancer till date. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of defect closure for the prevention of IH after LTG.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective cohort study collected data from 714 gastric cancer patients who underwent LTG with Rou-en-Y reconstruction between 2010 and 2016 in 13 hospitals. We evaluated the incidence of postoperative IH by comparing closure and non-closure groups of Petersen's defect, jejunojejunostomy mesenteric defect, and transverse mesenteric defect.

RESULTS

The closure group for Petersen's defect included 609 cases, while the non-closure group included 105 cases. The incidence of postoperative IH in the closure group for Petersen's defect was significantly lower than it was in the non-closure group (0.5% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001). The closure group for jejunojejunostomy mesenteric defect included 641 cases, while the non-closure group included 73 cases. The incidence of postoperative IH in the closure group of jejunojejunostomy mesenteric defect was significantly lower than that in the non-closure group (0.8% vs. 4.1%, p = 0.004). Out of 714 patients, 41 underwent retro-colic reconstruction. No patients in the transverse mesenteric defect group developed IH.

CONCLUSION

Mesenteric defect closure after LTG with Roux-en-Y reconstruction may reduce postoperative IH incidence. Endoscopic surgeons should take great care to prevent IH by closing mesenteric defects.

Comparison Between Linear Stapler and Circular Stapler After Laparoscopic-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy in Patients With Gastric Cancer

Background and Aim

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy distal gastrectomy using a linear stapler compared with a circular stapler in patients with gastric cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 173 patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer at a single center from January 2018 to December 2020. Patients were categorized into the linear stapler group and the circular stapler group. General data, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, postoperative pathological results, postoperative complications, and postoperative follow-up in the two groups were compared and analyzed.

Results

The operation time (208.76 ± 32.92 vs. 226.69 ± 26.92 min, p &lt; 0.05), anastomosis time (71.87 ± 9.50 vs. 90.56 ± 3.18 min, p &lt; 0.05), time to first flatus (68.60 ± 25.96 vs. 76.16 ± 21.05 h, p &lt; 0.05), time to the first sip of water (3.66 ± 0.61 vs. 4.07 ± 0.77 days, p &lt; 0.05), and time to the first liquid diet (4.43 ± 1.02 vs. 5.03 ± 1.70 days, p &lt; 0.05) were significantly shorter in the linear stapler group. In addition, the highest postoperative body temperature within 3 days (37.4 ± 0.61 vs. 37.7 ± 0.61, p &lt; 0.05) after the operation, white blood cell count (WBC) on the 3rd day (9.07 ± 2.52 vs. 10.01 ± 2.98 × 10∧9/L, p &lt; 0.05), and average gastric tube drainage within 3 days (36.65 ± 24.57 vs. 52.61 ± 37 ml, p &lt; 0.05) were also significantly lower in the linear stapler group.

Conclusions

Both circular and linear staplers are safe and feasible for gastrointestinal reconstruction in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. In contrast, a linear stapler has advantages over a circular stapler in shortening operation time and accelerating the postoperative recovery of patients.

Early experience with total robotic D2 gastrectomy in a low incidence region: surgical perspectives

Background

Few European centers have reported on robotic gastrectomy for malignancy. We report our early experience with curative-intent total robotic gastrectomy.

Materials and methods

The Intuitive Surgery Da Vinci Surgical System Xi 4 armed robot was used. Routine D2 lymphadenectomy was applied.

Results

Some 27 patients with adenocarcinoma (n = 18), hereditary cancer susceptibility (n = 8) and premalignancy (n = 1) were allocated to robotic gastrectomy, three were excluded due to inoperability during surgery. Median (range) age was 66 (18–87) years, 14 (58.3%) were females and body mass index was 25.5 (22.1–33.5) kg/m². Total gastrectomy was performed in 19 (79.2%) and subtotal in five (20.8%) patients. One (4.2%) procedure was converted to laparotomy. Procedural time was 273 (195–427) minutes. Three (12.5%) patients were reoperated within 30 days, one (4.2%) died. Serious complications (Clavien Dindo IIIb or more) occurred in three (12.5%) patients. Postoperative hospital stay was 10 (6–43) days. Fourteen of 16 (87.5%) patients with adenocarcinoma/premalignancy received radical resections. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 20 (11–34). Eleven (73.3%) patients with adenocarcinoma had T3/T4 tumors and 6 (40%) had TNM stage III or more.

Conclusion

Total robotic D2 gastrectomy appears feasible and safe during early introduction in a low incidence region.

Comparative Outcomes of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy and Open Gastrectomy for Scirrhous Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for scirrhous gastric cancer (GC) as a unique subtype also known as type 4 gastric cancer or linitis plastica.

Background

Although data on the efficacy and safety of LG as an alternative to OG are emerging, the applicability of LG to scirrhous GC remains unclear.

Methods

Patients with clinical type 4 GC undergoing gastrectomy at 13 hospitals from 2005 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. As the primary endpoint, we compared overall survival (OS) between the LG and OG groups. To adjust for confounding factors, we used multivariate Cox regression analysis for the main analyses and propensity-score matching for sensitivity analysis. Short-term outcomes and recurrence-free survival were also compared.

Results

A total of 288 patients (LG, 62; OG, 226) were included in the main analysis. Postoperative complications occurred in 25.8% and 30.1%, respectively (P = 0.44). No significant difference in recurrence-free survival was observed (P = 0.72). The 5-year OS rates were 32.4% and 31.6% in the LG and OG groups, respectively (P = 0.60). The hazard ratio (LG/OG) for OS was 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.43) in the multivariate regression analysis. In the sensitivity analyses after propensity-score matching, the hazard ratio for OS was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.58-1.45).

Conclusions

Considering the hazard ratios and 95% CIs for OS, LG for scirrhous GC was not associated with worse survival than that for OG.

Morbidity and Mortality of Laparoscopic vs Open Total Gastrectomy for Clinical Stage I Gastric Cancer: The CLASS02 Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for the treatment of gastric cancer remains uncertain given the lack of high-level clinical evidence.

Objective

To compare the safety of LTG for clinical stage I gastric cancer with that of conventional open total gastrectomy (OTG).

Design, Setting, and Participants

The Chinese Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (CLASS) Group CLASS02 study was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial that compared the safety of LTG vs OTG with lymphadenectomy for patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer. From January 2017 to September 2018, a total of 227 patients were enrolled. Final follow-up was in October 2018.

Interventions

Eligible patients were randomized to LTG (n = 113) or OTG (n = 114) by an interactive web response system.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the morbidity and mortality within 30 days following surgeries between LTG and OTG with a noninferiority margin of 10%. The secondary outcomes were recovery courses and postoperative hospital stays.

Results

A total of 214 patients were analyzed for morbidity and mortality (105 patients in the LTG group and 109 patients in the OTG group). The mean (SD) age was 59.8 (9.4) years in the LTG group and 59.4 (9.2) years in the OTG group, and most were male (LTG group, 75 of 105 [71.4%]; OTG group, 80 of 109 [73.4%]). The overall morbidity and mortality rates were not significantly different between the groups (rate difference, -1.1%; 95% CI, -11.8% to 9.6%). Intraoperative complications occurred in 3 patients (2.9%) in the LTG group and 4 patients (3.7%) in the OTG group (rate difference, -0.8%; 95% CI, -6.5% to 4.9%). In addition, there was no significant difference in the overall postoperative complication rate of 18.1% in the LTG group and 17.4% in the OTG group (rate difference, 0.7%; 95% CI, -9.6% to 11.0%). One patient in the LTG group died from intra-abdominal bleeding secondary to splenic artery hemorrhage. However, there was no significant difference in mortality between the LTG group and the OTG group (rate difference, 1.0%; 95% CI, -2.5% to 5.2%), and the distribution of complication severity was similar between the 2 groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of the CLASS02 trial showed that the safety of LTG with lymphadenectomy by experienced surgeons for clinical stage I gastric cancer was comparable to that of OTG.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03007550.

Intraoperative gastroscopy to determine proximal resection margin during totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with upper third gastric cancer

Background

In totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG), it is usually difficult to determine the proximal margin. Therefore, the present study evaluated the usefulness of intraoperative gastroscopy for direct marking of the tumor proximal margin during TLG for cancer in the upper third of the stomach.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 52 patients with gastric cancer who underwent TLG from January 2018 to May 2020. The proximal margin of tumors was determined by intraoperative gastroscopic methods.

Results

Patients were divided into short (1 cm) and long (2 cm) groups according to the distance to the proximal margin of the tumor. Participants consisted of 41 males and 11 females with a median age of 63.5 years. Tumors involving the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) occurred in 27 patients. Siewert type II and III tumors were present in 42 and 10 patients, respectively. The median operative time was 244 min. The long group had a statistically significant lower frequency of positive margin than the short group (0% vs. 17.4%, P=0.033). Total gastrectomy was performed in 35 patients, and 17 patients received proximal gastrectomy. No complications associated with the procedure occurred in any patient.

Conclusions

Intraoperative endoscopic views for tumor proximal localization can be used effectively during TLG for patients with upper third gastric cancer. Our results indicate that a distance of ≥2 cm from the proximal resection margin to the tumor was necessary to achieve a negative resection margin. In the future, this may be used as an alternative to frozen section diagnosis.

Feasibility and quality of life assessment of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy using double-tract reconstruction

PURPOSE

As the frequency of cancer in the proximal stomach or around the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) increases worldwide, the use of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) has expanded. This study evaluated the safety of LPG with double-tract reconstruction (LPG-DT) and the resulting quality of life (QOL) of patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed the data of patients who underwent LPG-DT via linear-stapled esophagojejunostomy for gastric or EGJ cancer between 2013 and 2019, and outcomes were compared with those of laparoscopic total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (LTG-RY) peMME000372rformed over the same period. Surgical outcomes, changes of nutritional parameters, and chronological QOL as evaluated using the Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS-37) questionnaire were compared in the propensity-matched cohorts.

RESULTS

In total, 289 patients (99 LPG-DT and 190 LTG-RY) were eligible and the outcomes were evaluated in the propensity-matched cohorts (n = 75 each). Operative time and the incidence of complications (≥ grade III) were comparable. Reflux esophagitis was more frequent in the LPG-DT group (8.0% vs. 0%), whereas the incidence of anastomotic stricture did not differ. The percentage rates of body weight loss and hemoglobin reduction were lower in the LPG-DT group at any time point within postoperative 2 years but show no statistical differences. In PGSAS-37 (n = 26, n = 23), the diarrhea and quality of ingestion scores were slightly better in the LPG-DT group.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggested that our LPG-DT is feasible and safe in appropriately selected patients, and it may provide slightly better outcomes in nutrition and QOL compared with LTG-RY.