Esophagojejunostomy With Linear Staplers in Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy: Experience With 168 Cases in 5 Consecutive Years. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017;27:e101-e107. [PMID: 28902037 DOI: 10.1097/sle.0000000000000464]

Comparison of the safety of esophagojejunal overlap and π-shaped anastomosis in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Globally, totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy is increasingly being accepted by surgeons for the treatment of gastric cancer. Overlap anastomosis and π-shaped anastomosis are the two most commonly used anastomosis methods in total laparoscopic surgery; however, their safety and suitability for the population are still unclear.

METHODS

A total of 162 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent total laparoscopic total gastrectomy with overlap or π-shaped anastomosis were retrospectively analyzed. The intraoperative conditions and postoperative complications were compared.

RESULTS

A significant difference in the tumor location was found between the two groups (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found in the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay between the two anastomosis methods (p > 0.05); however, the π-shaped anastomosis group had more postoperative anastomotic leakage (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Overlap anastomosis is recommended as the preferred anastomosis for totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy, and π-shaped anastomosis can be applied to non-gastroesophageal junction cancer with lower tumor location.

Comparison of short-term and long-term clinical effects of modified overlap anastomosis and conventional incision-assisted anastomosis in laparoscopic total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

To compare short-term and long-term clinical effects of modified overlap anastomosis and conventional incision-assisted anastomosis for laparoscopic total gastrectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients with gastric cancer admitted to the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University from January 2016 to March 2020. Quality of life, intraoperative and postoperative conditions were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional assisted group, the modified overlap group showed a shorter auxiliary incision, milder postoperative pain, shorter time to the first postoperative anal exhaust, shorter time to the first postoperative liquid food intake, and shorter postoperative stay. There were no differences between the two groups regarding operation time, esophagus-jejunum anastomosis time, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected, and length of the upper incision margin. There were no differences between the two groups regarding postoperative early and late complications. There were no differences between the two groups regarding the QLQ-C30 scale three years after the operation. The scores of the QLQ-STO22 scale 3 years after the operation showed significantly lower scores for dysphagia and feeding limit in the modified overlap group than those in the conventional assisted anastomosis group. There was no recurrence in the modified overlap group but one patient in the conventional assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with modified overlap anastomosis have better minimal invasiveness and faster post-operative recovery than conventional incision-assisted anastomosis.

Short-term outcomes of different esophagojejunal anastomotic techniques during laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different techniques have been described for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer. Linear stapled techniques include overlap (OL) and functional end-to-end anastomosis (FEEA) while single staple technique (SST), hemi-double staple technique (HDST), and OrVil® are circular stapled approaches. Nowadays, the choice among techniques for EJ depends on operating surgeon personal preference.

PURPOSE

To compare short-term outcomes of different EJ techniques during LTG.

METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analysis. OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® were compared. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to measure relative inference.

RESULTS

Overall, 3177 patients (20 studies) were included. The technique for EJ was SST (n = 1026; 32.9%), OL (n = 826; 26.5%), FEEA (n = 752; 24.1%), OrVil® (n = 317; 10.1%), and HDST (n = 196; 6.4%). AL was comparable for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.82; 95% CrI 0.47-1.49), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.55; 95% CrI 0.27-1.21), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.54; 95% CrI 0.32-1.22), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.65; 95% CrI 0.28-1.63). Similarly, AS was similar for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.46; 95% CrI 0.18-1.28), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.89; 95% CrI 0.39-2.15), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.14-1.02), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.61; 95% CrI 0.31-1.21). Anastomotic bleeding, time to soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay, and mortality were comparable while operative time was reduced for FEEA.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis shows similar postoperative AL and AS risk when comparing OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® techniques. Similarly, no differences were found for anastomotic bleeding, operative time, soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality.

Feasibility and Potential of Reduced Port Surgery for Total Gastrectomy With Overlap Esophagojejunal Anastomosis Method

PURPOSE

Reduced port surgery (RPS) for gastric cancer has been frequently reported in distal gastrectomies but rarely in total gastrectomies. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of 3-port totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) with overlapping esophagojejunal (EJ) anastomosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 81 patients who underwent curative TLTG for gastric cancer (36 and 45 patients with 3-port and 5-port TLTG, respectively) were evaluated. All 3-port TLTG procedures were performed with the same method as 5-port TLTG, including EJ anastomosis with the intracorporeal overlap method using a linear stapler, except for the number of ports and assistants. Short-term outcomes, including the number of lymph nodes (LNs) harvested by station and postoperative complications, were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Clinical characteristics were not significantly different among the groups, except that the 3-port TLTG group was younger and had a lower rate of pulmonary comorbidity. There were no cases of open conversion or additional port placement. All operative details and the number of harvested LNs did not differ between the groups, but the rate of suprapancreatic LN harvest was higher in the 3-port TLTG group. No significant differences were observed in the overall complication rates between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-port TLTG with overlapping EJ anastomoses using a linear stapler is a feasible RPS procedure for total gastrectomy to treat gastric cancer.

Short-term outcomes after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with esophagojejunostomy constructed by π-shaped method versus overlap method

BACKGROUND

Regarding the overlap anastomosis and recently introduced π-shaped anastomosis, there is no consensus on which intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EJS) methods are preferred using linear stapler in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG). This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes using two methods.

METHODS

Patients with upper gastric cancer underwent TLTG with either π-shaped (n = 48) or the modified overlap method using knotless barbed sutures (MOBS) (n = 37) were included in our study. Intraoperative and perioperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

All patients achieved R0 resection margin. The overall esophagojejunal (E-J)-related complications rate was 7.06%. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of postoperative complications, margin distance, numbers of lymph nodes (LNs), length of stay. In the π-shaped group, anastomosis time (19.61 ± 7.17 min vs. 27.09 ± 3.59 min, p < 0.001) was significantly lower. The consumable costs for surgery were similar (44 507.74¥ [42 933.03-46 937.29] vs. 43 718.36¥ [42 743.25-47 256.06], p = 0.825). The first defection time was significantly longer in π-shaped group (131.00 h [93.75-171.25] vs. 100.00 h [85.00-120.00], p = 0.026), whereas the other postoperative recovery parameters were similar. No mortality was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Both methods showed similar short-term postoperative outcomes. The π-shaped technique was faster than the MOBS method without significantly increasing the supplies costs. Large prospective studies are warranted.

Digestive tract reconstruction of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a comparison of the intracorporeal overlap, intracorporeal hand-sewn anastomosis, and extracorporeal anastomosis

Background

The application of esophagojejunostomy has certain difficulties in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG). This is due to the higher requirement for surgical techniques and the lack of any unified standards. This study aim to explore the practicability and safety of intracorporeal overlap and intracorporeal hand-sewn anastomosis compared with extracorporeal anastomosis.

Methods

The clinical pathological data of 56 patients who underwent TLTG from March 2016 to December 2020 in the Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. According to the method of anastomosis, the patients were divided into the overlap (n=36) and the hand-sewn anastomosis (n=20). Patients who receive laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG; n=74) formed the control group. The basic clinical data, and intraoperative and postoperative results of the patients were assessed.

Results

Compared with the control group, the overlap anastomosis and hand-sewn anastomosis groups showed no significant differences in clinicopathological data and short-term postoperative recovery. There were no significant differences between the overlap and the control group in operation time nor anastomosis time. However, the anastomosis time of the hand-sewn anastomosis group was significantly prolonged compared to the control group (53.20±14.14 vs. 43.01±12.53 minutes, P=0.002). Compared with the control group, the operation cost was significantly higher in the overlap group (CNY 81,300±6,100 vs. CNY 76,600±6,800, P=0.001), but significantly lower in the hand-sewn anastomosis group (CNY 71,900±1,700 vs. CNY 76,600±6,800, P=0.003). Early postoperative complications occurred in 5 cases (13.9%) in the overlap group, 3 cases (15.0%) in the hand-sewn anastomosis group, and 11 cases (14.9%) in the control group. There were 3 cases (8.3%) of postoperative anastomotic-related complications in the overlap group. No anastomotic-related complications were observed in the hand-sewn anastomosis group.

Conclusions

The overlap anastomosis and hand-sewn anastomosis are practical and safe. Furthermore, the overlap anastomosis may be more suitable for patients with lower cardia and fundic lesions. The hand-sewn method has a wider range of indications pending advanced surgical skills, and is an effective supplementary technique for instrument anastomosis.

Impact of Esophagojejunal Reconstruction without Division of the Mesentery for Total Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of total laparoscopic total gastrectomy without mesentery division (LTG without MD) and conventional total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (CLTG), as well as evaluate the appropriate method for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) reconstruction after total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG).

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data from 301 consecutive patients who underwent TLTG for upper or middle third gastric cancer between January 2016 and May 2019. After propensity score matching, 95 patients who underwent LTG without MD and 95 who underwent CLTG were assessed. Data on clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes, including operation time, length of postoperative hospital stay, pathological findings, and postoperative complications were analyzed.

Results

The LTG without MD group showed a shorter time to first flatus (3.26±0.80 vs. 3.62±0.81 days, P=0.003) and a shorter time to soft diet (2.80±2.09 vs. 3.52±2.20 days, P=0.002). The total EJ-related complications in the LTG without MD group were comparable to those in the CLTG group (9.47% vs. 3.16%, P=0.083). EJ-related leakage (6.32% vs. 3.16%, P=0.317) and EJ-related stricture (3.16% vs. 1.05%, P=0.317) rates were not significantly different between the LTG without MD and CLTG groups. No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of other early surgical outcomes such as early complications, late complications, hospital stay, and readmission rate.

Conclusions

LTG without MD is a safe surgical treatment for upper or middle third gastric cancer. LTG without MD may be an alternative procedure for EJ anastomosis during TLTG.

Reduced anastomotic complications with intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy using endoscopic linear staplers (overlap method) in laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

With advances in surgical technique and instrumentation, intracorporeal anastomosis is increasingly being performed for laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). However, the benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis in reducing postoperative complications have not been demonstrated, although its technical feasibility has been proven in many studies. In this study, we investigated the impact of intracorporeal anastomosis in reducing postoperative complications after LTG.

METHODS

We analyzed 410 consecutive gastric cancer patients who underwent LTG between 2008 and 2018. Of these, 118 underwent intracorporeal anastomosis using linear staplers (overlap method), while 292 underwent extracorporeal anastomosis using a circular stapler. Short-term surgical outcomes including postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The two groups showed no significant differences in age, sex, comorbidity, and abdominal surgery history. D2 lymph node dissection was more frequently performed in the intracorporeal group because of the presence of more advanced cancer stages. The overall morbidity in the intracorporeal and extracorporeal group was 23.7% and 27.7%, respectively (p = 0.405). However, the intracorporeal group showed a significantly lower incidence of late complications (0.8% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.008). Concerning complications, the incidence of anastomotic bleeding (0% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.008) and anastomotic stenosis (0% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.024) was significantly lower in the intracorporeal group. In univariate and multivariate analyses, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and operative bleeding were independent predictive factors for postoperative complications in patients who underwent intracorporeal anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Intracorporeal anastomosis using linear staplers reduced anastomotic bleeding and stenosis compared to extracorporeal anastomosis after LTG. Future research will be required to determine the ideal method for intracorporeal anastomosis in LTG.

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.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy with and without prophylactic drains in gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The number of patients who are undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy for treating gastric cancer is increasing. Although prophylactic drains have been widely employed following the procedure, there are few studies reporting the efficacy of prophylactic drainage. Therefore, this study assessed the efficacy of prophylactic drains following laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Data of patients who received laparoscopic gastrectomy for treating gastric cancer in our institution between April 2011 and March 2017 were reviewed, and the outcomes of patients with and without a prophylactic drainage were compared. Propensity score matching was used to minimize potential selection bias.

RESULTS

A total of 779 patients who underwent surgery for gastric cancer were reviewed; of these, 628 patients who received elective laparoscopic gastrectomy were included in this study. After propensity score matching, data of 145 pairs of patients were extracted. No significant differences were noted in the incidence of postoperative complications between the drain and no-drain groups (19.3% vs 11.0%, P = 0.071). The days after the surgery until the initiation of soft diet (6.3 ± 7.4 vs 4.9 ± 2.9 days, P = 0.036) and the length of postoperative hospital stay (15.7 ± 12.9 vs 13.0 ± 6.3 days, P = 0.023) were greater in the drain group than those in the no-drain group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that routinely using prophylactic drainage following laparoscopic gastrectomy for treating gastric cancer is not obligatory.

Comparison of the safety and efficacy between linear stapler and circular stapler in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Total gastrectomy is often recommended for upper body gastric cancer, and totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) is deemed to be a promising surgical method with the well-known advantages such as less invasion and fast recovery. However, the anastomosis between oesophagus and jejunum is the difficulty of TLTG. Although staplers have promoted the development of TLTG, the choice of suitable staplers to complete oesophagojejunostomy is controversial and unclear. Therefore, a higher level of research evidence is needed to compare the two types of staplers in terms of safety and efficacy for oesophagojejunostomy in TLTG among patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang Databases will be comprehensively searched from January 1990 to July 2019. All eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs or observational studies comparing the two types of staplers will be included. A meta-analysis will be performed using Review Manager V.5.3 software to compare the safety and efficacy of linear and circular staplers for oesophagojejunostomy in TLTG. The primary outcomes are anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, anastomotic haemorrhage. The secondary outcomes include time to first instance of passing gas after surgery, first feeding time, total operation time, reconstruction time, estimated blood loss. The heterogeneity of this study will be assessed by p values and I² statistic. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be used to explore and explain the heterogeneity. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane tool or the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval will not be required because this proposed systematic review and meta-analysis is based on previously published data, which does not include intervention data on patients. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at a relevant congress.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018111680.

Comparison of Intracorporeal and Extracorporeal Esophagojejunostomy after Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Based on Short-Term Outcomes

Background:

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is increasingly performed in patients with gastric cancer. However, the usage of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (IEJ) following LTG is limited, as the safety and efficacy remain unclear. The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of IEJ following LTG.

Methods:

Studies published from January 1994 to January 2017 comparing the outcomes of IEJ and extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EEJ) following LTG were reviewed and collected from the PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI). Operative results, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications were compared and analyzed. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Review Manager 5.3.

Results:

Seven nonrandomized studies with 785 patients were included. Compared with EEJ, IEJ has less blood loss (WMD: −13.52 ml; 95% CI: −24.82–−2.22; P = 0.02), earlier time to first oral intake (WMD: −0.49 day; 95% CI: −0.83–−0.14; P < 0.01), and shorter length of hospitalization (WMD: −0.62 day; 95% CI: −1.08–−0.16; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between IEJ and EEJ regarding the operation time, anastomotic time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, time to first flatus, anastomosis leakage rate, anastomosis stenosis rate, and proximal resections (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions:

Compared with EEJ, IEJ has better cosmesis, milder surgical trauma, and a faster postoperative recovery. IEJ can be performed as safely as EEJ. IEJ should be encouraged to surgeons with sufficient expertise.