scholarly journals CLINICAL EVALUATION OF NARROW GASTRIC TUBE RECONSTRUCTION AFTER PROXIMAL GASTRECTOMY

2008 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 995-1002
Author(s):  
Kenji SAKOGAWA ◽  
Yasutomo NAGASUE ◽  
Shuhei ITO ◽  
Norifumi TSUTSUMI ◽  
Yasushi SUMIYOSHI ◽  
...  
BMC Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiguo Li ◽  
Yan Ma ◽  
Guiting Liu ◽  
Ming Fang ◽  
Yingwei Xue

Abstract Objective Proximal gastrectomy acts as a function-preserving operation for upper-third gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term surgical outcomes between proximal gastrectomy with gastric tube reconstruction and proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition reconstruction in upper-third gastric cancer. Methods A retrospective review of 301 patients who underwent proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition (JI) or gastric tube (GT) at Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital between June 2007 and December 2016 was performed. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and Visick grade were used to evaluate postgastrectomy syndromes. Gastrointestinal fiberoscopy was used to evaluate the prevalence and severity of reflux esophagitis based on the Los Angeles (LA) classification system. Results The JI group had a longer operation time than the GT group (220 ± 52 vs 182 ± 50 min), but no significant difference in blood loss was noted. Compared to the GT group, the Visick grade and GSRS score were significantly higher. Reflux esophagitis was significantly increased in the GT group compared with the JI group. Conclusion Proximal gastrectomy is well tolerated with excellent short-term outcomes in patients with upper-third gastric cancer. Compared with GT construction, JI construction has clear functional advantages and may provide better quality of life for patients with upper-third gastric cancer.


1999 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 468-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yosuke Adachi ◽  
Takeshi Katsuta ◽  
Masanori Aramaki ◽  
Akio Morimoto ◽  
Norio Shiraishi ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norio Shiraishi ◽  
Ryuichiro Hirose ◽  
Akio Morimoto ◽  
Katsunori Kawano ◽  
Yosuke Adachi ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 2343-2348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryuusuke Aihara ◽  
Erito Mochiki ◽  
Teturo Ohno ◽  
Mituhiro Yanai ◽  
Yoshitaka Toyomasu ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yosuke Adachi ◽  
Tokuji Inoue ◽  
Yoshiaki Hagino ◽  
Norio Shiraishi ◽  
Katsuhiro Shimoda ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiguo Li ◽  
Yan Ma ◽  
Guiting Liu ◽  
Ming Fang ◽  
YingWei Xue

Abstract Objective: Proximal gastrectomy was acted as a function-preserving operation for upper third gastric cancer. The aim of this study is to compare the surgical short-term outcomes between proximal gastrectomy with gastric tube reconstruction and proximal gastrectomy with Jejunal interposition reconstruction in the upper third gastric cancer. Methods: A retrospective review of 301 patients who underwent proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition (JI) or gastric tube (GT) at the Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital between June 2007 and December 2016 was performed. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and Visick grade were used to evaluate the post-gastrectomy syndromes. The gastrointestinal fiberoscopy was used to evaluate the prevalence and severity of reflux esophagitis by Los Angeles (LA) classification system. Results: The JI group had a longer operation time than GT group (220±52 vs 182±50 min), whereas there was no significant difference in blood loss. Compared to the GT group, the Visick grade and GSRS score were significantly higher than that of the JI group. The reflux esophagitis of GT group was significantly higher than that of the JI group. Conclusion: Proximal gastrectomy is well tolerated, with excellent short-outcomes in patients with upper third gastric cancer . C ompared with GT construction, JI construction has clear functional advantages and may provide better quality of life for patients with upper third gastric cancer.


2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. e2016.00046 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshitake Ueda ◽  
Norio Shiraishi ◽  
Manabu Toujigamori ◽  
Hidefumi Shiroshita ◽  
Tsuyoshi Etoh ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-145
Author(s):  
M. Sakai ◽  
R. Muranushi ◽  
H. Saito ◽  
K. Kuriyama ◽  
T. Yoshida ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document