Pylorus-preserving Proximal Gastrectomy vs. Total Gastrectomy with Jejunal Interposition for Proximal Gastric Adenocarcinomas

2002 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seung Moo Noh ◽  
Hyun Yong Jeong ◽  
Byong Seok Lee ◽  
June Sik Cho ◽  
Kyung Sook Shin ◽  
...  
2004 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 271-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinji Homma ◽  
Kenji Satoh ◽  
Hitoshi Matsuo ◽  
Minoru Yagi ◽  
Jun Hasegawa ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 558-564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isao Nozaki ◽  
Shinji Hato ◽  
Takaya Kobatake ◽  
Koji Ohta ◽  
Yoshirou Kubo ◽  
...  

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.


1992 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-18
Author(s):  
Shunichi Tsujitani ◽  
Yoshihiro Kakeji ◽  
Akihiro Watanabe ◽  
Yoshihiko Maehara ◽  
Motonosuke Furusawa ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaixuan Zhu ◽  
Yingying Xu ◽  
Jiaxin Fu ◽  
Farah Abdidahir Mohamud ◽  
Zongkui Duan ◽  
...  

Background. To determine the ideal surgical approach (total gastrectomy (TG) vs. proximal gastrectomy (PG)) for Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG), we searched and analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data. Methods. Patients with Siewert type II AEG treated by TG or PG were identified from the 2004–2014 SEER dataset. We obtained the patients’ overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) and stratified the patients by surgical approach. We performed a propensity score 1 : 1 matching (PSM) analysis and a univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model. Results. A total of 2,217 patients with 6th AJCC stage IA–IIIB Siewert type II AEG was examined: 1,584 patients (71.4%) underwent PG, and 633 patients (28.6%) underwent TG. The follow-up time was 1–131 months. OS favored total gastrectomy before the PSM analysis (χ2=3.952, p=0.047), but after this analysis, there was no significant difference between TG and PG (χ2=2.227, p=0.136). The univariate and multivariate analyses identified age as an independent factor, and an X-tail analysis revealed 70 years as a cut-off point. The patients aged≥70 years obtained a significant long-term OS benefit from PG compared to TG (χ2=8.245, p=0.004), and those aged<70 years showed no difference between TG and PG (χ2=0.167, p=0.682). Conclusions. PG showed an equivalent survival benefit to TG in both the early and locally advanced stages of Siewert type II AEG. For elderly patients, PG is strongly recommended because of its clearer OS benefit compared to TG.


2014 ◽  
Vol 61 (1.2) ◽  
pp. 23-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
TARO ISOBE ◽  
KOUSUKE HASHIMOTO ◽  
JUNYA KIZAKI ◽  
SATORU MATONO ◽  
NAOTAKA MURAKAMI ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 191-194
Author(s):  
Kenji Kakisako ◽  
Yoichi Tamura ◽  
Takeshi Katsuta ◽  
Tetsuji Kai ◽  
Hideyuki Tanimura ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document