Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 21, 2017; 23(39): 7129-7138
Published online Oct 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i39.7129
Published online Oct 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i39.7129
Table 1 Characteristics, merit and demerit of different esophagojejunostomy anastomosis techniques
Anastomosis surgeon | Characteristics | Merit | Demerit |
Uyama et al[12] | The anastomosis line is vertical with esophageal long axis | Anastomotic is large enough | The number of anastomosis linear staplers is much |
Jejunum is located in the right side of the esophagus. | |||
Matsui et al[37] | Complete the anastomosis before severed esophagus | The number of anastomosis linear staplers is reduced | Probably develop dysphagia 6 mo after operation |
Close the stoma and resect specimens at the same time | |||
Jejunum is located in the right side of the esophagus | |||
Lee et al[13] | Suture esophagus, jejunum and right angle of diaphragm after anastomosis | Reduce the incidence of esophageal hiatal hernia and anastomotic fistula | Increase the operation time |
Jejunum is located in the right side of the esophagus | |||
Okabe et al[38] | Before anastomosis, the specimens was removed | The size of anastomotic stoma is bigger | The technique is difficult |
Jejunum is located in the left side of the esophagus | |||
Inaba et al[29] | Overlap anastomosis | Isoperistaltic anastomosis meets the physiological needs | The jejunum is free and difficult for anastomosis |
Divide the jejunum before anastomosis | |||
Matsui et al[39] | Overlap anastomosis | Isoperistaltic anastomosis meets the physiological needs | The jejunum is free and difficult for anastomosis |
Divide the esophagus after anastomosis |
Table 2 Structure of EORTC QLC-C30 and EORTC QLQ-STO22
Scale | Number of constituting items |
EORTC QLQ-C30 | |
Global health status/QoL scale1 | 2 |
Functional scales1 | |
Physical functioning | 5 |
Role functioning | 2 |
Emotional functioning | 4 |
Cognitive functioning | 2 |
Social functioning | 2 |
Symptom scales2 | |
Fatigue | 3 |
Nausea and vomiting | 2 |
Pain | 2 |
Dyspnoea | 1 |
Insomnia | 1 |
Appetite loss | 1 |
Constipation | 1 |
Diarrhoea | 1 |
Financial difficulties | 1 |
EORTC-QLQ-STO222 | |
Dysphagia | 3 |
Chest and abdominal pain | 4 |
Reflux | 3 |
Eating restrictions | 4 |
Anxieties | 3 |
Dry mouth | 1 |
Taste problem | 1 |
Body image | 1 |
Hair loss | 2 |
Table 3 Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients in the two groups
All patients | Propensity-matched patients | |||||
Group T (n = 51) | Group A (n = 456) | P value | Group T (n = 51) | Group A (n = 102) | P value | |
Age (mean ± SD, yr) | 55.5 ± 12.1 | 61.6 ± 11.2 | < 0.001 | 55.5 ± 12.1 | 55.9 ± 11.0 | 0.916 |
Gender | < 0.001 | 1.000 | ||||
Male | 34 | 345 | 34 | 68 | ||
Female | 17 | 111 | 17 | 34 | ||
Charlson comorbidity index | 0.281 | 0.608 | ||||
0 | 48 | 418 | 48 | 92 | ||
1-2 | 3 | 38 | 3 | 10 | ||
BMI (mean ± SD, kg/m2) | 22.5 ± 13.1 | 22.3 ± 13.5 | 0.919 | 22.5 ± 13.1 | 22.6 ± 12.8 | 0.965 |
Tumor size (mean ± SD, cm) | 4.5 ± 1.5 | 4.9 ± 1.3 | 0.041 | 4.5 ± 1.5 | 4.7 ± 1.7 | 0.142 |
Tumor location | < 0.001 | 0.177 | ||||
Upper third | 4 | 188 | 4 | 12 | ||
Middle third | 34 | 169 | 34 | 76 | ||
Whole | 13 | 99 | 13 | 14 | ||
Histology type | 0.453 | 0.482 | ||||
Differentiation | 47 | 416 | 47 | 97 | ||
Undifferentiation | 4 | 40 | 4 | 5 | ||
Preoperative albumin (mean ± SD, g/L) | 40.8 ± 4.3 | 39.1 ± 5.2 | 0.025 | 40.8 ± 4.3 | 40.6 ± 4.6 | 0.796 |
Depth of infiltration (T) | 0.174 | 0.643 | ||||
T1 | 15 | 82 | 15 | 23 | ||
T2 | 8 | 83 | 8 | 18 | ||
T3 | 10 | 135 | 10 | 16 | ||
T4a | 18 | 166 | 18 | 45 | ||
Nodal status (N) | 0.729 | 0.534 | ||||
N0 | 21 | 190 | 21 | 34 | ||
N1 | 11 | 77 | 11 | 18 | ||
N2 | 5 | 66 | 5 | 10 | ||
N3 | 14 | 123 | 14 | 40 | ||
UICC stage | 0.319 | 0.502 | ||||
I | 13 | 78 | 13 | 18 | ||
II | 17 | 159 | 17 | 40 | ||
III | 21 | 219 | 21 | 44 |
Table 4 Operative variables of the patients
All patients | Propensity-matched patients | |||||
Group T (n = 51) | Group A (n = 456) | P value | Group T (n = 51) | Group A (n = 102) | P value | |
Operative time, min (mean ± SD) | 209.3 ± 41.0 | 203.6 ± 49.3 | 0.427 | 209.3 ± 41.0 | 200.5 ± 55.6 | 0.318 |
Blood loss, mL (mean ± SD) | 48.3 ± 38.5 | 98.4 ± 149.1 | 0.017 | 48.3 ± 38.5 | 105.4 ± 147.9 | 0.008 |
Harvested LNs (mean ± SD) | 44.5 ± 15.0 | 41.2 ± 14.2 | 0.237 | 44.5 ± 15.0 | 42.6 ± 15.2 | 0.465 |
Time to first flatus, days (mean ± SD) | 3.8 ± 1.2 | 3.5 ± 1.7 | 0.220 | 3.8 ± 1.2 | 3.6 ± 1.2 | 0.332 |
Time to fluid diet, days (mean ± SD) | 5.6 ± 1.4 | 5.6 ± 1.6 | 1 | 5.6 ± 1.4 | 5.5 ± 1.9 | 0.739 |
Postoperative days (mean ± SD) | 12.6 ± 4.3 | 14.7 ± 8.9 | 0.097 | 12.6 ± 4.3 | 15.4 ± 8.9 | 0.035 |
hospitalization costs, yuan | 75450 ± 20038 | 73308 ± 21932 | 0.505 | 75450 ± 20038 | 70407 ± 13254 | 0.065 |
Chemotherapy | 33 | 310 | 0.635 | 33 | 78 | 0.123 |
Table 5 Morbidity and mortality associate with anastomosis
All patients | Propensity-matched patients | |||||
Group T, % (n = 456) | Group A, % (n = 51) | P value | Group T, % (n = 102) | Group A, % (n = 51) | P value | |
Morbidity | 1 (2.0) | 27 (5.9) | 0.893 | 1 (1.9) | 6 (11.8) | 0.552 |
Anastomotic fistula | 1 | 22 | 1 | 4 | ||
Anastomotic hemorrhage | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||
Anastomotic obstruction | 0 | 4 | 0 | 2 | ||
Mortality | 0 | 0 | / | 0 | 0 | / |
Table 6 Constituent items of pain of EORTC-QLQ-C30 and dysphagia of EORTC-QLQ-STO22 as compared between group T and group A
Propensity-matched patients | |||
Group T (n = 44) | Group A (n = 89) | P value | |
Constituent items of pain of EORTC-QLQ-C30 | |||
Have you felt pain? | 0.018 | ||
Not at all | 28 | 66 | |
A little | 12 | 7 | |
Quite a lot | 3 | 14 | |
Very much | 1 | 2 | |
Have your life affected by pain? | 0.271 | ||
Not at all | 39 | 73 | |
A little | 4 | 7 | |
Quite a lot | 1 | 9 | |
Very much | 0 | 0 | |
Constituent items of dysphagia of EORTC-QLQ-STO22 | |||
Have you felt difficult to eat solid food? | 0.039 | ||
Not at all | 26 | 31 | |
A little | 11 | 32 | |
Quite a lot | 7 | 21 | |
Very much | 0 | 5 | |
Have you felt difficult to eat liquid of soft food? | 0.275 | ||
Not at all | 38 | 67 | |
A little | 5 | 15 | |
Quite a lot | 1 | 7 | |
Very much | 0 | 0 | |
Have you felt difficult to drink water? | 0.194 | ||
Not at all | 39 | 80 | |
A little | 5 | 5 | |
Quite a lot | 0 | 4 | |
Very much | 0 | 0 |
- Citation: Huang ZN, Huang CM, Zheng CH, Li P, Xie JW, Wang JB, Lin JX, Lu J, Chen QY, Cao LL, Lin M, Tu RH, Lin JL. Digestive tract reconstruction using isoperistaltic jejunum-later-cut overlap method after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Short-term outcomes and impact on quality of life. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23(39): 7129-7138
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v23/i39/7129.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i39.7129