Original Articles
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2001.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 15, 2001; 7(2): 281-284
Published online Apr 15, 2001. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v7.i2.281
Table 1 Comparison of operation manner with numbers of lymph nodes, time for operation, amount of blood transfusion during operation, hospitalization days and complications (-x±sx)
Manners of operationN (1200)Numbers lymph nodesTime for operation (h)Amount of blood transfusion (mL)Hospitalization stays (days)Complication (%)Positive resection margin (%)
Distal gastrectomy76811.7 ± 0.3*3.3 ± 0.04426.5 ± 17.1*16.9 ± 0.79.13.8
Proximal gastrectomy via abdomen729.6 ± 0.44.0 ± 0.1*629.5 ± 43.3*18.3 ± 1.517*8.2*
Proximal gastrectomy via thorax2648.2 ± 0.23.3 ± 0.03771.5 ± 19.515.5 ± 0.61.68.7*
Total gastrectomy9613.8 ± 0.7*4.6 ± 0.1*768.2 ± 47.619.8 ± 1.712.99.3*
P< 0.0001< 0.0001< 0.0001> 0.05< 0.001= 0.01
Table 2 Comparison of depth of infiltration with age, diameter, hemoglobin, and lymphatic metastasis rate (-x±sx)
Depth of invasionN (1200)Age (yrs)Diameter (cm)Hemoglobin(g/L)Lymphatic metastasis rate (%)
pT1(m)11451.6 ± 1.22.3 ± 0.412.1 ± 0.33.2 ± 0.8
pT1(ms)6555.7 ± 1.5*2.5 ± 0.711.3 ± 0.4*4.1 ± 1.3
pT29156.8 ± 1.4*3.1 ± 0.311.2 ± 0.1*9.8 ± 1.6*
pT39557.1 ± 1.2*4.2 ± 0.6*11.4 ± 0.2*20.4 ± 2.9*
pT483556.9 ± 0.3*5.6 ± 0.1*11.2 ± 0.1*37.1 ± 1.2*
P< 0.003< 0.0001< 0.001< 0.0001
Table 3 Comparison of differentiation with age, diameter, hemoglobin and lymphatic metastasis rate (-x±sx)
DifferentiationN (1200)Age (yrs)Diameter (cm)Hemoglobin (g/L)Lymphatic metastasis rate (%)
I3761.4 ± 1.43.5 ± 0.210.7 ± 0.410.3 ± 3.2*
II16157.9 ± 0.84.1 ± 0.311.1 ± 0.126.1 ± 2.5
III32958.6 ± 0.74.2 ± 0.211.2 ± 0.322.7 ± 1.4
IV67353.2 ± 0.3*4.9 ± 0.3*11.8 ± 0.1*33.6 ± 1.2*
P< 0.0001= 0.004= 0.01< 0.0001
Table 4 Comparison of tumor site with age, diameter, hemoglobin and positive lymph node rate (-x±sx)
Location of tumorN (1200)Age (yrs)Diameter (cm)Hemoglobin (g/L)Lymphatic metastasis rate (%)
Pylorus2754.3 ± 2.93.9 ± 0.712.6 ± 0.713.9 ± 3.2
Antrum37956.6 ± 0.5*4.6 ± 0.211.5 ± 0.326.3 ± 1.4
Incisura37254.2 ± 0.43.3 ± 0.412.5 ± 0.122.5 ± 1.3
Corpus9155.2 ± 1.26.4 ± 0.5*12.2 ± 0.438.3 ± 4.2*
Fundus33159.8 ± 0.6*5.6 ± 0.2*12.8± 0.235.1 ± 1.9*
P< 0.0001< 0.0001> 0.005< 0.001
Table 5 Comparison of sex with tumor location, differentiation, depth of invasion and positive lymph node rate (-x±sx)
SexLocation (%)
Differentiation (%)
Depth of invasion (%)
Frequency of metastatic lymph node (%)
ProximalMiddleDistalWellMiddleBadpT1pT2pT3< 30> 30
Male (836)31240183052148786436
Female (364)40325132166157785644
P< 0.001< 0.001> 0.05= 0.01
Table 6 Multi-factors analysis of lymphatic metastasis in gastric patients
Related factorsRegression coefficientStandard errorStandard regression coefficientP
Constant-24.37.10.001
Age-0.0061440.079-0.220.438
Sex-6.4892.027-0.0920.001
Tumor location2.3260.7800.0870.003
Diameter of tumor2.3680.4590.1650.0001
Depth of invasion7.0430.7860.2850.0001
Differentiation3.6871.1460.0940.001