Liu BY, Wu S, Xu Y. Clinical efficacy and safety of double-channel anastomosis and tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis in gastrectomy. World J Gastrointest Surg 2024; 16(7): 2012-2022 [PMID: 39087109 DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v16.i7.2012]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Yu Xu, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, No. 134 East Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou 350013, Fujian Province, China. doctorxuyu2020@yeah.net
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Cohort Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastrointest Surg. Jul 27, 2024; 16(7): 2012-2022 Published online Jul 27, 2024. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v16.i7.2012
Clinical efficacy and safety of double-channel anastomosis and tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis in gastrectomy
Bei-Ying Liu, Shuai Wu, Yu Xu
Bei-Ying Liu, Department of Operation Room, The Affiliated Hospital, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, Sichuan Province, China
Shuai Wu, Department of Urology, Qingdao Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences (Qingdao Municipal Hospital), Qingdao 266001, Shangdong Province, China
Yu Xu, Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou 350013, Fujian Province, China
Author contributions: Xu Y wrote the manuscript; Liu BY collected the data and guided the study; Wu S reviewed, edited, and approved the final manuscript and revised it critically for important intellectual content, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Institutional review board statement: This study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Fujian Provincial Hospital.
Informed consent statement: Informed written consent was obtained from the patients or their families.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest for this article.
Data sharing statement: Statistical analysis plan, informed consent form, and clinical study report will also be shared if requested. E-mails could be sent to the address below to obtain the shared data: doctorxuyu2020@yeah.net.
STROBE statement: The authors have read the STROBE Statement-checklist of items, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the STROBE Statement-checklist of items.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Yu Xu, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, No. 134 East Street, Gulou District, Fuzhou 350013, Fujian Province, China. doctorxuyu2020@yeah.net
Received: February 3, 2024 Revised: May 6, 2024 Accepted: May 28, 2024 Published online: July 27, 2024 Processing time: 169 Days and 17.8 Hours
Core Tip
Core Tip: This study compared the clinical efficacy and safety of double-channel anastomosis and tubular gastroesophageal anastomosis in proximal gastrectomy. The clinical data of the patients, including surgical indications, surgical methods, postoperative complications, and follow-up results, were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the differences in surgical treatment effect and postoperative safety between the two anastomotic methods. This study focused on indicators such as the postoperative complication rate, incidence of anastomotic fistula, postoperative discharge time, nutritional status, and quality of life during long-term follow-up to comprehensively compare the advantages and disadvantages of the two surgical methods and provide a reference for clinicians to choose the best treatment plan.
