Ji Xin, Yan Yan, Bu Zhao-De, Li Zi-Yu, Wu Ai-Wen, Zhang Lian-Hai, Wu Xiao-Jiang, Zong Xiang-Long, Li Shuang-Xi, Shan Fei, Jia Zi-Yu, Ji Jia-Fu
Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, No. 52 Fucheng Road, Haidian District, Beijing, 100142, China.
Key laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Endoscopy, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, China.
BMC Cancer. 2017 May 19;17(1):345. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3343-0.
The optimal extent of gastrectomy for middle-third gastric cancer remains controversial. In our study, the short-term effects and longer-term survival outcomes of distal subtotal gastrectomy and total gastrectomy are analysed to determine the optimal extent of gastrectomy for middle-third gastric cancer.
We retrospectively collect and analyse clinicopathologic data and follow-up outcomes from a prospectively collected database at the Peking University Cancer Hospital. Patients with middle-third gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent curative resection are enrolled in our study.
We collect data of 339 patients between January 2005 and October 2011. A total of 144 patients underwent distal subtotal gastrectomy, and 195 patients underwent total gastrectomy. Patients in the total gastrectomy group have longer operative duration (P < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.001) than those in the distal subtotal gastrectomy group. In the total gastrectomy group, more lymph nodes are harvested (P < 0.001). Meanwhile, the rate of postoperative complications is lower in the distal subtotal gastrectomy group than in the total gastrectomy group (8% vs 15%, P = 0.047). Further analysis demonstrates that the rate of anastomosis leakage is lower in the distal subtotal gastrectomy group than in the total gastrectomy group (0% vs 4%, P = 0.023). Kaplan-Meier (log rank test) analysis shows a significant difference in overall survival between the two groups. The 5-year overall survival rates in the distal subtotal gastrectomy and total gastrectomy groups are 65% and 47%, respectively (P < 0.001). Further stage-stratified analysis reveals that no statistical significance exists in 5-year survival rate between the distal subtotal gastrectomy and total gastrectomy groups at the same stage. Multivariate analysis shows that age (P = 0.046), operation duration (P < 0.001), complications (P = 0.037), usage of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P < 0.001), tumor size (P = 0.012), presence of lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.043) and N stage (P < 0.001) are independent prognostic factors for survival.
For patients with middle-third gastric cancer, distal subtotal gastrectomy shortens the operation duration and postoperative hospital stay and reduces postoperative complications. Meanwhile, the long-term survival of patients with distal subtotal gastrectomy is similar to that of those with total gastrectomy at the same stage. The extent of gastrectomy for middle-third gastric cancer is not an independent prognostic factor for survival.
胃中部癌的最佳胃切除范围仍存在争议。在我们的研究中,分析了远端胃次全切除术和全胃切除术的短期效果及长期生存结果,以确定胃中部癌的最佳胃切除范围。
我们回顾性收集并分析了北京大学肿瘤医院前瞻性收集数据库中的临床病理数据及随访结果。纳入接受根治性切除的胃中部腺癌患者。
我们收集了2005年1月至2011年10月期间339例患者的数据。共有144例患者接受了远端胃次全切除术,195例患者接受了全胃切除术。全胃切除术组患者的手术时间(P<0.001)和术后住院时间(P=0.001)均长于远端胃次全切除术组。全胃切除术组切除的淋巴结更多(P<0.001)。同时,远端胃次全切除术组的术后并发症发生率低于全胃切除术组(8%对15%,P=0.047)。进一步分析表明,远端胃次全切除术组的吻合口漏发生率低于全胃切除术组(0%对4%,P=0.023)。Kaplan-Meier(对数秩检验)分析显示两组的总生存率存在显著差异。远端胃次全切除术组和全胃切除术组的5年总生存率分别为65%和47%(P<0.001)。进一步的分期分层分析显示,在同一分期下,远端胃次全切除术组和全胃切除术组的5年生存率无统计学差异。多因素分析显示,年龄(P=0.046)、手术时间(P<0.001)、并发症(P=0.037)、新辅助化疗的使用(P<0.001)、肿瘤大小(P=0.012)、淋巴管侵犯情况(P=0.043)和N分期(P<0.001)是生存的独立预后因素。
对于胃中部癌患者,远端胃次全切除术可缩短手术时间和术后住院时间,并减少术后并发症。同时远端胃次全切除术患者的长期生存与同期全胃切除术患者相似。胃中部癌的胃切除范围不是生存的独立预后因素。