Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Air Force Medical University, Xinsi Road No.1, Baqiao District, Xi'an, 710038, China.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2021 Jul;25(7):1667-1676. doi: 10.1007/s11605-020-04806-0. Epub 2020 Sep 28.
Studies comparing the incidence of reflux esophagitis (RE) and patients' quality of life (QoL) when using circular stapler (CS) and linear stapler (LS) in esophagojejunostomy (EJS) after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) are rare, and certainly there are not enough to make a definitive decision on best practice. Presented herein is a study on the comparison of the short-term outcomes, QoL of the patients with the focus on the incidence of RE after both linear and circular stapling in LTG.
From January 2014 to October 2018, 120 patients were analyzed; of these, 42 patients underwent laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) with CS (CS group) and 78 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) with LS (LS group). We examined the results obtained in terms of perioperative outcomes, reflux-related assessments (GerdQ questionnaire and endoscopy findings with all cases; 24-h pH monitoring with limited cases), and EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22. In addition, questionnaires were also supplied to patients and the results were recorded.
The incidence of anastomotic stenosis (7.1% vs. 0; P < 0.05) and the median intraoperative blood loss (180.0 vs. 100.0 mL; P < 0.05) of the CS group were higher than the LS group. The factor aside, no significant differences were observed between the two groups with regard to the incidence of RE assessed by the QLQ-STO22 reflux scale, the GerdQ scores, endoscopy (in all cases), or the percent time of pH > 7 (in limited cases) (P > 0.05). In the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22, it was noted that the score of constipation [0 (0, 0) vs. 0 (0, 33.3); P = 0.028] and postoperative dysphagia [0 (0, 0) vs. 0 (0, 22.2); P = 0.046] of the LS group in a 1-year follow-up were lower than the CS group.
TLTG with LS generated better results than LATG with CS in terms of the incidence of anastomotic stenosis, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative constipation and dysphagia. Furthermore, when compared with circular stapling, linear stapling in EJS did not increase the incidence of RE assessed by the QLQ-STO22 reflux scale, the GerdQ scores, endoscopy (in all cases), or the percent time of pH > 7 (in limited cases).
比较腹腔镜全胃切除术后使用圆形吻合器(CS)和线性吻合器(LS)行食管空肠吻合术(EJS)时反流性食管炎(RE)发生率和患者生活质量(QoL)的研究很少,而且肯定不足以确定最佳实践。本文介绍了一项关于 LS 和 CS 行 LTG 后短期结果和患者 QoL 的比较研究,重点是 RE 的发生率。
2014 年 1 月至 2018 年 10 月,分析了 120 例患者,其中 42 例行腹腔镜辅助全胃切除术(LATG)+CS(CS 组),78 例行完全腹腔镜全胃切除术(TLTG)+LS(LS 组)。我们检查了围手术期结果、反流相关评估(GerdQ 问卷和所有病例的内镜检查结果;有限病例的 24 小时 pH 监测)和 EORTC QLQ-C30 和 QLQ-STO22。此外,还向患者提供了问卷,并记录了结果。
CS 组的吻合口狭窄发生率(7.1%比 0;P<0.05)和术中出血量中位数(180.0 比 100.0 毫升;P<0.05)均高于 LS 组。除了这些因素,两组之间在 QLQ-STO22 反流量表评估的 RE 发生率、GerdQ 评分、内镜(所有病例)或 pH 值>7 的时间百分比(有限病例)(P>0.05)方面无显著差异。在 EORTC QLQ-C30 和 QLQ-STO22 中,LS 组在 1 年随访中便秘评分[0(0,0)比 0(0,33.3);P=0.028]和术后吞咽困难评分[0(0,0)比 0(0,22.2);P=0.046]较低。
与 LATG+CS 相比,LS+TLTG 在吻合口狭窄、术中出血量、术后便秘和吞咽困难方面的效果更好。此外,与 CS 相比,EJS 中 LS 并不增加 QLQ-STO22 反流量表评估的 RE 发生率、GerdQ 评分、内镜检查(所有病例)或 pH 值>7 的时间百分比(有限病例)。