Yang L, Wu J Z, You J, Fan L, Jing C Q, Wang Q, Yan S, Yu J, Zang L, Xing J D, Hu W Q, Liu Fenglin
Department of General Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China.
Department of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China.
Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2022 Sep 1;60(9):838-845. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20220418-00175.
To examine the clinical efficacy of 3 anti-reflux methods of digestive tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. The clinical data and follow-up data of gastric cancer patients who underwent anti-reflux reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy in 11 medical centers of China from September 2016 to August 2021 were retrospectively collected, including 273 males and 65 females, aging of (63±10) years (range: 28 to 91 years). Among them, 159 cases were performed with gastric tube anastomosis (GTA), 107 cases with double tract reconstruction (DTR), and 72 cases with double-flap technique (DFT), respectively. The duration of operation, length of postoperative hospital stay and early postoperative complications (referring to Clavien-Dindo classification) of different anti-reflux reconstruction methods were assessed. Body mass index, hemoglobin and albumin were used to reflect postoperative nutritional status. Reflux esophagitis was graded according to Los Angeles criteria based on the routinely gastroscopy within 12 months after surgery. The postoperative quality of life (QoL) was evaluated by Visick score system. The ANOVA analysis, Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test, χ test and Fisher's exact test were used for comparison between multiple groups, and further comparison among groups were performed with LSD, Tamhane's test or Bonferroni corrected χ test. The mixed effect model was used to compare the trends of Body mass index, hemoglobin and albumin over time among different groups. The operation time of DFT was significantly longer than that of GTA and DTR ((352±63) minutes (221±66) minutes, (352±63) minutes (234±61) minutes, both <0.01). The incidence of early complications with Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅱ to Ⅴ in GTA, DFT and DTR groups was 17.0% (27/159), 9.7% (7/72) and 10.3% (11/107), respectively, without significant difference among these three groups (χ=3.51, =0.173). Body mass index decreased more significantly in GTA than DFT group at 6 and 12 months after surgery (mean difference=1.721 kg/m, 0.01; mean difference=2.429 kg/m, <0.01). body mass index decreased significantly in DTR compared with DFT at 12 months after surgery (mean difference=1.319 kg/m, =0.027). There was no significant difference in hemoglobin or albumin fluctuation between different reconstruction methods perioperative. The incidence of reflux esophagitis one year after surgery in DTR group was 12.9% (4/31), which was lower than that in DFT (45.9% (17/37), χ=8.63, =0.003). Follow-up of postoperative quality of life showed the incidence of Visick grade 2 to 4 in DFT group was lower than that in GTA group (10.4% (7/67) 34.6% (27/78), χ=11.70, =0.018), while there was no significant difference between DFT and DTR group (10.4% (7/67) 22.2% (8/36, >0.05). Compared with GTA and DTR, DFT is more time-consuming, but there is no significant difference in early complications among three methods. DFT reconstruction is more conducive to maintain postoperative nutritional status and improve QoL, especially compared with GTA. The risk of reflux esophagitis after DTR reconstruction is lower than that of DFT.
探讨胃癌近端胃切除术后3种消化道重建抗反流方法的临床疗效。回顾性收集2016年9月至2021年8月在中国11家医疗中心行近端胃切除术后抗反流重建的胃癌患者的临床资料和随访资料,其中男性273例,女性65例,年龄(63±10)岁(范围:28至91岁)。其中,分别有159例行胃管吻合术(GTA),107例行双通道重建术(DTR),72例行双瓣技术(DFT)。评估不同抗反流重建方法的手术时长、术后住院时间及术后早期并发症(参照Clavien-Dindo分级)。采用体质指数、血红蛋白和白蛋白反映术后营养状况。根据洛杉矶标准,基于术后12个月内常规胃镜检查对反流性食管炎进行分级。采用Visick评分系统评估术后生活质量(QoL)。多组间比较采用方差分析、Kruskal-Wallis秩和检验、χ检验和Fisher确切检验,组间进一步比较采用LSD、Tamhane检验或Bonferroni校正χ检验。采用混合效应模型比较不同组间体质指数、血红蛋白和白蛋白随时间的变化趋势。DFT的手术时间显著长于GTA和DTR((352±63)分钟对(221±66)分钟,(352±63)分钟对(234±61)分钟,均P<0.01)。GTA、DFT和DTR组Clavien-DindoⅡ至Ⅴ级早期并发症发生率分别为17.0%(27/159)、9.7%(7/72)和10.3%(11/107),三组间差异无统计学意义(χ=3.51,P=0.173)。术后6个月和12个月时,GTA组体质指数下降幅度比DFT组更显著(平均差值=1.721kg/m²,P<0.01;平均差值=2.429kg/m²,P<0.01)。术后12个月时,DTR组体质指数较DFT组显著下降(平均差值=1.319kg/m²,P=0.027)。不同重建方法围手术期血红蛋白或白蛋白波动无显著差异。DTR组术后1年反流性食管炎发生率为12.9%(4/31),低于DFT组(45.9%(17/37),χ=8.63,P=0.003)。术后生活质量随访显示,DFT组Visick 2至4级发生率低于GTA组(10.4%(7/67)对34.6%(27/78),χ=11.70,P=0.018),而DFT组与DTR组间差异无统计学意义(10.4%(7/67)对22.2%(8/36),P>0.05)。与GTA和DTR相比,DFT耗时更长,但三种方法早期并发症无显著差异。DFT重建更有利于维持术后营养状况并改善生活质量,尤其是与GTA相比。DTR重建术后反流性食管炎风险低于DFT。