Billroth-II modified with hinged anti-peristaltic afferent loop versus Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A propensity-score match analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of modified Billroth-II with a hinged anti-peristaltic afferent loop by comparing it with the Roux-en-Y method. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 344 patients with gastric cancer who underwent distal gastrectomy between 2016 and 2021. Propensity score matching was conducted to balance baseline characteristics. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, there were 117 patients in each group. The Billroth-II group was significantly better regarding operating time (184.7 vs 225.3 minutes), postoperative hospital stays (7.9 vs 9.2 days), and time to semi-solid diet tolerance (2.8 vs 3.8 days). The Billroth-II group demonstrated comparable results with the Roux-en-Y group in weight loss, hemoglobin changes, reflux esophagitis, food residue, and gastritis severity. Presentation of bile in gastric remnant was significantly higher in the Billroth-II group (42.9% vs 10.3%). CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in functional outcomes between Billroth-II and Roux-en-Y reconstructions. The Billroth-II was superior to Roux-en-Y in operating time, hospital stays, and time to semi-solid diet tolerance. The Billroth-II could be considered an acceptable alternative reconstruction after distal gastrectomy.

Long-term Results of Totally Laparoscopic Near-total Gastrectomy for Middle-third Gastric Cancer.

PURPOSE: In recent years, laparoscopic near-total gastrectomy (LnTG) has emerged as a surgical option for gastric cancer in the middle-third of the stomach. However, its application in locally advanced stages presents technical challenges. This study aims to provide a detailed analysis of the operative outcomes and long-term functional and oncological results of totally LnTG in combination with D2 lymphadenectomy for middle-third gastric cancer. PATIENTS AND METHOD: A prospective study was conducted on 79 patients who underwent totally LnTG and D2 lymphadenectomy for middle-third gastric cancer between January 2017 and December 2021. Short-term outcomes included operative characteristics, and the evaluation of gastroesophageal reflux and gastric remnant condition using endoscopy based on the Los Angeles (LA) and Residue-Gastritis-Bile classifications. Long-term oncological outcomes included overall survival and disease-free survival. RESULTS: Totally LnTG was successfully performed in 98.7% of patients without intraoperative complications or conversions to laparotomy. The mean operation time was 202.2±43.0 min, and the median blood loss was 50 (50;100) mL. The overall incidence of postoperative morbidities was 16.5%, with one patient experiencing a narrowing of the gastrojejunostomy, successfully treated by endoscopic balloon dilation. All patients had tumor-free resection margins, and there were no mortalities. The 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 80% and 55%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Totally LnTG is an effective and feasible approach for gastric cancer in the middle-third of the stomach, yielding favorable short-term outcomes and acceptable long-term results. Routine application of totally LnTG for middle-third gastric cancer is practical and promising.

Surgical outcomes and quality of life assessment of esophagectomy for cancer with colon conduit via retrosternal route.

PURPOSE: Colon conduit is an alternative to a gastric conduit for esophagectomy in patients that stomach is not available. Surgical technique is complex and has a high risk of morbidities and mortality. Outcomes of patients are still lacking in the literature, thus aims of this study are to evaluate the safety, feasibility and long-term functional outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer with colon conduit via retrosternal route. METHODS: Twenty-six patients underwent operation between August 2016 and June 2021 for malignancies. Minimally invasive esophagectomy and laparotomy were performed in accordance with the 2017 Japan Esophageal Society's guidelines. Colonic interposition was used for esophageal replacement. Outcomes were technical success, complications assessed using Clavien-Dindo classification, and patient's quality of life (QOL) based on EORTC-QOL-OES18 questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean age was 56.0 ± 9.9 years and 21 patients (80.8%) were men. Mean operating time was 432 ± 66 min. Technical success was 100%. The average number of resected lymph nodes was 26 ± 14. Twelve patients (46.2%) experienced postoperative complications: 7/12 were classified as grade I-II, 3/12 as grade III, 1/12 as grade IV, and 1/12 as grade V (death). Patient's QOL improved during the follow-up period with median (25-75th percentiles) global EORTC-QOL-OES18 score was 29 (17-34); 13 (9-21), and 9 (6-16) at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. During the follow-up period, there were 4 late complications, 3 lymphatic recurrences, 5 distant metastases, and 6 deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Colon conduit via retrosternal route after esophagectomy is feasible, safe, and could provide acceptable long-term functional outcomes.

Long-Term Outcomes of Open Versus Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for T4a Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer (GC) has been applied more frequently worldwide but is still controversial for patients with serosal invasion (T4a). This study compared short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal radical gastrectomy (LDG) with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for T4a GC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively studied 472 patients with T4a gastric adenocarcinoma in the lower or middle third of the stomach: 231 underwent LDG and 241 underwent ODG between 2013 and 2020. Short-term outcomes included operative characteristics and complications. Long-term outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline characteristics between groups. RESULTS: The PSM strategy resulted in 294 patients (147 in each group). The LDG group had a significantly longer operating time (mean: 200 vs 190 min, p = 0.001) but reduced blood loss (mean: 50 vs 100 ml, p = 0.001). The LDG group had a higher rate of any postoperative complication (23.1% vs 12.2%, p = 0.021) but most were classified as grades I-II according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Grade III-V complications were similar between groups. Five-year OS was 69% versus 60% (p = 0.109) and 5-year DFS was 58% vs 53% (p = 0.3) in LDG and ODG groups, respectively. For tumor size < 5 cm, LDG was better in reduction of blood loss, postoperative hospital length of stay, and OS. CONCLUSIONS: LDG is feasible and safe for patients with T4a GC and is comparable to ODG regarding short- and long-term outcomes. Furthermore, LDG can be a favorable option for T4a GC smaller than 5 cm.