[Exploration of esophagojejunostomy after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy].

The advantages of lymph node dissection through total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) seem to be more and more accepted by the academic community. However, reconstruction of digestive tract is challenging and remains a focus of debate and research. Which way is better for esophagojejunostomy, circular stapler or linear stapler,remains to be answered. The authors believe that, under the conditions of existing anastomosis instruments, using of linear stapler for esophagojejunal side-to-side anastomosis may be the most common choice, but it must be used with strict indications, because there are still many problems to be solved. It is believed that with the breakthrough in the development of the circular stapler suitable for esophagojejunostomy in TLTG, the application of circular stapler for digestive tract reconstruction will become the mainstream again in future. Thus, the current routine clinical practice of TLTG should be cautious and the surgical indications should be strictly evaluated.

[Analysis on perioperative safety and feasibility of pure single-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer].

Objective: To investigate the safety and feasibility of pure single-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (SDG) in the radical treatment of gastric cancer. Methods: A retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted. Subjects were included in the study who were diagnosed by imaging examination and pathology as early distal gastric cancer, no distant metastasis, no serious cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases and underwent radical gastrectomy. Patients with incomplete clinical data, unplanned second operation and complicated with other tumors were excluded. A retrospective analysis was performed on 15 patients who underwent pure SDG radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer from September 2020 to March 2022, namely the SDG group. Fifty-eight patients undergoing conventional five-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer were included as the control group, namely the LDG group. As it was found that there was a statistically significant difference in baseline body mass index (BMI) between the two groups [(20.8±0.8) kg/m2 vs. (22.9±0.4) kg/m2, t=2.456, P=0.017], one-to-one PSM was conducted between the two groups. Then the basic conditions of the two groups of patients in perioperative period were analyzed and compared. Results: There were 14 patients after PSM in the SDG group and the LDG group respectively. There were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding, number of lymph nodes dissected, time to the first postoperative feeding and postoperative complications between the SDG group and the LDG group (all P>0.05). Compared with LDG group, the operative time in the SDG group was longer [(163.6±6.3) minutes vs. (133.9±4.4) minutes, t=3.866, P=0.001]. However, in the SDG group, time to the first flatus [(2.6±0.2) days vs. (3.3±0.1) days, t=3.053,P=0.005], time to drainage tube removal [(4.5±0.8) days vs. (6.9±0.2) days, t=2.914, P=0.007)] and postoperative hospital stay [(6.7±0.1) days vs. (9.2±1.0) days, t=2.534,P=0.018)] were significantly shorter, and pain score at the first postoperative day evaluated by NRS (1.86±0.29 vs. 2.86±0.35, t=2.205, P=0.037) was significantly lower as compared to the LDG group. Four patients in SDG group did not receive peritoneal drainage tube placement after surgery, and they all recovered safely. Conclusion: The pure single-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer is safe and feasible, and has an advantage over the LDG in postoperative recovery.

[Analysis and comparison of the clinical features and prognosis between extra - gastrointestinal stromal tumors and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors].

Objective: To investigate the differences of clinicopathological features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis between patients with extra-gastrointestinal stromal tumors (EGIST) and duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (DGIST). Methods: A retrospective case - control study was performed. Case inclusion criteria: (1) tumor confirmed by histology and pathology; (2) primary tumor locating in the extra - gastrointestinal tract or duodenum; (3) without other synchronous tumors; (4) complete clinical and pathological data. Clinical data of 20 EGIST patients and 32 DGIST patients from March 2011 to September 2016 at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine were retrospectively collected and analyzed. The observational parameters included clinicopathological characteristics, treatment and prognosis conditions. Continuous data of abnormal distribution were expressed as median (range) and compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the Log-rank test. Results: Of the 20 EGIST patients, 8 were males and 12 were females with age of 61.0 (30.0 to 86.0) years and of the 32 DGIST patients, 12 were males and 20 were females with age of 55.5 (27.0 to 70.0) years. Compared with DGIST patients, EGIST patients were older (U=188.000, P=0.012], had larger tumor size [10.0 (3.0 to 29.0) cm vs. 4.0 (1.5 to 10.0) cm, U=98.500, P<0.001] and higher ratio of high risk classification [85.0% (17/20) vs. 12.5% (4/32), χ(2)=26.870, P<0.001]. Among the 20 EGIST patients, 5 were diagnosed with distal metastasis and received imatinib (400 mg/d), and the other 15 patients underwent radical resection who were included in survival analysis. All the 32 DGIST patients underwent radical resection. The median follow-up of whole group was 43 (14 to 76) months. The 3-year recurrence/metastasis-free survival rate of 15 cases undergoing radical resection in the EGIST group was 85.6%, which was lower than that of the DGIST group (88.6%), and the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.745). There was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate between the EGIST group (92.9%) and the DGIST group (100%) (P=0.271). Conclusions: As compared to DGIST, EGIST mostly occurs in those with older age, larger tumor size and higher risk grade. The prognosis of EGIST patients after radical resection is similar to that of DGIST patients.