Short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy : a systematic review and meta-analysis
© 2024. The Author(s)..
BACKGROUND: The optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of various reconstruction methods.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched to identify comparative studies concerning the reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy. The reconstruction methods were classified into six groups: double tract reconstruction (DTR), esophagogastrostomy (EG), gastric tube reconstruction (GT), jejunal interposition (JI), jejunal pouch interposition (JPI) and double flap technique (DFT). Esophagogastric anastomosis group (EG group) included EG, GT and DFT, while esophagojejunal anastomosis group (EJ group) included DTR, JI and JPI.
RESULTS: A total of 27 studies with 2410 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that the incidences of reflux esophagitis of DTR, EG, GT, JI, JPI and DFT were 7.6%, 27.3%, 4.5%, 7.1%, 14.0%, and 9.1%, respectively. The EG group had more reflux esophagitis (OR = 3.68, 95%CI 2.44-5.57, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 1.58, 95%CI 1.02-2.45, P = 0.04) than the EJ group. But the EG group showed shorter operation time (MD=-56.34, 95%CI -76.75- -35.94, P < 0.00001), lesser intraoperative blood loss (MD=-126.52, 95%CI -187.91- -65.12, P < 0.0001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=-2.07, 95%CI -3.66- -0.48, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, the EG group had fewer postoperative complications (OR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.51-0.90, P = 0.006) and lesser weight loss (MD=-1.25, 95%CI -2.11- -0.39, P = 0.004). For specific reconstruction methods, there were lesser reflux esophagitis (OR = 0.10, 95%CI 0.06-0.18, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 0.14, 95%CI 0.06-0.33, P < 0.00001) in DTR than the esophagogastrostomy. DTR and esophagogastrostomy showed no significant difference in anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.34-3.01, P = 0.98).
CONCLUSION: Esophagojejunal anastomosis after proximal gastrectomy can reduce the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture, while esophagogastric anastomosis has advantages in technical simplicity and long-term weight status. Double tract reconstruction is a safe technique with excellent anti-reflux effectiveness and favorable quality of life.
REGISTRATION: This meta-analysis was registered on the PROSPERO (CRD42022381357).
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:24 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
BMC cancer - 24(2024), 1 vom: 10. Jan., Seite 56 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Li, Bailong [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Digestive tract reconstruction |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 12.01.2024 Date Revised 13.01.2024 published: Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1186/s12885-024-11827-4 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM366909983 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM366909983 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240114234851.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240114s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s12885-024-11827-4 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1258.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM366909983 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38200411 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Li, Bailong |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy |b a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 12.01.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 13.01.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2024. The Author(s). | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: The optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and long-term quality of life of various reconstruction methods | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched to identify comparative studies concerning the reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy. The reconstruction methods were classified into six groups: double tract reconstruction (DTR), esophagogastrostomy (EG), gastric tube reconstruction (GT), jejunal interposition (JI), jejunal pouch interposition (JPI) and double flap technique (DFT). Esophagogastric anastomosis group (EG group) included EG, GT and DFT, while esophagojejunal anastomosis group (EJ group) included DTR, JI and JPI | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: A total of 27 studies with 2410 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that the incidences of reflux esophagitis of DTR, EG, GT, JI, JPI and DFT were 7.6%, 27.3%, 4.5%, 7.1%, 14.0%, and 9.1%, respectively. The EG group had more reflux esophagitis (OR = 3.68, 95%CI 2.44-5.57, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 1.58, 95%CI 1.02-2.45, P = 0.04) than the EJ group. But the EG group showed shorter operation time (MD=-56.34, 95%CI -76.75- -35.94, P < 0.00001), lesser intraoperative blood loss (MD=-126.52, 95%CI -187.91- -65.12, P < 0.0001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=-2.07, 95%CI -3.66- -0.48, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, the EG group had fewer postoperative complications (OR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.51-0.90, P = 0.006) and lesser weight loss (MD=-1.25, 95%CI -2.11- -0.39, P = 0.004). For specific reconstruction methods, there were lesser reflux esophagitis (OR = 0.10, 95%CI 0.06-0.18, P < 0.00001) and anastomotic stricture (OR = 0.14, 95%CI 0.06-0.33, P < 0.00001) in DTR than the esophagogastrostomy. DTR and esophagogastrostomy showed no significant difference in anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.34-3.01, P = 0.98) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Esophagojejunal anastomosis after proximal gastrectomy can reduce the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture, while esophagogastric anastomosis has advantages in technical simplicity and long-term weight status. Double tract reconstruction is a safe technique with excellent anti-reflux effectiveness and favorable quality of life | ||
| 520 | |a REGISTRATION: This meta-analysis was registered on the PROSPERO (CRD42022381357) | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Systematic Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Digestive tract reconstruction | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Gastric cancer | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Proximal gastrectomy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Quality of life | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Short-term outcome | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wang, Yinkui |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Baocong |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Shan, Fei |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Ziyu |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t BMC cancer |d 2001 |g 24(2024), 1 vom: 10. Jan., Seite 56 |w (DE-627)NLM111431948 |x 1471-2407 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:2024 |g number:1 |g day:10 |g month:01 |g pages:56 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-11827-4 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 24 |j 2024 |e 1 |b 10 |c 01 |h 56 | ||