Gastroduodenostomy after Distal Subtotal Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer Patients Comparison between manual and stapled anastomosis.
- Author:
Keun Won RYU
1
;
Boo Hwan HONG
;
Chong Suk KIM
;
Bum Hwan GOO
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Gastroduodenostomy;
CEEA stapler;
Gastric cancer
- MeSH:
Constriction, Pathologic;
Duodenostomy;
Gastrectomy*;
Gastric Bypass;
Humans;
Korea;
Operative Time;
Retrospective Studies;
Stomach Neoplasms*
- From:Journal of the Korean Surgical Society
2000;58(5):645-649
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: A gastroduodenostomy after a distal subtotal gastrectomy is known to have several advantage over a gastrojejunostomy. However, recently, anastomotic methods using an EEA stapler during a gastro duodenostomy have been developed and have been reported to be superior to manual anastomosis with respect to operative time and complications. Thus, we investigated the differences between a manual and a stapled gastroduodenostomy by comparing the clinicopatholoic features and clinical course. METHODS: From January to October 1999 at Korea University Guro Hospital, a gastroduodenostomy using an EEA stapler was performed on 30 gastric cancer patients after a distal subtotal gastrectomy. From January 1996 to December 1998, a manual anastomosis had been used on 40 patients at the same hospital. A retrospective analysis of these two groups was made with respect to patients, tumor, operation, post operative complications and clinical course. RESULTS: The mean age of the stapled group was older than that of manual group (62.3+/-8.4 vs 53.0+/-10.7 years), and most of the tumors were located at the antrum and the body. In the stapled group, the operative time was significantly shorter than I was in the manual group (205.0+/-20.0 vs 239.6+/-37.3 minutes, p<0.001), and there was no significant difference in the resection margin between the two groups. The time of nasogastric (NG) tube removal was earlier in the stapled group (4.8+/-0.8 vs 5.9+/-2.2 days, p=0.007), but no significant differences were observed with respect to the oral intake and the complication rate between the two groups. Anastomotic stenosis was observed in one case of manual group, but it was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: A gastroduodeno stomy using an EEA stapler has an advantage over conventional manual anastomosis with respect to operation time and NG tube removal, so this method can be employed safely in aged and generally morbid patients to improve the postoperative course.
