This article was aimed to study the effect of geniposide in hyperuricemia mice. Different doses (50, 100, 200 mg·kg-1) of geniposide were administrated to hyperuricemia mice induced by potassium oxonate by gavage for seven consecutive days. Then, serum uric acid (SUA), urinary uric acid (UUA) and the hepatic xanthine oxidase ac-tivities (XOD) of mice were detected. The results showed that the middle- and high-dose groups of geniposide re-duced the level of SUA significantly (P<0.01). It was concluded that geniposide can reduce the level of SUA in hy-peruricemia mice by promoting UUA excretion.

Gastric cancer poses a serious threat to the health of people.Despite the continuous breakthroughs in the development of new drugs such as chemotherapy,targeted therapy and immunotherapy in recent years,radical surgery remains the cornerstone in the treatment of gastric cancer.With the establishment of standard gastric cancer surgery,the advancement of minimally invasive surgical techniques represented by laparoscopy,the determination of perioperative comprehensive treatment of advanced gastric cancer and the formation and initial practice of precise surgical concepts for gastric cancer,the progress of surgical treatment for gastric cancer is advancing by leaps and bounds.The concepts of individualized and optimal treatment are gradually taking root.Safety,effectiveness,precision and minimally invasive approaches have always been the inherent laws of discipline development firmly grasped by gastric cancer surgeons.In order to facilitate better growth for young doctors,the author summarized the latest developments in the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer and looked ahead to future trend.

Objective To compare the differences and clinical value of prognostic evaluation between American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition for gastric cancer (GC).Methods The retrospective case-control study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 1 383 GC patients who were admitted to the First People's Hospital of Changzhou between January 2008 and August 2012 were collected.Distal gastrectomy,proximal gastrectomy + pyloroplasty or total gastrectomy were performed according to preoperative evaluation and intraoperative exploration.Observation indicators:(1) surgical and postoperative situations;(2) follow-up and survival situations;(3) T staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition;(4) N staging comparison of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition;(5) prognostic analysis in N staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition;(6) TNM staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition;(7) prognostic analysis in different TNM staging between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition.Follow-up using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect postoperative survival up to October 2017.Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as x ± s.Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range).The survival curve and survival rate were respectively drawn and calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method,and the Log-rank test was used for survival analysis.Results (1) Surgical and postoperative situations:1 383 GC patients underwent successful radical gastrectomy,including 923 with distal gastrectomy,165 with proximal gastrectomy and 295 with total gastrectomy.Of 1 383 patients,115 with postoperative complications were improved by symptomatic treatment,including 87 with surgical complications and 28 with non-surgical complications.Postoperative pathological examinations:total number of intraoperative lymph node dissection and number of lymph node metastasis were 25± 12 and 7±4;577 didn't have lymph node metastasis and 806 had regional lymph node metastasis;308 were in early GC and 1 075 in advanced GC.(2) Follow-up and survival situations:1 383 patients were followed up for 1-117 months,with a median time of 34 months.The 1-,3-and 5-year survival rates of 1 383 patients were respectively 90.5％,71.9％ and 61.1％.(3) T staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:T staging definition between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition was identical.T staging of 1 383 patients:308,192,65,628 and 190 were respectively detected in T1,T2,T3,T4a and T4b stagings.(4) N staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:N staging definition between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition was identical.N staging of 1 383 patients:577,255,207,230 and 114 were respectively detected in N0,N1,N2,N3a and N3b stagings.N3a and N3b were classified as N3 staging of AJCC TNM staging system 7thedition,but they were classified as independent staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition.(5) Prognostic analysis in N staging of AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition:5-year survival rate of patients in N0,N1,N2,N3a and N3b stagings was respectively 85.6％,76.5％,59.4％,45.2％ and 32.5％ based on AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition,with a statistically significant difference in survival (x2 =394.400,P＜0.05).There was a statistically significant difference between N0 and N 1 stagings (x2 =45.630,P＜0.05),between N 1 and N2 stagings (x2 =19.470,P＜0.05),between N2 and N3a stagings (x2 =7.602,P＜0.05) and between N3a and N3b stagings (x2=13.020,P＜0.05).(6) TNM staging comparison between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:TNM staging of 366 patients had changes,including 2 in T1N3b staging,2 in T2N3b staging,18 in T3N3b staging,120 in T4aN2 staging,149 in T4aN3a staging,34 in T4bN0 staging and 41 in T4bN2 staging;364 were detected in staging Ⅲ in 7th edition and 8th edition,and sub-staging of staging Ⅲ had a change;2 in T1N3b of ⅡB staging were redistricted into Ⅲ B staging based on AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition.(7) Prognostic analysis in different TNM staging between AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition and 8th edition:according to 7th edition,cases and 5-year survival rate were respectively 247,89.5％ in Ⅰ A staging and 147,83.7％ in Ⅰ B staging and 77,75.9％ in ⅡA staging and 207,70.5％ in ⅡB staging and 136,61.0％ in ⅢA staging and 236,37.5％ in Ⅲ B staging and 333,35.4％ in Ⅲ C staging,with a statistically significant difference in survival among sub-stagings (x2 =228.800,P＜0.05).There was a statistically significant difference in survival among Ⅰ,Ⅱ and Ⅲ stagings (x2=189.000,P＜0.05) and between ⅢA and ⅢB or ⅢC stagings (x2=22.710,18.010,P＜0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between Ⅰ A and Ⅰ B stagings (x2=0.179,P＞0.05),between Ⅱ A and Ⅱ B stagings (x2 =0.265,P＞0.05),and between Ⅲ B and Ⅲ C stagings (x2 =1.550,P＞0.05).According to 8th edition,cases and 5-year survival rate were respectively 247,89.5％ in Ⅰ A staging and 147,83.7％ in Ⅰ B staging and 77,75.9％ in Ⅱ A staging and 205,70.7％ in Ⅱ B staging and 288,53.8％ in ⅢA staging and 258,37.3％ in ⅢB staging and 161,28.5％ in ⅢC staging,with a statistically significant difference in survival among sub-stagings (x2=234.900,P ＜ 0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between Ⅰ A and Ⅰ B stagings (x2 =0.179,P＞0.05) and between Ⅱ A and ⅡB stagings (x2 =0.564,P＞0.05).There was statistically significant differences in survival between Ⅲ A and Ⅲ B or ⅢC stagings (x2 =29.790,43.060,P＜0.05) and between Ⅲ B and Ⅲ C stagings (x2 =7.494,P＜0.05).Further analysis showed that changes of TNM staging system between 7th edition and 8th edition were in T3N3b,T4aN2,T4aN3a,T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings,5-year survival rate in above stagings was respectively 16.7％,35.8％,30.2％,47.1％ and 26.8％,with statistically significant differences in survival between T3N3b and T4aN2,T4aN3a,T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings (x2 =19.590,8.039,12.070,3.853,P＜0.05),between T4aN2 and T4aN3a,T4bN2 stagings (x2 =6.529,3.859,P ＜ 0.05),between T4aN3a and T4bN0 stagings (x2 =10.400,P＜0.05) and between T4bN0 and T4bN2 stagings (x2=4.636,P＜0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in survival between T4aN2 and T4bN0 stagings (x2 =3.607,P＞0.05) and between T4aN3a and T4bN2 stagings (x2 =0.029,P＞0.05).Conclusions Compared with AJCC TNM staging system 7th edition,N3a and N3b stagings are classified as independent staging in AJCC TNM staging system 8th edition,and 8th edition is more accurate in prognostic evaluation of GC patients in stage Ⅲ.

Tumor deposit (TD) is a common histopathological finding in gastric cancer. With the improved ability of lymphadenectomy and pathological examination, the positive rate and harvested number of TD are also increasing. The role of TD in staging and prognosis prediction for gastric cancer patients is getting more attention. However, due to the lack of standardization and unification, the denomination, definition and diagnostic criteria are still controversial. The previous studies on the definition and diagnostic criteria of TD were reviewed to standardize the items and improve the awareness. TD is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer. Each TD should be counted separately as a lymph node in the final pN determination according to TNM staging system of the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) or American Joint Committee on Cancer(AJCC) or Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma. But this rule is just an experience-based practice, without support from high-level evidence. Several studies have tried to incorporate TD into TNM staging system to improve the accuracy and discriminative ability. With the wide use of the 8th TNM staging system, how to incorporate TD into the new staging system in an easy and reasonable way still needs more investigations.
Humans ; Lymph Node Excision ; Lymph Nodes ; pathology ; surgery ; Neoplasm Staging ; methods ; Prognosis ; Stomach Neoplasms ; diagnosis ; pathology ; therapy

Objective:To investigate the prognosis of patients with initially resectable gastric cancer liver metastasis (GCLM) who were treated by different modalities, and analyze the influencing factors for prognosis of patients.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 327 patients with initially resectable GCLM who were included in the database of a nationwide multicenter retrospective cohort study on GCLM based on real-world data from January 2010 to December 2019 were collected. There were 267 males and 60 females, aged 61(54,68)years. According to the specific situations of patients, treatment modalities included radical surgery combined with systemic treatment, palliative surgery combined with systemic treatment, and systemic treatment alone. Observation indicators: (1) clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities; (2) prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities; (3) analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM; (4) screening of potential beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M( Q1, Q3), and comparison between groups was conducted using the rank sum test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate survival rate and draw survival curve, and Log-Rank test was used for survival analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using the COX proportional hazard regression model. The propensity score matching was employed by the 1:1 nearest neighbor matching method with a caliper value of 0.1. The forest plots were utilized to evaluate potential benefits of diverse surgical combined with systemic treatments within the population. Results:(1) Clinical characteristics of patients who were treated by different modalities. Of 327 patients, there were 118 cases undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, 164 cases undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment, and 45 cases undergoing systemic treatment alone. There were significant differences in smoking, drinking, site of primary gastric tumor, diameter of primary gastric tumor, site of liver metastasis, and metastatic interval among the three groups of patients ( P<0.05). (2) Prognostic outcomes of patients who were treated by different modalities. The median overall survival time of the 327 pati-ents was 19.9 months (95% confidence interval as 14.9-24.9 months), with 1-, 3-year overall survival rate of 61.3%, 32.7%, respectively. The 1-year overall survival rates of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment, palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and systemic treatment alone were 68.3%, 63.1%, 30.6%, and the 3-year overall survival rates were 41.1%, 29.9%, 11.9%, showing a significant difference in overall survival rate among the three groups of patients ( χ2=19.46, P<0.05). Results of further analysis showed that there was a significant difference in overall survival rate between patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients undergoing systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.40, 95% confidence interval as 0.26-0.61, P<0.05), between patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment and patients under-going systemic treatment alone ( hazard ratio=0.47, 95% confidence interval as 0.32-0.71, P<0.05). (3) Analysis of influencing factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. Results of multivariate analysis showed that the larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differentiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases were independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=1.20, 1.70, 1.20, 2.06, 95% confidence interval as 1.14-1.27, 1.25-2.31, 1.04-1.42, 1.45-2.92, P<0.05) and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy were independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM ( hazard ratio=0.60, 0.39, 0.46, 95% confidence interval as 0.42-0.87, 0.25-0.60, 0.30-0.70, P<0.05). (4) Screening of potentinal beneficiaries in patients who were treated by radical surgery plus systemic treatment and patients who were treated by palliative surgery plus systemic treatment. Results of forest plots analysis showed that for patients with high-moderate differentiated GCLM and patients with liver metastasis located in the left liver, the overall survival rate of patients undergoing radical surgery plus systemic treatment was better than patients undergoing palliative surgery plus systemic treatment ( hazard ratio=0.21, 0.42, 95% confidence interval as 0.09-0.48, 0.23-0.78, P<0.05). Conclusions:Compared to systemic therapy alone, both radical and palliative surgery plus systemic therapy can improve the pro-gnosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM. The larger primary gastric tumor, poorly differen-tiated tumor, larger liver metastasis, multiple hepatic metastases are independent risk factors for prognosis of patients with initial resectable GCLM and immunotherapy or targeted therapy, the treatment modality of radical or palliative surgery plus systemic therapy are independent protective factors for prognosis of patients with initially resectable GCLM.

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Objective:To examine the impact of varied surgical treatment strategies on the prognosis of patients with initial resectable gastric cancer liver metastases (IR-GCLM).Methods:This is a retrospective cohort study. Employing a retrospective cohort design, the study selected clinicopathological data from the national multi-center retrospective cohort study database, focusing on 282 patients with IR-GCLM who underwent surgical intervention between January 2010 and December 2019. There were 231 males and 51 males, aging ( M(IQR)) 61 (14) years (range: 27 to 80 years). These patients were stratified into radical and palliative treatment groups based on treatment decisions. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and distinctions in survival rates were assessed using the Log-rank test. The Cox risk regression model evaluated HR for various factors, controlling for confounders through multivariate analysis to comprehensively evaluate the influence of surgery on the prognosis of IR-GCLM patients. A restricted cubic spline Cox proportional hazard model assessed and delineated intricate associations between measured variables and prognosis. At the same time, the X-tile served as an auxiliary tool to identify critical thresholds in the survival analysis for IR-GCLM patients. Subgroup analysis was then conducted to identify potential beneficiary populations in different surgical treatments. Results:(1) The radical group comprised 118 patients, all undergoing R0 resection or local physical therapy of primary and metastatic lesions. The palliative group comprised 164 patients, with 52 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors and liver metastases, 56 cases undergoing radical resections for gastric primary tumors only, 45 cases undergoing palliative resections for gastric primary tumors, and 11 cases receiving palliative treatments for liver metastases. A statistically significant distinction was observed between the groups regarding the site and the number of liver metastases (both P<0.05). (2) The median overall survival (OS) of the 282 patients was 22.7 months (95% CI: 17.8 to 27.6 months), with 1-year and 3-year OS rates were 65.4% and 35.6%, respectively. The 1-year OS rates for patients in the radical surgical group and palliative surgical group were 68.3% and 63.1%, while the corresponding 3-year OS rates were 42.2% and 29.9%, respectively. A comparison of OS between the two groups showed no statistically significant difference ( P=0.254). Further analysis indicated that patients undergoing palliative gastric cancer resection alone had a significantly worse prognosis compared to other surgical options ( HR=1.98, 95% CI: 1.21 to 3.24, P=0.006). (3) The size of the primary gastric tumor significantly influenced the patients′ prognosis ( HR=2.01, 95% CI: 1.45 to 2.79, P<0.01), with HR showing a progressively increasing trend as tumor size increased. (4) Subgroup analysis indicates that radical treatment may be more effective compared to palliative treatment in the following specific cases: well/moderately differentiated tumors ( HR=2.84, 95% CI 1.49 to 5.41, P=0.001), and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver ( HR=2.06, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.57, P=0.010). Conclusions:In patients with IR-GCLM, radical surgery did not produce a significant improvement in the overall prognosis compared to palliative surgery. However, within specific patient subgroups (well/moderately differentiated tumors, and patients with liver metastases located in the left lobe of the liver), radical treatment can significantly improve prognosis compared to palliative approaches.

Background::Oral anti-coagulants (OAC) are the intervention for the prevention of stroke, which consistently improve clinical outcomes and survival among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The main purpose of this study is to identify problems in OAC utilization among hospitalized patients with AF in China.Methods::Using data from the Improving Care for Cardiovascular Disease in China-Atrial Fibrillation (CCC-AF) registry, guideline-recommended OAC use in eligible patients was assessed.Results::A total of 52,530 patients with non-valvular AF were enrolled from February 2015 to December 2019, of whom 38,203 were at a high risk of stroke, 9717 were at a moderate risk, and 4610 were at a low risk. On admission, only 20.0% (6075/30,420) of patients with a diagnosed AF and a high risk of stroke were taking OAC. The use of pre-hospital OAC on admission was associated with a lower risk of new-onset ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack among the diagnosed AF population (adjusted odds ratio: 0.54, 95% confidence interval: 0.43–0.68; P <0.001). At discharge, the prescription rate of OAC was 45.2% (16,757/37,087) in eligible patients with high stroke risk and 60.7% (2778/4578) in eligible patients with low stroke risk. OAC utilization in patients with high stroke risk on admission or at discharge both increased largely over time (all P <0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that OAC utilization at discharge was positively associated with in-hospital rhythm control strategies, including catheter ablation (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 11.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.04–13.47; P <0.001), electronic cardioversion (adjusted OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.65–3.51; P <0.001), and anti-arrhythmic drug use (adjusted OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.38–1.53; P <0.001). Conclusions::In hospitals participated in the CCC-AF project, >70% of AF patients were at a high risk of stroke. Although poor performance on guideline-recommended OAC use was found in this study, over time the CCC-AF project has made progress in stroke prevention in the Chinese AF population.Registration::ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02309398.

Objective: To investigate the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) and its risk factors after radical gastrectomy. Methods: The prospective study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 2 089 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy in 22 medical centers between December 2017 and November 2018 were collected, including 380 in the Zhongshan Hospital of Fudan University, 351 in the Renji Hospital of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, 130 in the Ruijin Hospital of Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, 139 in the Peking University Cancer Hospital, 128 in the Fujian Provincial Cancer Hospital, 114 in the First Hospital Affiliated to Army Medical University, 104 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, 104 in the Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University, 103 in the Weifang People′s Hospital, 102 in the Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, 99 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Air Force Medical University, 97 in the Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 60 in the Hangzhou First People′s Hospital Affiliated to Zhejiang University School of Medicine, 48 in the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, 29 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi′an Jiaotong University, 26 in the Lishui Municipal Central Hospital, 26 in the Guangdong Provincial People′s Hospital, 23 in the Jiangsu Province Hospital, 13 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University, 7 in the Second Hospital of Jilin University, 4 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, 2 in the Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital of Capital Medical University. Observation indicators: (1) the incidence of POPF after radical gastrectomy; (2) treatment of grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy; (3) analysis of clinicopathological data; (4) analysis of surgical data; (5) risk factors for grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean±SD, and comparison between groups was analyzed using ANOVA. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was analyzed using the chi-square test. Univariate analysis was conducted using the t test or chi-square test based on data excluding missing data of clinico-pathological and surgical data. Multivariate analysis was conducted using the Logistic regression model based on factors with P<0.20 in univariate analysis. Results: There were 2 089 patients screened for eligibility, including 1 512 males, 576 females and 1 without sex information, aged (62±11)years. The body mass index (BMI) was (23±3)kg/m². (1) The incidence of POPF after radical gastrectomy: the total incidence rate of POPF in the 2 089 patients was 20.728%(433/2 089). The incidence rates of biochemical fistula, grade B pancreatic fistula, and grade C pancreatic fistula were 19.627%(410/2 089), 1.101%(23/2 089), 0, respectively. (2) Treatment of grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy: 2 of 23 patients with grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy had drainage tube placed for more than 21 days and received anti-infective therapy. Four of 23 patients with grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy had ascites detected by imaging examination, of which 2 received peritoneal drainage guided by ultrasound, 1 received failed puncture drainage, 1 received no puncture drainage, and they were given anti-infective therapy. Eleven of 23 patients with grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy had no ascites detected by imaging examinations, and they were given anti-infective therapy and inhibitors of pancreas secretion for clinical manifestation as fever or elevated white blood cells. Six patients with no typical clinical manifestations were given somatostatin to inhibite pancreas secretion and prolonged duration of abdominal drainage tube placement (with a median time of 7 days). All the 23 patients recovered well after treatment, without reoperation. (3) Analysis of clinicopathological data: for the 2 089 patients, BMI, cases with or without neoadjuvant therapy were (23±3)kg/m^2, 1 487, 160 of patients without pancreatic fistula, (23±3)kg/m^2, 386, 22 of patients with biochemical fistula, and (24±3)kg/m^2, 22, 1 of patents with grade B pancreatic fistula, showing significant differences between the three groups (F=5.787, χ²=8.269, P<0.05). (4) Analysis of surgical data: for the 2 089 patients, cases with open surgery, laparoscopic assisted surgery, totally laparoscopic surgery (surgical method), cases with D₁ lymph lode dissection, D₂ lymph lode dissection, and other lymph lode dissection (range of lymph lode dissection), cases with no omentectomy, partial omentectomy, and total omentectomy (range of omentectomy), cases with no usage of energy facility, usage of CUSA, LigaSure, LigaSure+ CUSA as energy facility, cases with or without biological glue, the number of lymph node dissection were 737, 624, 292, 24, 1 580, 51, 418, 834, 381, 63, 1 530, 23, 16, 1 431, 201, 33±14 of patients without pancreatic fistula, 146, 189, 74, 11, 389, 9, 110, 171, 128, 35, 359, 6, 9, 378, 31, 31±14 of patients with biochemical fistula, and 14, 5, 4, 0, 20, 3, 6, 13, 4, 2, 18, 1, 2, 22, 1, 37±16 of patients with grade B pancreatic fistula, showing significant differences between the three groups (χ²=15.578, 9.397, 15.023, 28.245, 8.359, F=4.945, P<0.05). (5) Risk factors for grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy: results of univariate analysis showed that usage of energy facility was a related factor for grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy (χ²=9.914, P<0.05). Results of multivariate analysis showed that laparoscopic assisted surgery, combined evisceration, application of LigaSure + CUSA, the number of lymph lode dissection were independent factors for for grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy (odds ratio=0.168, 3.922, 9.250, 1.030, 95% confidence interval: 0.036-0.789, 1.031-14.919, 1.036-82.602, 1.001-1.059, P<0.05). Conclusions The incidence of grade B POPF after radical gastrectomy is relatively low. Laparoscopic assisted surgery, combined evisceration, application of LigaSure + CUSA, and the number of lymph lode dissection are independent risk factors for grade B POPF. Trial Registration: This study was registrated at ClinicalTrial.gov in United States with the registration number of NCT03391687.