A comparative study on short-term outcomes and quality of life for gastric cancer patients between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler.
10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20210430-00185
- VernacularTitle:腹腔镜辅助下圆形吻合器与完全腹腔镜下直线切割闭合器行食管空肠吻合的短期疗效和生活质量比较研究
- Author:
Peng HU
1
;
Wen Quan LIANG
2
;
Hong Qing XI
2
;
Ke Cheng ZHANG
2
;
Jian Xin CUI
2
;
Lin CHEN
2
Author Information
1. Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China Medical School of Chinese PLA, Beijing 100853, China.
2. Department of General Surgery, The First Medical Center, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Circular stapler;
Laparoscopy;
Linear stapler;
Quality of life;
Stomach neoplasms;
Total gastrectomy
- MeSH:
Aged, 80 and over;
Gastrectomy/methods*;
Humans;
Laparoscopy/methods*;
Quality of Life;
Retrospective Studies;
Stomach Neoplasms/pathology*;
Treatment Outcome
- From:
Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
2022;25(2):157-165
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To explore the differences of short-term outcomes and quality of life (QoL) for gastric cancer patients between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Clinicopathological data of patients with stage I to III gastric adenocarcinoma who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy from January 2017 to January 2020 were retrospectively collected. Those who were ≥80 years old, had serious complications that could affect the quality of life, underwent multi-organ resections, palliative surgery, emergency surgery due to gastrointestinal perforation, obstruction, bleeding, died or lost to follow-up within 1 year after surgery were excluded. A total of 130 patients were enrolled and divided into circular stapler group (CS group, 77 cases) and linear stapler group (LS group, 53 cases) according to the surgical method. The differences of age, gender, body mass index, number of comorbidities, history of abdominal surgery, ASA, tumor location, degree of differentiation, tumor length, tumor T stage, tumor N stage, tumor pathological stage and preoperative quality of life between the two groups were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). The observation indicators: (1) Surgery and postoperative conditions. (2) Postoperative complications: Any adverse conditions that require conservative treatment or surgical intervention after surgery were defined as postoperative complications, of which, complications occurring within 30 days after surgery were defined as early complications; complications occurring within 30 days to 1 year after surgery were defined as late complications. (3) Postoperative quality of life was assessed by the quality of life core scale (QLQ-C30) and gastric cancer specific module scale (QLQ-STO22). The higher the scores of functional scales and global health status, the better the corresponding quality of life. The higher the scores of symptoms scales, the worse the corresponding quality of life. Results: (1) Surgery and postoperative conditions: Compared with the CS group, the LS group presented less intraoperative blood loss [50.0 (50.0-100.0) ml vs. 100.0 (100.0-100.0) ml, Z=-3.111, P=0.002] and earlier time to flatus [(3.1±0.8) days vs. (3.5±1.1) days, t=-2.490, P=0.014]. However, there were no statistically significant differences between two groups of patients in terms of operation time, time to start a liquid diet and postoperative hospital stay (all P>0.05). (2) Postoperative complications: The early complication rates of the CS group and the LS group were 22.1% (17/77) and 18.9% (10/53), respectively, while the late complication rate were 18.2% (14/77) and 15.1% (8/53), respectively, whose differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). (3) Postoperative quality of life: After 1-year follow-up, 7 (5.4%) patients were lost, including 5 in CS group and 2 in LS group. One year after operation, the QLQ-C30 scale showed that the score of financial difficulty of the LS group was significantly higher than that of the CS group [33.3 (0 to 33.3) vs.0 (0 to 33.3), Z=-1.972, P=0.049] with statistically significant difference, and there were no statistically significant differences in the scores of other functional fields and symptom fields between the two groups (all P>0.05). The QLQ-STO22 scale showed that the scores of dysphagia [0 (0 to 5.6) vs. 0 (0 to 11.1), Z=-2.094, P=0.036] and eating restriction were significantly lower [0 (0 to 4.2) vs. 0 (0 to 8.3), Z=-2.011, P=0.044] in patients of the LS group than those of the CS group. There were no significant differences in scores of other symptoms between two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with the circular stapler, the esophagojejunostomy with linear stapler for gastric cancer patients can reduce intraoperative blood loss, shorten the time to flatus after operation, alleviate the symptoms of dysphagia and eating restriction but increase the economic burden to a certain degree.
