Objective:To investigate the incidence of postoperative complications in Chinese patients with gastric or colorectal cancer, and to evaluate the risk factors for postoperative complications.Methods:This was a national, multicenter, prospective, registry-based, cohort study of data obtained from the database of the Prevalence of Abdominal Complications After Gastro- enterological Surgery (PACAGE) study sponsored by the China Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Union. The PACAGE database prospectively collected general demographic characteristics, protocols for perioperative treatment, and variables associated with postoperative complications in patients treated for gastric or colorectal cancer in 20 medical centers from December 2018 to December 2020. The patients were grouped according to the presence or absence of postoperative complications. Postoperative complications were categorized and graded in accordance with the expert consensus on postoperative complications in gastrointestinal oncology surgery and Clavien-Dindo grading criteria. The incidence of postoperative complications of different grades are presented as bar charts. Independent risk factors for occurrence of postoperative complications were identified by multifactorial unconditional logistic regression.Results:The study cohort comprised 3926 patients with gastric or colorectal cancer, 657 (16.7%) of whom had a total of 876 postoperative complications. Serious complications (Grade III and above) occurred in 4.0% of patients (156/3926). The rate of Grade V complications was 0.2% (7/3926). The cohort included 2271 patients with gastric cancer with a postoperative complication rate of 18.1% (412/2271) and serious complication rate of 4.7% (106/2271); and 1655 with colorectal cancer, with a postoperative complication rate of 14.8% (245/1655) and serious complication rate of 3.0% (50/1655). The incidences of anastomotic leakage in patients with gastric and colorectal cancer were 3.3% (74/2271) and 3.4% (56/1655), respectively. Abdominal infection was the most frequently occurring complication, accounting for 28.7% (164/572) and 39.5% (120/304) of postoperative complications in patients with gastric and colorectal cancer, respectively. The most frequently occurring grade of postoperative complication was Grade II, accounting for 65.4% (374/572) and 56.6% (172/304) of complications in patients with gastric and colorectal cancers, respectively. Multifactorial analysis identified (1) the following independent risk factors for postoperative complications in patients in the gastric cancer group: preoperative comorbidities (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.51-4.28, P<0.001), neoadjuvant therapy (OR=1.42, 95%CI:1.06-1.89, P=0.020), high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores (ASA score 2 points:OR=1.60, 95% CI: 1.23-2.07, P<0.001, ASA score ≥3 points:OR=0.43, 95% CI: 0.25-0.73, P=0.002), operative time >180 minutes (OR=1.81, 95% CI: 1.42-2.31, P<0.001), intraoperative bleeding >50 mL (OR=1.29,95%CI: 1.01-1.63, P=0.038), and distal gastrectomy compared with total gastrectomy (OR=0.65,95%CI: 0.51-0.83, P<0.001); and (2) the following independent risk factors for postoperative complications in patients in the colorectal cancer group: female (OR=0.60, 95%CI: 0.44-0.80, P<0.001), preoperative comorbidities (OR=2.73, 95%CI: 1.25-5.99, P=0.030), neoadjuvant therapy (OR=1.83, 95%CI:1.23-2.72, P=0.008), laparoscopic surgery (OR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.30-0.72, P=0.022), and abdominoperineal resection compared with low anterior resection (OR=2.74, 95%CI: 1.71-4.41, P<0.001). Conclusion:Postoperative complications associated with various types of infection were the most frequent complications in patients with gastric or colorectal cancer. Although the risk factors for postoperative complications differed between patients with gastric cancer and those with colorectal cancer, the presence of preoperative comorbidities, administration of neoadjuvant therapy, and extent of surgical resection, were the commonest factors associated with postoperative complications in patients of both categories.

Objective:To investigate the feasibility and accuracy of computer vision-based artificial intelligence technology in detecting and recognizing instruments and organs in the scenario of radical laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Methods:Eight complete laparoscopic distal radical gastrectomy surgery videos were collected from four large tertiary hospitals in China (First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital [three cases], Liaoning Cancer Hospital [two cases], Liyang Branch of Jiangsu Province People's Hospital [two cases], and Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center [one case]). PR software was used to extract frames every 5–10 seconds and convert them into image frames. To ensure quality, deduplication was performed manually to remove obvious duplication and blurred image frames. After conversion and deduplication, there were 3369 frame images with a resolution of 1,920×1,080 PPI. LabelMe was used for instance segmentation of the images into the following 23 categories: veins, arteries, sutures, needle holders, ultrasonic knives, suction devices, bleeding, colon, forceps, gallbladder, small gauze, Hem-o-lok, Hem-o-lok appliers, electrocautery hooks, small intestine, hepatogastric ligaments, liver, omentum, pancreas, spleen, surgical staplers, stomach, and trocars. The frame images were randomly allocated to training and validation sets in a 9:1 ratio. The YOLOv8 deep learning framework was used for model training and validation. Precision, recall, average precision (AP), and mean average precision (mAP) were used to evaluate detection and recognition accuracy.Results:The training set contained 3032 frame images comprising 30 895 instance segmentation counts across 23 categories. The validation set contained 337 frame images comprising 3407 instance segmentation counts. The YOLOv8m model was used for training. The loss curve of the training set showed a smooth gradual decrease in loss value as the number of iteration calculations increased. In the training set, the AP values of all 23 categories were above 0.90, with a mAP of 0.99, whereas in the validation set, the mAP of the 23 categories was 0.82. As to individual categories, the AP values for ultrasonic knives, needle holders, forceps, gallbladders, small pieces of gauze, and surgical staplers were 0.96, 0.94, 0.91, 0.91, 0.91, and 0.91, respectively. The model successfully inferred and applied to a 5-minutes video segment of laparoscopic gastroenterostomy suturing.Conclusion:The primary finding of this multicenter study is that computer vision can efficiently, accurately, and in real-time detect organs and instruments in various scenarios of radical laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Objective:To investigate the incidence of postoperative complications in Chinese patients with gastric or colorectal cancer, and to evaluate the risk factors for postoperative complications.Methods:This was a national, multicenter, prospective, registry-based, cohort study of data obtained from the database of the Prevalence of Abdominal Complications After Gastro- enterological Surgery (PACAGE) study sponsored by the China Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Union. The PACAGE database prospectively collected general demographic characteristics, protocols for perioperative treatment, and variables associated with postoperative complications in patients treated for gastric or colorectal cancer in 20 medical centers from December 2018 to December 2020. The patients were grouped according to the presence or absence of postoperative complications. Postoperative complications were categorized and graded in accordance with the expert consensus on postoperative complications in gastrointestinal oncology surgery and Clavien-Dindo grading criteria. The incidence of postoperative complications of different grades are presented as bar charts. Independent risk factors for occurrence of postoperative complications were identified by multifactorial unconditional logistic regression.Results:The study cohort comprised 3926 patients with gastric or colorectal cancer, 657 (16.7%) of whom had a total of 876 postoperative complications. Serious complications (Grade III and above) occurred in 4.0% of patients (156/3926). The rate of Grade V complications was 0.2% (7/3926). The cohort included 2271 patients with gastric cancer with a postoperative complication rate of 18.1% (412/2271) and serious complication rate of 4.7% (106/2271); and 1655 with colorectal cancer, with a postoperative complication rate of 14.8% (245/1655) and serious complication rate of 3.0% (50/1655). The incidences of anastomotic leakage in patients with gastric and colorectal cancer were 3.3% (74/2271) and 3.4% (56/1655), respectively. Abdominal infection was the most frequently occurring complication, accounting for 28.7% (164/572) and 39.5% (120/304) of postoperative complications in patients with gastric and colorectal cancer, respectively. The most frequently occurring grade of postoperative complication was Grade II, accounting for 65.4% (374/572) and 56.6% (172/304) of complications in patients with gastric and colorectal cancers, respectively. Multifactorial analysis identified (1) the following independent risk factors for postoperative complications in patients in the gastric cancer group: preoperative comorbidities (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.51-4.28, P<0.001), neoadjuvant therapy (OR=1.42, 95%CI:1.06-1.89, P=0.020), high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores (ASA score 2 points:OR=1.60, 95% CI: 1.23-2.07, P<0.001, ASA score ≥3 points:OR=0.43, 95% CI: 0.25-0.73, P=0.002), operative time >180 minutes (OR=1.81, 95% CI: 1.42-2.31, P<0.001), intraoperative bleeding >50 mL (OR=1.29,95%CI: 1.01-1.63, P=0.038), and distal gastrectomy compared with total gastrectomy (OR=0.65,95%CI: 0.51-0.83, P<0.001); and (2) the following independent risk factors for postoperative complications in patients in the colorectal cancer group: female (OR=0.60, 95%CI: 0.44-0.80, P<0.001), preoperative comorbidities (OR=2.73, 95%CI: 1.25-5.99, P=0.030), neoadjuvant therapy (OR=1.83, 95%CI:1.23-2.72, P=0.008), laparoscopic surgery (OR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.30-0.72, P=0.022), and abdominoperineal resection compared with low anterior resection (OR=2.74, 95%CI: 1.71-4.41, P<0.001). Conclusion:Postoperative complications associated with various types of infection were the most frequent complications in patients with gastric or colorectal cancer. Although the risk factors for postoperative complications differed between patients with gastric cancer and those with colorectal cancer, the presence of preoperative comorbidities, administration of neoadjuvant therapy, and extent of surgical resection, were the commonest factors associated with postoperative complications in patients of both categories.

Objective:To investigate the feasibility and accuracy of computer vision-based artificial intelligence technology in detecting and recognizing instruments and organs in the scenario of radical laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Methods:Eight complete laparoscopic distal radical gastrectomy surgery videos were collected from four large tertiary hospitals in China (First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital [three cases], Liaoning Cancer Hospital [two cases], Liyang Branch of Jiangsu Province People's Hospital [two cases], and Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center [one case]). PR software was used to extract frames every 5–10 seconds and convert them into image frames. To ensure quality, deduplication was performed manually to remove obvious duplication and blurred image frames. After conversion and deduplication, there were 3369 frame images with a resolution of 1,920×1,080 PPI. LabelMe was used for instance segmentation of the images into the following 23 categories: veins, arteries, sutures, needle holders, ultrasonic knives, suction devices, bleeding, colon, forceps, gallbladder, small gauze, Hem-o-lok, Hem-o-lok appliers, electrocautery hooks, small intestine, hepatogastric ligaments, liver, omentum, pancreas, spleen, surgical staplers, stomach, and trocars. The frame images were randomly allocated to training and validation sets in a 9:1 ratio. The YOLOv8 deep learning framework was used for model training and validation. Precision, recall, average precision (AP), and mean average precision (mAP) were used to evaluate detection and recognition accuracy.Results:The training set contained 3032 frame images comprising 30 895 instance segmentation counts across 23 categories. The validation set contained 337 frame images comprising 3407 instance segmentation counts. The YOLOv8m model was used for training. The loss curve of the training set showed a smooth gradual decrease in loss value as the number of iteration calculations increased. In the training set, the AP values of all 23 categories were above 0.90, with a mAP of 0.99, whereas in the validation set, the mAP of the 23 categories was 0.82. As to individual categories, the AP values for ultrasonic knives, needle holders, forceps, gallbladders, small pieces of gauze, and surgical staplers were 0.96, 0.94, 0.91, 0.91, 0.91, and 0.91, respectively. The model successfully inferred and applied to a 5-minutes video segment of laparoscopic gastroenterostomy suturing.Conclusion:The primary finding of this multicenter study is that computer vision can efficiently, accurately, and in real-time detect organs and instruments in various scenarios of radical laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Advanced paternal age has been overlooked, and its effect on fertility remains controversial. Previous studies have focused mainly on intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles in men with oligozoospermia. However, few studies have reported on men with semen parameters within reference ranges. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective cohort study analyzing the reproductive outcomes of couples with non-male-factor infertility undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. In total, 381 cycles included were subgrouped according to paternal age (<35-year-old, 35-39-year-old, or ≥40-year-old), and maternal age was limited to under 35 years. Data on embryo quality and clinical outcomes were analyzed. The results showed that fertilization and high-quality embryo rates were not significantly different (all P > 0.05). The pregnancy rate was not significantly different in the 35-39-year-old group (42.0%; P > 0.05), but was significantly lower in the ≥40-year-old group (26.1%; P < 0.05) than that in the <35-year-old group (40.3%). Similarly, the implantation rate significantly decreased in the ≥40-year-old group (18.8%) compared with that in the <35-year-old group (31.1%) and 35-39-year-old group (30.0%) (both P < 0.05). The live birth rate (30.6%, 21.7%, and 19.6%) was not significantly different across the paternal age subgroups (<35-year-old, 35-39-year-old, and ≥40-year-old, respectively; all P > 0.05), but showed a declining trend. The miscarriage rate significantly increased in the 35-39-year-old group (44.8%) compared with that in the <35-year-old group (21.0%; P < 0.05). No abnormality in newborn birth weight was found. The results indicated that paternal age over 40 years is a key risk factor that influences the assisted reproductive technology success rate even with good semen parameters, although it has no impact on embryo development.
Pregnancy ; Infant, Newborn ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Adult ; Paternal Age ; Retrospective Studies ; Semen ; Fertilization in Vitro ; Reproductive Techniques, Assisted ; Oligospermia

Objective:To investigate the safety and short-term efficacy of laparoscopic pro-ximal gastrectomy (LPG) for proximal gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 385 patients with proximal gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction who underwent LPG in the 15 medical centers, including the First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University et al, from January 2014 to March 2022 were collected. There were 304 males and 81 females, aged (63±9)years. Of the 385 patients, 335 cases undergoing LPG were divided into the laparoscopic group and 50 cases undergoing open proximal gastrectomy were divided into the open group. Observation indicators: (1) intraoperative and postoperative situations; (2) follow-up; (3) stratified analysis. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M(range), and comparison between groups was conducted using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. Count data were described as absolute numbers, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Repeated measurement data were analyzed using the repeated ANOVA. Results:(1) Intraoperative and postoperative situations. The operation time, cases with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophagogastric anastomosis and esophageal-jejunal anastomosis, cases with postoperative pathological staging as stage 0?Ⅰ and stage Ⅱ?Ⅲ, duration of postoperative hospital stay, cases with postoperative early complications were (212±96)minutes, 270, 65, 177, 107, 10(range, 8?14)days, 40 in patients of the laparoscopic group, with 51 cases missing the data of postoperative pathological staging. The above indicators were (174±90)minutes, 39, 11, 22, 28, 10(range, 8?18)days, 10 in patients of the open group. There were significant differences in the opera-tion time and postoperative pathological staging between the two groups ( t=2.62, χ2=5.93, P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the reconstruction of digestive tract, duration of post-operative hospital stay, postoperative early complications between the two groups ( χ2=0.19, Z=0.40, χ2=2.50, P>0.05). (2) Follow-up. Of the 385 patients,202 cases were followed up during the post-operative 12 months, including 187 cases in the laparoscopic group and 15 cases in the open group. Cases with reflux esophagitis, cases with esophageal anastomotic stenosis were 48, 11 in patients of the laparoscopic group, versus 5, 2 in patients of the open group, showing no significant difference in the above indicators between the two groups ( P>0.05). The body mass index (BMI), hemoglobin (Hb), albumin (Alb) at postoperative 6 months and 12 months were (21±3)kg/m 2, (130±15)g/L, (40±4)g/L and (21±3)kg/m 2, (132±14)g/L, (41±4)g/L in patients of the laparoscopic group, versus (21±3)kg/m 2, (121±19)g/L, (37±5)g/L and (21±3)kg/m 2, (125±21)g/L, (43±6)g/L in patients of the open group. There were significant differences in postoperative Hb between the two groups ( Fgroup=5.88, Ftime=5.49, Finteraction=19.95, P<0.05) and there were significant differences in time effect of postopera-tive BMI and Alb between the two groups ( Ftime=9.53, 49.88, P<0.05). (3) Stratified analysis. ① Incidence of postoperative of reflux esophagitis and esophageal anastomotic stenosis in patients with different reconstruction of digestive tract. Of the 202 patients, cases with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophagogastric anastomosis and esophageal-jejunal anastomosis were 168 and 34, respectively. The incidence rates of postoperative of reflux esophagitis were 26.79%(45/168)and 23.53%(8/34)in cases with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophagogastric anastomosis and esophageal-jejunal anastomosis, showing no significant difference between them ( χ2=0.16, P>0.05). Cases undergoing esophageal anastomotic stenosis were 13 in patients with reconstruction of diges-tive tract as esophagogastric anastomosis. ② The BMI, Hb, Alb in patients with different reconstruc-tion of digestive tract. The BMI, Hb, Alb were (24±3)kg/m 2, (135±20)g/L, (41±5)g/L in the 168 patients with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophagogastric anastomosis before the operation, versus (23±3)kg/m 2, (130±19)g/L, (40±4)g/L in the 34 patients with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophageal-jejunal anastomosis before the operation, showing no significant difference between them ( t=1.44, 1.77, 1.33, P>0.05). The BMI, Hb, Alb at postoperative 6 months and 12 months were (21±3)kg/m 2, (128±16)g/L, (39±4)g/L and (21±3)kg/m 2, (131±16)g/L, (41±4)g/L in the 168 patients with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophagogastric anastomosis, versus (20±4)kg/m 2, (133±13)g/L, (43±3)g/L and (21±3)kg/m 2, (135±12)g/L, (44±3)g/L in the 34 patients with reconstruction of digestive tract as esophageal-jejunal anastomosis. There were significant differences in the group effect and time effect of postoperative Alb between patients with different reconstruction of diges-tive tract ( Fgroup=15.82, Ftime=5.43, P<0.05), and there was also a significant difference in the time effect of postoperative BMI between them ( Ftime=4.22 , P<0.05). Conclusion:LPG can be used to the treatment of proximal gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction, with a good safety and short-term efficacy.

Objective: To examine the clinical efficacy of 3 anti-reflux methods of digestive tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: The clinical data and follow-up data of gastric cancer patients who underwent anti-reflux reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy in 11 medical centers of China from September 2016 to August 2021 were retrospectively collected, including 273 males and 65 females, aging of (63±10) years (range: 28 to 91 years). Among them, 159 cases were performed with gastric tube anastomosis (GTA), 107 cases with double tract reconstruction (DTR), and 72 cases with double-flap technique (DFT), respectively. The duration of operation, length of postoperative hospital stay and early postoperative complications (referring to Clavien-Dindo classification) of different anti-reflux reconstruction methods were assessed. Body mass index, hemoglobin and albumin were used to reflect postoperative nutritional status. Reflux esophagitis was graded according to Los Angeles criteria based on the routinely gastroscopy within 12 months after surgery. The postoperative quality of life (QoL) was evaluated by Visick score system. The ANOVA analysis, Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test, χ² test and Fisher's exact test were used for comparison between multiple groups, and further comparison among groups were performed with LSD, Tamhane's test or Bonferroni corrected χ² test. The mixed effect model was used to compare the trends of Body mass index, hemoglobin and albumin over time among different groups. Results: The operation time of DFT was significantly longer than that of GTA and DTR ((352±63) minutes vs. (221±66) minutes, (352±63) minutes vs. (234±61) minutes, both P<0.01). The incidence of early complications with Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅱ to Ⅴ in GTA, DFT and DTR groups was 17.0% (27/159), 9.7% (7/72) and 10.3% (11/107), respectively, without significant difference among these three groups (χ²=3.51, P=0.173). Body mass index decreased more significantly in GTA than DFT group at 6 and 12 months after surgery (mean difference=1.721 kg/m², P<0.01; mean difference=2.429 kg/m², P<0.01). body mass index decreased significantly in DTR compared with DFT at 12 months after surgery (mean difference=1.319 kg/m², P=0.027). There was no significant difference in hemoglobin or albumin fluctuation between different reconstruction methods perioperative. The incidence of reflux esophagitis one year after surgery in DTR group was 12.9% (4/31), which was lower than that in DFT (45.9% (17/37), χ²=8.63, P=0.003). Follow-up of postoperative quality of life showed the incidence of Visick grade 2 to 4 in DFT group was lower than that in GTA group (10.4% (7/67) vs. 34.6% (27/78), χ²=11.70, P=0.018), while there was no significant difference between DFT and DTR group (10.4% (7/67) vs. 22.2% (8/36, P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with GTA and DTR, DFT is more time-consuming, but there is no significant difference in early complications among three methods. DFT reconstruction is more conducive to maintain postoperative nutritional status and improve QoL, especially compared with GTA. The risk of reflux esophagitis after DTR reconstruction is lower than that of DFT.
Aged ; Albumins ; Esophagitis, Peptic/surgery* ; Female ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Hemoglobins ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Quality of Life ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms/surgery*

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.

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.

OBJECTIVETo investigate the clinical efficacy of all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) plus arsenic trioxide (ATO) in induction and maintenance therapy in newly diagnosed acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL).

METHODSA retrospective analysis of 298 newly diagnosed APL patients from the department of hematology, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University since September 2004 to December 2013, including 177 cases with ATRA plus ATO and 116 ATRA plus chemotherapy (CT), was performed to investigate the clinical efficacy between the low-intermediate (WBC≤10×10⁹/L) and high (WBC>10×10⁹/L) risk APL patients, respectively.

RESULTSFor the low-intermediate risk patients, the relapse rate in ATRA plus CT and ATRA plus ATO are 22.0% and 6.1% (P=0.004), respectively; the 3 years estimated relapse-free survival (RFS) are 78.0% and 92.9% (P=0.021), respectively. For the high risk patients, the relapse rate in ATRA plus CT and ATRA plus ATO are 25.0% and 5.2% (P=0.035), respectively; the 3 years estimated RFS rate were 80.8% and 93.0% (P=0.021), respectively. But the rate of early death (ED), complete remission (CR) and overall survival (OS) between the two therapy protocols had no statistical difference (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONATRA plus ATO in induction and maintenance therapy might prolong the RFS time of the low-intermediate risk APL patients and decrease the relapse rate of the low, intermediate and high risk APL patients.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols ; Arsenicals ; Humans ; Leukemia, Promyelocytic, Acute ; Oxides ; Recurrence ; Remission Induction ; Retrospective Studies ; Survival Rate ; Tretinoin