Reconstruction Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Cancer
dc.contributor.author | Schneider, Marcel Andre | |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, Jeesun | |
dc.contributor.author | Berlth, Felix | |
dc.contributor.author | Sugita, Yutaka | |
dc.contributor.author | Grimminger, Peter P. | |
dc.contributor.author | Wijnhoven, Bas P. L. | |
dc.contributor.author | Overtoom, Hidde | |
dc.contributor.author | Gockel, Ines | |
dc.contributor.author | Thieme, Rene | |
dc.contributor.author | Griffiths, Ewen A. | |
dc.contributor.author | Butterworth, William | |
dc.contributor.author | Nienhuser, Henrik | |
dc.contributor.author | Mueller, Beat | |
dc.contributor.author | Crnovrsanin, Nerma | |
dc.contributor.author | Gero, Daniel | |
dc.contributor.author | Nickel, Felix | |
dc.contributor.author | Gisbertz, Suzanne | |
dc.contributor.author | van Berge Henegouwen, Mark I. | |
dc.contributor.author | Pucher, Philip H. | |
dc.contributor.author | Khan, Kashuf | |
dc.contributor.author | Chaudry, Asif | |
dc.contributor.author | Patel, Pranav H. | |
dc.contributor.author | Pera, Manuel | |
dc.contributor.author | Dal Cero, Mariagiulia | |
dc.contributor.author | Garcia, Carlos | |
dc.contributor.author | Martinez Salinas, Guillermo | |
dc.contributor.author | Kassab, Paulo | |
dc.contributor.author | Prado Castro, Osvaldo Antonio | |
dc.contributor.author | Norero, Enrique | |
dc.contributor.author | Wisniowski, Paul | |
dc.contributor.author | Putnam, Luke Randall | |
dc.contributor.author | Lombardi, Pietro Maria | |
dc.contributor.author | Ferrari, Giovanni | |
dc.contributor.author | Gudaityte, Rita | |
dc.contributor.author | Maleckas, Almantas | |
dc.contributor.author | Prodehl, Leanne | |
dc.contributor.author | Castaldi, Antonio | |
dc.contributor.author | Prudhomme, Michel | |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, Hyuk-Joon | |
dc.contributor.author | Sano, Takeshi | |
dc.contributor.author | Baiocchi, Gian Luca | |
dc.contributor.author | De Manzoni, Giovanni | |
dc.contributor.author | Giacopuzzi, Simone | |
dc.contributor.author | Bencivenga, Maria | |
dc.contributor.author | Rosati, Riccardo | |
dc.contributor.author | Puccetti, Francesco | |
dc.contributor.author | D'Ugo, Domenico | |
dc.contributor.author | Nunobe, Souya | |
dc.contributor.author | Yang, Han-Kwang | |
dc.contributor.author | Gutschow, Christian Alexander | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2025-01-20T16:06:35Z | |
dc.date.available | 2025-01-20T16:06:35Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | |
dc.description.abstract | Objective/Background:Various anastomotic and reconstruction techniques are used for minimally invasive total (miTG) and distal gastrectomy (miDG). Their effects on postoperative morbidity have not been extensively studied.Methods:MiTG and miDG patients were selected from 9356 oncological gastrectomies performed in 2017-2021 in 43 centers. Endpoints included anastomotic leakage (AL) rate and postoperative morbidity tested by multivariable analysis.Results:Three major anastomotic techniques [circular stapled (CS); linear stapled (LS); and hand sewn (HS)], and 3 major bowel reconstruction types [Roux (RX); Billroth I (BI); Billroth II (BII)] were identified in miTG (n=878) and miDG (n=3334). Postoperative complications, including AL (5.2% vs 1.1%), overall (28.7% vs 16.3%), and major morbidity (15.7% vs 8.2%), as well as 90-day mortality (1.6% vs 0.5%) were higher after miTG compared with miDG. After miTG, the AL rate was higher after CS (4.3%) and HS (7.9%) compared with LS (3.4%). Similarly, major complications (LS: 9.7%, CS: 16.2%, and HS: 12.7%) were lowest after LS. Multivariate analysis confirmed anastomotic technique as a predictive factor for AL, overall, and major complications. In miDG, AL rate (BI: 1.4%, BII 0.8%, and RX 1.2%), overall (BI: 14.5%, BII: 15.0%, and RX: 18.7%), and major morbidity (BI: 7.9%, BII: 9.1%, and RX: 7.2%), and mortality (BI: 0%, BII: 0.1%, and RY: 1.1%%) were not affected by bowel reconstruction.Conclusions:In oncologically suitable situations, miDG should be preferred to miTG, as postoperative morbidity is significantly lower. LS should be a preferred anastomotic technique for miTG in Western Centers. Conversely, bowel reconstruction in DG may be chosen according to the surgeon's preference. | |
dc.fuente.origen | WOS | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006470 | |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1528-1140 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0003-4932 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006470 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/89969 | |
dc.identifier.wosid | WOS:001328598200011 | |
dc.issue.numero | 5 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.pagina.final | 798 | |
dc.pagina.inicio | 788 | |
dc.revista | Annals of surgery | |
dc.rights | acceso restringido | |
dc.subject | anastomosis | |
dc.subject | complications | |
dc.subject | gastrectomy | |
dc.subject | gastric cancer | |
dc.subject | reconstruction | |
dc.subject.ods | 03 Good Health and Well-being | |
dc.subject.odspa | 03 Salud y bienestar | |
dc.title | Reconstruction Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Cancer | |
dc.type | artículo | |
dc.volumen | 280 | |
sipa.index | WOS | |
sipa.trazabilidad | WOS;2025-01-12 |