Gastric partitioning for the treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction

BACKGROUND Gastric outlet obstruction(GOO)is one of the main complications in stage IV gastric cancer patients.This condition is usually managed by gastrojejunostomy(GJ).However,gastric partitioning(GP)has been described as an alternative to overcoming possible drawbacks of GJ,such as delayed gastric emptying and tumor bleeding.AIM To compare the outcomes of patients who underwent GP and GJ for malignant GOO.METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 60 patients who underwent palliative gastric bypass for unresectable distal gastric cancer with GOO from 2009 to 2018.Baseline clinicopathological characteristics including age,nutritional status,body mass index,and performance status were evaluated.Obstructive symptoms were graded according to GOO score(GOOS).Surgical outcomes evaluated included duration of the procedure,surgical complications,mortality,and length of hospital stay.Acceptance of oral diet after the procedure,weight gain,and overall survival were the long-term outcomes evaluated.RESULTS GP was performed in 30 patients and conventional GJ in the other 30 patients.The mean follow-up was 9.2 mo.Forty-nine(81.6%)patients died during that period.All variables were similar between groups,with the exception of worse performance status in GP patients.The mean operative time was higher in the GP group(161.2 vs 85.2 min,P<0.001).There were no differences in postoperative complications and surgical mortality between groups.The median overall survival was 7 and 8.4 mo for the GP and GJ groups,respectively(P=0.610).The oral acceptance of soft solids(GOOS 2)and low residue or full diet(GOOS 3)were reached by 28(93.3%)GP patients and 22(75.9%)GJ patients(P=0.080).Multivariate analysis demonstrated that GOOS 2 and GOOS 3 were the main prognostic factors for survival(hazard ratio:8.90,95%confidence interval:3.38-23.43,P<0.001).CONCLUSION GP is a safe and effective procedure to treat GOO.Compared to GJ,it provides similar surgical outcomes with a trend to better solid diet acceptance by patients.

The SUPER reporting guideline suggested for reporting of surgical technique

Background:Existing reporting guidelines pay insufficient attention to the detail and comprehensiveness reporting of surgical technique.The Surgical techniqUe rePorting chEcklist and standaRds(SUPER)aims to address this gap by defining reporting standards for surgical technique.The SUPER guideline intends to apply to articles that encompass surgical technique in any study design,surgical discipline,and stage of surgical innovation.Methods:Following the EQUATOR(Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research)Network approach,16 surgeons,journal editors,and methodologists reviewed existing reporting guidelines relating to surgical technique,reviewed papers from 15 top journals,and brainstormed to draft initial items for the SUPER.The initial items were revised through a three-round Delphi survey from 21 multidisciplinary Delphi panel experts from 13 countries and regions.The final SUPER items were formed after an online consensus meeting to resolve disagreements and a three-round wording refinement by all 16 SUPER working group members and five SUPER consultants.Results:The SUPER reporting guideline includes 22 items that are considered essential for good and informative surgical technique reporting.The items are divided into six sections:background,rationale,and objectives(items 1 to 5);preoperative preparations and requirements(items 6 to 9);surgical technique details(items 10 to 15);postoperative considerations and tasks(items 16 to 19);summary and prospect(items 20 and 21);and other information(item 22).Conclusions:The SUPER reporting guideline has the potential to guide detailed,comprehensive,and transparent surgical technique reporting for surgeons.It may also assist journal editors,peer reviewers,systematic reviewers,and guideline developers in the evaluation of surgical technique papers and help practitioners to better understand and reproduce surgical technique.