The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopy assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) performed by one operating and advising surgeon in patients with gastric canc...The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopy assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) performed by one operating and advising surgeon in patients with gastric cancer over a period of 10 years. We examined the choice of anastomosis techniques, and compared the duration of surgery, blood loss, number of dissected lymph nodes and intraoperative complications for LADG and open distal gastrectomy (ODG). We studied 254 patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy and 36 patients who underwent ODG. 169 of 254 patients received LADG. Duration of surgery was significantly longer for LADG than that for ODG, blood loss was significantly smaller, and numbers of dissected lymph nodes were similar. With LADG, there was anastomotic leakage in 2 patients and postoperative obstruction in 2 patients. No recurrence of disease and no deaths have been reported to date. Though previous clinical trials have shown that LADG is less invasive, our study of LADG in the real world did not show superiority, but rather equivalence to ODG in terms of other outcomes. This study could be advantageous to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of LADG without having to take into account multiple surgeons’ technical levels and the background differences between the facilities.展开更多
文摘The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopy assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) performed by one operating and advising surgeon in patients with gastric cancer over a period of 10 years. We examined the choice of anastomosis techniques, and compared the duration of surgery, blood loss, number of dissected lymph nodes and intraoperative complications for LADG and open distal gastrectomy (ODG). We studied 254 patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy and 36 patients who underwent ODG. 169 of 254 patients received LADG. Duration of surgery was significantly longer for LADG than that for ODG, blood loss was significantly smaller, and numbers of dissected lymph nodes were similar. With LADG, there was anastomotic leakage in 2 patients and postoperative obstruction in 2 patients. No recurrence of disease and no deaths have been reported to date. Though previous clinical trials have shown that LADG is less invasive, our study of LADG in the real world did not show superiority, but rather equivalence to ODG in terms of other outcomes. This study could be advantageous to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of LADG without having to take into account multiple surgeons’ technical levels and the background differences between the facilities.
