Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNIBS
  • ×
  • Home
  • Persone
  • Strutture
  • Competenze
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Professioni
  • Corsi
  • Insegnamenti
  • Terza Missione

Competenze & Professionalità
Logo UNIBS

|

Competenze & Professionalità

unibs.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • Persone
  • Strutture
  • Competenze
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Professioni
  • Corsi
  • Insegnamenti
  • Terza Missione
  1. Pubblicazioni

Reconstruction Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Cancer Insights From the GastroBenchmark and GASTRODATA databases

Articolo
Data di Pubblicazione:
2024
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.
Tipologia CRIS:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
Keywords:
anastomosis; complications; gastrectomy; gastric cancer; reconstruction
Elenco autori:
Schneider, M. A.; Kim, J.; Berlth, F.; Sugita, Y.; Grimminger, P. P.; Wijnhoven, B. P. L.; Overtoom, H.; Gockel, I.; Thieme, R.; Griffiths, E. A.; Butterworth, W.; Nienhuser, H.; Muller, B.; Crnovrsanin, N.; Gero, D.; Nickel, F.; Gisbertz, S.; van Berge Henegouwen, M. I.; Pucher, P. H.; Khan, K.; Chaudry, A.; Patel, P. H.; Pera, M.; Dal Cero, M.; Garcia, C.; Salinas, G. M.; Kassab, P.; Castro, O. A. P.; Norero, E.; Wisniowski, P.; Putnam, L. R.; Lombardi, P. M.; Ferrari, G.; Gudaityte, R.; Maleckas, A.; Prodehl, L.; Castaldi, A.; Prudhomme, M.; Lee, H. -J.; Sano, T.; Baiocchi, G. L.; De Manzoni, G.; Giacopuzzi, S.; Bencivenga, M.; Rosati, R.; Puccetti, F.; D'Ugo, D.; Nunobe, S.; Yang, H. -K.; Gutschow, C. A.; Piessen, G.; Lerooy, J.; van Sandick, J. W.; Reynolds, J. V.; Morgagni, P.; Holscher, A. H.; Hemmerich, M.; Monig, S.; Chevallay, M.; Kolodziejczyk, P.; Hartgrink, H.; da Costa, P. M.; Borges, F. C.; de Medicina, F.; Davies, A.; Baker, C.; Allum, W.; Kumar, S.; Polkowski, W.; Rawicz-Pruszynski, K.; Romario, U. F.; De Pascale, S.; Tarasconi, A.; Reim, D.; Pergolini, I.; Santos, L. L.; Martins, P. C.; Biondi, A.; Degiuli, M.; Reddavid, R.; Kielan, W.; Schneider, P. M.; Murphy, T.
Autori di Ateneo:
BAIOCCHI GIANLUCA
Link alla scheda completa:
https://iris.unibs.it/handle/11379/617745
Pubblicato in:
ANNALS OF SURGERY
Journal
  • Assistenza
  • Privacy
  • Utilizzo dei cookie
  • Note legali

Realizzato con VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.6.0.0