World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 42, Issue 5, pp 1477–1484 | Cite as

Clinical Outcomes of Gastric Cancer Patients Who Underwent Proximal or Total Gastrectomy: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

  • Yuki Ushimaru
  • Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
  • Yuji Shishido
  • Yoshitomo Yanagimoto
  • Jeong-Ho Moon
  • Keijiro Sugimura
  • Takeshi Omori
  • Hiroshi Miyata
  • Masahiko Yano
Original Scientific Report

Abstract

Background

Total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) are used to treat upper-third early gastric cancer. To date, no consensus has been reached regarding which procedure should be selected. The aim of this study was to validate the usefulness of preserving the stomach in early upper-third gastric cancer.

Methods

Between 2004 and 2013, 201 patients underwent PG or TG at our institution for treatment of upper-third early gastric cancer. According to the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 192 cases were enrolled in this study. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the outcomes between the two groups.

Results

The operation time was shorter in the PG group. Although no significant difference was observed, the PG group had less bleeding and fewer postoperative complications. R0 resection rate was 100%, and no surgery-related deaths were observed. The frequencies of reflux symptoms and anastomotic stenosis were significantly higher in the PG group, but could be controlled by balloon dilation and drug therapy. The maintenance rates of body mass index and lean body mass were significantly higher in patients who underwent PG than TG. The total protein and serum albumin values were higher in the PG group than in the TG group and remained statistically superior.

Conclusion

PG group exhibited better perioperative performance. Furthermore, better nutritional results were obtained in the PG group. Although the late stenosis and reflux symptoms must be addressed, the PG is a preferable surgical procedure for the treatment of early proximal gastric cancer.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Drs. Yuki Ushimaru, Yoshiyuki Fujiwara, Yuji Shishido, Yoshitomo Yanagimoto, Jeong-Ho Moon, Keijiro Sugimura, Takeshi Omori, Hiroshi Miyata, and Masahiko Yano have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R et al (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 136:E359–E386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL et al (2015) Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 65:87–108CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dassen AE, Lemmens VE, van de Poll-Franse LV et al (2010) Trends in incidence, treatment and survival of gastric adenocarcinoma between 1990 and 2007: a population-based study in the Netherlands. Eur J Cancer 46:1101–1110CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kusano C, Gotoda T, Khor CJ et al (2008) Changing trends in the proportion of adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction in a large tertiary referral center in Japan. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 23:1662–1665CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steevens J, Botterweck AA, Dirx MJ et al (2010) Trends in incidence of oesophageal and stomach cancer subtypes in Europe. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 22:669–678PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu H, Rusiecki JA, Zhu K et al (2009) Stomach carcinoma incidence patterns in the United States by histologic type and anatomic site. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev Publ Am Assoc Cancer Res Cospons Am Soc Prev Oncol 18:1945–1952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yamashita H, Katai H, Morita S et al (2011) Optimal extent of lymph node dissection for Siewert type II esophagogastric junction carcinoma. Ann Surg 254:274–280CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Crew KD, Neugut AI (2006) Epidemiology of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 12:354–362CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deans C, Yeo MS, Soe MY et al (2011) Cancer of the gastric cardia is rising in incidence in an Asian population and is associated with adverse outcome. World J Surg 35:617–624. doi: 10.1007/s00268-010-0935-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shang J, Pena AS (2005) Multidisciplinary approach to understand the pathogenesis of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 11:4131–4139CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ooki A, Yamashita K, Kikuchi S et al (2008) Clinical significance of total gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer. Anticancer Res 28:2875–2883PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Katai H, Morita S, Saka M et al (2010) Long-term outcome after proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition for suspected early cancer in the upper third of the stomach. Br J Surg 97:558–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ichikawa D, Komatsu S, Kubota T et al (2014) Long-term outcomes of patients who underwent limited proximal gastrectomy. Gastric Cancer 17:141–145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    An JY, Youn HG, Choi MG et al (2008) The difficult choice between total and proximal gastrectomy in proximal early gastric cancer. Am J Surg 196:587–591. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2007.09.040 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huh YJ, Lee HJ, Oh SY et al (2015) Clinical outcome of modified laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy compared to conventional proximal gastrectomy or total gastrectomy for upper-third early gastric cancer with special references to postoperative reflux esophagitis. J Gastric Cancer 15:191–200CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ikeguchi M, Kader A, Takaya S et al (2012) Prognosis of patients with gastric cancer who underwent proximal gastrectomy. Int Surg 97:275–279CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kondoh Y, Okamoto Y, Morita M et al (2007) Clinical outcome of proximal gastrectomy in patients with early gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach. Tokai J Exp Clin Med 32:48–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shiraishi N, Adachi Y, Kitano S et al (2002) Clinical outcome of proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer. World J Surg 26:1150–1154. doi: 10.1007/s00268-002-6369-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Austin PC (2011) An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivar Behav Res 46:399–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang Y, Cai H, Li C et al (2013) Optimal caliper width for propensity score matching of three treatment groups: a Monte Carlo study. PLoS ONE 8:e81045CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2011) Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010 (ver. 3). Gastric Cancer 14:113–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2011) Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma: 3rd English edition. Gastric Cancer 14:101–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Armstrong D, Bennett JR, Blum AL et al (1996) The endoscopic assessment of esophagitis: a progress report on observer agreement. Gastroenterology 111:85–92CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Visick AH (1948) Measured radical gastrectomy; review of 505 operations for peptic ulcer. Lancet 1:551–555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Deurenberg P, Weststrate JA, Seidell JC (1991) Body mass index as a measure of body fatness: age- and sex-specific prediction formulas. Br J Nutr 65:105–114CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wen L, Chen XZ, Wu B et al (2012) Total vs. proximal gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hepatogastroenterology 59:633–640PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Masuzawa T, Takiguchi S, Hirao M et al (2014) Comparison of perioperative and long-term outcomes of total and proximal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: a multi-institutional retrospective study. World J Surg 38:1100–1106. doi: 10.1007/s00268-013-2370-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hsu CP, Chen CY, Hsieh YH et al (1997) Esophageal reflux after total or proximal gastrectomy in patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastric cardia. Am J Gastroenterol 92:1347–1350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Akarsu C, Unsal MG, Dural AC et al (2015) Endoscopic balloon dilatation as an effective treatment for lower and upper benign gastrointestinal system anastomotic stenosis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 25:138–142CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee HJ, Park W, Lee H et al (2014) Endoscopy-guided balloon dilation of benign anastomotic strictures after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Gut Liver 8:394–399CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ryan AM, Healy LA, Power DG et al (2007) Short-term nutritional implications of total gastrectomy for malignancy, and the impact of parenteral nutritional support. Clin Nutr 26:718–727CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Aoyama T, Kawabe T, Fujikawa H et al (2015) Loss of lean body mass as an independent risk factor for continuation of S-1 adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 22:2560–2566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Aoyama T, Sato T, Segami K et al (2016) Risk factors for the loss of lean body mass after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 23:1963–1970CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Son MW, Kim YJ, Jeong GA et al (2014) Long-term outcomes of proximal gastrectomy versus total gastrectomy for upper-third gastric cancer. J Gastric Cancer 14:246–251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yuki Ushimaru
    • 1
  • Yoshiyuki Fujiwara
    • 1
  • Yuji Shishido
    • 1
  • Yoshitomo Yanagimoto
    • 1
  • Jeong-Ho Moon
    • 1
  • Keijiro Sugimura
    • 1
  • Takeshi Omori
    • 1
  • Hiroshi Miyata
    • 1
  • Masahiko Yano
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryOsaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular DiseaseOsaka CityJapan

Personalised recommendations