55 169

Cited 2 times in

Trans-pacific multicenter collaborative study of minimally invasive proximal versus total gastrectomy for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers

Authors
 Naruhiko Ikoma  ;  Travis Grotz  ;  Hirofumi Kawakubo  ;  Hyoung-Il Kim  ;  Satoru Matsuda  ;  Yuki Hirata  ;  Atsushi Nakao  ;  Loretta A Williams  ;  Xin Shelley Wang  ;  Tito Mendoza  ;  Xuemei Wang  ;  Brian D Badgwell  ;  Paul F Mansfield  ;  Woo-Jin Hyung  ;  Vivian E Strong  ;  Yuko Kitagawa 
Citation
 BMC SURGERY, Vol.23(1) : 262, 2023-09 
Journal Title
BMC SURGERY
Issue Date
2023-09
MeSH
Esophagogastric Junction / surgery ; Gastrectomy ; Ghrelin* ; Humans ; Prospective Studies ; Quality of Life ; Stomach Neoplasms* / surgery
Keywords
Patient-reported outcomes ; Proximal gastrectomy ; Quality of life ; Robotic gastrectomy ; Total gastrectomy
Abstract
Background: The current standard operation for proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction (P/GEJ) cancers with limited esophageal extension is total gastrectomy (TG). TG is associated with impaired appetite and weight loss due to the loss of gastric functions such as production of ghrelin and with anemia due to intrinsic factor loss and vitamin B12 malabsorption. Theoretically, proximal gastrectomy (PG) can mitigate these problems by preserving gastric function. However, PG with direct esophagogastric reconstruction is associated with severe postoperative reflux, delayed gastric emptying, and poor quality of life (QoL). Minimally invasive PG (MIPG) with antireflux techniques has been increasingly performed by experts but is technically demanding owing to its complexity. Moreover, the actual advantages of MIPG over minimally invasive TG (MITG) with regards to postoperative QoL are unknown. Our overall objective of this study is to determine the short-term QoL benefits of MIPG. Our central hypotheses are that MIPG is safe and that patients have improved appetite after MIPG with effective antireflux techniques, which leads to an overall QoL improvement when compared with MITG.

Methods: Enrollment of a total of 60 patients in this prospective survey-collection study is expected. Procedures (MITG versus MIPG, antireflux techniques for MIPG [double-tract reconstruction versus the double-flap technique]) will be chosen based on surgeon and/or patient preference. Randomization is not considered feasible because patients often have strong preferences regarding MITG and MIPG. The primary outcome is appetite level (reported on a 0-10 scale) at 3 months after surgery. With an expected 30 patients per cohort (MITG versus MIPG), this study will have 80% power to detect a one-point difference in appetite level. Patient-reported outcomes will be longitudinally collected (including questions about appetite and reflux), and specific QoL items, body weight, body mass index and ghrelin, albumin, and hemoglobin levels will be compared.

Discussion: Surgeons from the US, Japan, and South Korea formed this collaboration with the agreement that the surgical approach to P/GEJ cancers is an internationally important but controversial topic that requires immediate action. At the completion of the proposed research, our expected outcome is the establishment of the benefit and safety of MIPG.

Trial registration: This trial was registered with Clinical Trials Reporting Program Registration under the registration number NCI-2022-00267 on January 11, 2022, as well as with ClinicalTrials.gov under the registration number NCT05205343 on January 11, 2022.
Files in This Item:
T202305158.pdf Download
DOI
10.1186/s12893-023-02163-8
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Surgery (외과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Kim, Hyoung Il(김형일) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6134-4523
Hyung, Woo Jin(형우진) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8593-9214
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/196337
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links