Optimal Procedures for Double Tract Reconstruction After Proximal Gastrectomy Assessed by Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale-45

The Safety and Anti-Reflex Effect of Robotic Double-Tract Reconstruction After Proximal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

PURPOSE

Double-tract reconstruction (DTR) is one of the major procedures following proximal gastrectomy (PG) with anti-reflex function for the esophagus. Although many studies demonstrated the feasibility of laparoscopic DTR, there is a lack of research on robotic DTR. We aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic DTR following PG.

METHODS

Esophagojejunostomy was performed with a robotic stapler under endoscopic observation using the TilePro function of the Davinci Xi surgical system. The gastrojejunostomy procedure slightly differed depending on the size of the remnant stomach. Along with short-term surgical outcomes, long-term outcomes were compared based on the size of the remnant stomach.

RESULT

Thirty patients underwent robotic DTR. The median value of operative bleeding was 10 mL, although the median operative and reconstruction times were 398 and 119 min, respectively. Anastomotic complications were absent, and reflux esophagitis was not observed endoscopically 1 year after operation. Body weight loss, symptoms, and blood test findings did not differ significantly.

CONCLUSION

Robotic DTR may be a safe and favorable procedure in terms of the postoperative course and incidence of reflux esophagitis.

Function Preserving Gastrectomy and Quality of Life

Advances in gastric cancer screening have enabled earlier detection, shifting the focus of treatment toward preserving patients' quality of life (QoL). Function-preserving gastrectomy (FPG), including pylorus-preserving gastrectomy, proximal gastrectomy, and sentinel node navigation surgery, represents a paradigm shift in the surgical management of early gastric cancer. These techniques aim to balance oncological safety with the preservation of gastric function, mitigating postgastrectomy syndromes such as dumping syndrome, bile reflux, and nutritional deficiencies. QoL assessment tools, including EORTC QLQ-STO22, KOQUSS-40, and PGSAS-45, have become integral for evaluating patient-reported outcomes, providing insights into physical, emotional, and functional recovery. Although current evidence underscores the benefits of FPG, most studies are limited to East Asia, highlighting the need for multinational trials to validate these findings globally. FPG has demonstrated comparable short- and long-term oncological outcomes to conventional gastrectomy. Enhanced nutritional recovery and reduced gastrointestinal sequelae make FPG increasingly attractive. However, its widespread adoption is challenged by technical complexity, resource intensity, and the need for adequate surgical experience. The integration of advanced technologies, such as robotic surgery and artificial intelligence, coupled with personalized approaches, is expected to further optimize FPG outcomes. This review underscores the critical role of standardized QoL assessments, collaborative research, and technological innovations in advancing FPG as a cornerstone of patient-centered gastric cancer care.

Long-term quality of life after open and laparoscopic total gastrectomy for stage I gastric cancer: A prospective multi-institutional study (CCOG1504)

Background

Little information is available from prospective clinical trials on the influences of surgical approaches on postoperative quality of life (QOL). We aimed to prospectively compare chronological changes in postoperative body weight and QOL between laparoscopic and open total gastrectomy for stage I gastric cancer (GC).

Methods

We conducted a multi-institutional prospective study (CCOG1504) of patients who undergo laparoscopic or open total gastrectomy. Body weight was measured at the baseline and at the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd postoperative years (POY). QOL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the Post-Gastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale-37 (PGSAS-37) questionnaires were measured at the baseline and at the 1st, 3rd, 6th, 12th, and 36th postoperative months (POM).

Results

We enrolled 84 patients from 15 institutions, and finally 43 patients for the laparoscopic group and 16 for the open group were eligible for data analysis. There were no significant differences in body weight change between the two groups. The role functioning score among the EORTC QLQ-C30 tended to be higher (i.e., better QOL) in the laparoscopic group at POM 1 and 12 after surgery compared to the open group. The dissatisfaction at working score among the PGSAS-37 at 1 month after surgery was lower (i.e. better QOL) in the laparoscopic group compared to the open group.

Conclusions

The results of CCOG1504 indicated that laparoscopic approach for total gastrectomy was associated with a more favorable dissatisfaction at working score (PGSAS-37).

Quality of life comparison between esophagogastrostomy and double tract reconstruction for proximal gastrectomy assessed by Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS)-45

Aim

The current study compared the postoperative quality of life (QOL) between the esophagogastrostomy method (PGEG) and double tract method (PGDT) after proximal gastrectomy using the Postgastretomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS)-45.

Methods

Among the 2364 patients who received the PGSAS-45 questionnaire, 300 PGEG and 172 PGDT cases responded. The main outcomes measures (MOMs) consisted of seven subscales (SS) covering symptoms, meals (amount and quality), ability to work, dissatisfaction with daily life, physical and mental component summary of the 8-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-8), and change in body weight, and were compared between PGEG and PGDT.

Results

Overall, PGDT promoted significantly better constipation SS scores (p < 0.05), whereas PGEG tended to promote better body weight (BW) loss% (p < 0.10). A stratified analysis based on the remnant stomach size revealed that among those with a remnant stomach size of 1/2, PGDT had significantly better constipation and dumping SS scores (p < 0.05) and tended to have better working conditions (p < 0.10) compared to PGEG. Even among those with the remnant stomach size of 2/3, PGDT had significantly better diarrhea SS scores, lesser dissatisfaction with symptoms, and better dissatisfaction with daily life SS scores (p < 0.05) and tended to have better constipation SS scores and lesser dissatisfaction with work (p < 0.10) compared to PGEG.

Conclusions

After comparing the QOLs of PGEG and PGDT, the stratified analysis according to remnant stomach sizes of 1/2 and 2/3 revealed that PGDT was relatively superior to PGEG for several MOMs.