Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience

Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0*$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7*$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Teng, Wenhao [verfasserIn] Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Zang, Weidong

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery Gastric cancer Laparoscopic surgery Total gastrectomy Single-incision plus one port Single-incision plus two ports

Anmerkung:	© The Author(s) 2023

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: BMC surgery - London : BioMed Central, 2001, 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:23 ; year:2023 ; number:1 ; day:30 ; month:03

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1

Katalog-ID:	SPR05241857X

Internformat


LEADER	01000naa a22002652 4500
001	SPR05241857X
003	DE-627
005	20230726102714.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230726s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)SPR05241857X
035			\|a (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	1		\|a Teng, Wenhao \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © The Author(s) 2023
520			\|a Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients.
650		4	\|a Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Gastric cancer \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Laparoscopic surgery \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Total gastrectomy \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Single-incision plus one port \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
650		4	\|a Single-incision plus two ports \|7 (dpeaa)DE-He213
700	1		\|a Liu, Jingfu \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Liu, Wenju \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Jiang, Jianping \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Chen, Meimei \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Zang, Weidong \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t BMC surgery \|d London : BioMed Central, 2001 \|g 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März \|w (DE-627)331018837 \|w (DE-600)2050442-1 \|x 1471-2482 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:23 \|g year:2023 \|g number:1 \|g day:30 \|g month:03
856	4	0	\|u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 \|z kostenfrei \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_SPRINGER
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 23 \|j 2023 \|e 1 \|b 30 \|c 03

Indexfelder

author_variant	w t wt j l jl w l wl j j jj m c mc w z wz
matchkey_str	article:14712482:2023----::hrtrotoeordcdotaaocpcugrvrucnetoalprsoisreyottla
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 doi (DE-627)SPR05241857X (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Teng, Wenhao verfasserin aut Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastric cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 Laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total gastrectomy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus one port (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus two ports (dpeaa)DE-He213 Liu, Jingfu aut Liu, Wenju aut Jiang, Jianping aut Chen, Meimei aut Zang, Weidong aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 23 2023 1 30 03
spelling	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 doi (DE-627)SPR05241857X (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Teng, Wenhao verfasserin aut Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastric cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 Laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total gastrectomy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus one port (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus two ports (dpeaa)DE-He213 Liu, Jingfu aut Liu, Wenju aut Jiang, Jianping aut Chen, Meimei aut Zang, Weidong aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 23 2023 1 30 03
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 doi (DE-627)SPR05241857X (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Teng, Wenhao verfasserin aut Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastric cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 Laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total gastrectomy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus one port (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus two ports (dpeaa)DE-He213 Liu, Jingfu aut Liu, Wenju aut Jiang, Jianping aut Chen, Meimei aut Zang, Weidong aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 23 2023 1 30 03
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 doi (DE-627)SPR05241857X (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Teng, Wenhao verfasserin aut Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastric cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 Laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total gastrectomy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus one port (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus two ports (dpeaa)DE-He213 Liu, Jingfu aut Liu, Wenju aut Jiang, Jianping aut Chen, Meimei aut Zang, Weidong aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 23 2023 1 30 03
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 doi (DE-627)SPR05241857X (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Teng, Wenhao verfasserin aut Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2023 Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastric cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 Laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total gastrectomy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus one port (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus two ports (dpeaa)DE-He213 Liu, Jingfu aut Liu, Wenju aut Jiang, Jianping aut Chen, Meimei aut Zang, Weidong aut Enthalten in BMC surgery London : BioMed Central, 2001 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 23 2023 1 30 03
language	English
source	Enthalten in BMC surgery 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03
sourceStr	Enthalten in BMC surgery 23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März volume:23 year:2023 number:1 day:30 month:03
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery Gastric cancer Laparoscopic surgery Total gastrectomy Single-incision plus one port Single-incision plus two ports
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	BMC surgery
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Teng, Wenhao @@aut@@ Liu, Jingfu @@aut@@ Liu, Wenju @@aut@@ Jiang, Jianping @@aut@@ Chen, Meimei @@aut@@ Zang, Weidong @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-03-30T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	331018837
id	SPR05241857X
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR05241857X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230726102714.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230726s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR05241857X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Teng, Wenhao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gastric cancer</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Laparoscopic surgery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Total gastrectomy</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Single-incision plus one port</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Single-incision plus two ports</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Jingfu</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Wenju</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiang, Jianping</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chen, Meimei</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zang, Weidong</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:23</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:30</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">23</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">30</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Teng, Wenhao
spellingShingle	Teng, Wenhao misc Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery misc Gastric cancer misc Laparoscopic surgery misc Total gastrectomy misc Single-incision plus one port misc Single-incision plus two ports Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
authorStr	Teng, Wenhao
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)331018837
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	springer
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1471-2482
topic_title	Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Gastric cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 Laparoscopic surgery (dpeaa)DE-He213 Total gastrectomy (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus one port (dpeaa)DE-He213 Single-incision plus two ports (dpeaa)DE-He213
topic	misc Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery misc Gastric cancer misc Laparoscopic surgery misc Total gastrectomy misc Single-incision plus one port misc Single-incision plus two ports
topic_unstemmed	misc Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery misc Gastric cancer misc Laparoscopic surgery misc Total gastrectomy misc Single-incision plus one port misc Single-incision plus two ports
topic_browse	misc Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery misc Gastric cancer misc Laparoscopic surgery misc Total gastrectomy misc Single-incision plus one port misc Single-incision plus two ports
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	BMC surgery
hierarchy_parent_id	331018837
hierarchy_top_title	BMC surgery
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1
title	Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
ctrlnum	(DE-627)SPR05241857X (SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e
title_full	Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
author_sort	Teng, Wenhao
journal	BMC surgery
journalStr	BMC surgery
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Teng, Wenhao Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Zang, Weidong
container_volume	23
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Teng, Wenhao
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1
title_sort	short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
title_auth	Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
abstract	Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. © The Author(s) 2023
abstractGer	Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. © The Author(s) 2023
abstract_unstemmed	Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients. © The Author(s) 2023
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience
url	https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1
remote_bool	true
author2	Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Zang, Weidong
author2Str	Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Zang, Weidong
ppnlink	331018837
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1
up_date	2024-07-04T02:44:03.491Z
_version_	1803614728743813120
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR05241857X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230726102714.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230726s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR05241857X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12893-023-01972-1-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Teng, Wenhao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy. Methods One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups. Results The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0$ 10^{9} $/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7$ 10^{9} $/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn’t find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Conclusions RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gastric cancer</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Laparoscopic surgery</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Total gastrectomy</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Single-incision plus one port</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Single-incision plus two ports</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Jingfu</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Liu, Wenju</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jiang, Jianping</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chen, Meimei</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zang, Weidong</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">London : BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">23(2023), 1 vom: 30. März</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:23</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:30</subfield><subfield code="g">month:03</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-01972-1</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">23</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">30</subfield><subfield code="c">03</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3998117

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?