Dataset Information

Study protocol for comparing the efficacy of left-open single-flap technique versus double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Proximal gastrectomy has gradually gained more attention due to its superiority in retaining the function of part of the stomach. The inevitable loss of the antireflux barrier and postoperative complications resulting from proximal gastrectomy can severely affect the quality of life. Continuous improvements in digestive tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy have yielded the development of a variety of methods with antireflux functions. Recently, our center attempted the left-open single-flap technique and initiated a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial for patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy to reduce the difficulty of surgical anastomosis and the incidence of perioperative complications compared with the double-flap technique. These findings will provide more evidence-based medical research for the development of clinical guidelines.

Methods/design

This study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial. We plan to recruit 250 patients who are eligible for proximal gastrectomy. After informed consent is obtained, patients will be randomly assigned to the trial group (left-open single-flap technique) and the control group (double-flap technique) in a 1:1 allocation ratio.

Discussion

Increasingly, clinical studies have focused on the improvement of reconstruction modalities after proximal gastrectomy. Among these methods, the double-flap technique is a clinically effective method. The purpose of this study is to establish a prospective randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of the left-open single-flap technique versus the double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy, aiming to provide more evidence-based medical studies for digestive tract reconstruction in proximal gastrectomy.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier [NCT05418920].

SUBMITTER: Yang QC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9712947 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Study protocol for comparing the efficacy of left-open single-flap technique versus double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Yang Qin Chuan QC Wang Wei Dong WD Mo Zhen Chang ZC Yue Chao C Zhou Hai Kun HK Gao Rui Qi RQ Yu Juan J Dong Dan Hong DH Liu Jin Qiang JQ Wei Jiang Peng JP Yang Xi Sheng XS Ji Gang G Li Xiao Hua XH

Frontiers in oncology 20221117

<h4>Background</h4>Proximal gastrectomy has gradually gained more attention due to its superiority in retaining the function of part of the stomach. The inevitable loss of the antireflux barrier and postoperative complications resulting from proximal gastrectomy can severely affect the quality of life. Continuous improvements in digestive tract reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy have yielded the development of a variety of methods with antireflux functions. Recently, our center attempted ...[more]

PMID: 36465382

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionLaparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double flap technique (LPG-DFT) reconstruction has been used for proximal early gastric cancer in recent years. However, its feasibility and safety remain uncertain, as only a few retrospective studies have contained postoperative complications and long-term survival data. LPG-DFT for proximal early gastric cancer is still in the early stages of research. Large-scale, prospective randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are necessary to assess the value of LPG-DFT for proximal early gastric cancer.Methods and analysisThis study is a multicentre, prospective, open-label, RCT that investigates the antireflux effect of LPG-DFT compared with laparoscopic total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (LTG-RY) reconstruction for proximal early gastric cancer. A total of 216 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to the LPG-DFT group or the LTG-RY group at a 1:1 ratio using a central, dynamic and stratified block randomisation method, if inclusion criteria are met. General and clinical data will be collected when the patient is enrolled in the study and keep pace with the patient at each stage of his medical and follow-up pathway. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with reflux esophagitis (Los Angeles Grade B or more) within 12 months postoperatively. The secondary endpoints included intraoperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, postoperative pain assessment, pathological outcomes, postoperative quality of life, postoperative nutrition status, morbidity and mortality rate, and oncological outcomes (3-year overall survival (OS), 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 5-year DFS and 5-year OS).Ethics and disseminationThe protocol is approved by the Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University ethics committee (registration number: SYSKY-2022-276-02) on 28 September 2022.We will report the positive as well as negative findings in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberNCT05890339.

Project description:BackgroundThe 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.MethodsEnrollment 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.DiscussionSurgeons 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 registrationThis 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.

Project description:BackgroundFor gastric cancer patients, surgical resection with en-bloc lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of curative treatment. Open gastrectomy has long been the preferred surgical approach worldwide. However, this procedure is associated with considerable morbidity. Several meta-analyses have shown an advantage in short-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy compared to open procedures, with similar oncologic outcomes. However, it remains unclear whether the results of these Asian studies can be extrapolated to the Western population. In this trial from the Netherlands, patients with resectable gastric cancer will be randomized to laparoscopic or open gastrectomy.MethodsThe study is a non-blinded, multicenter, prospectively randomized controlled superiority trial. Patients (≥18 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3b, M0) gastric adenocarcinoma and European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 are eligible to participate in the study after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 210) will be included in one of the ten participating Dutch centers and are randomized to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. The primary outcome is postoperative hospital stay (days). Secondary outcome parameters include postoperative morbidity and mortality, oncologic outcomes, readmissions, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.DiscussionIn this randomized controlled trial laparoscopic and open gastrectomy are compared in patients with resectable gastric cancer. It is expected that laparoscopic gastrectomy will result in a faster recovery of the patient and a shorter hospital stay. Secondly, it is expected that laparoscopic gastrectomy will be associated with a lower postoperative morbidity, less readmissions, higher cost-effectiveness, better postoperative quality of life, but with similar mortality and oncologic outcomes, compared to open gastrectomy. The study started on 1 December 2014. Inclusion and follow-up will take 3 and 5 years respectively. Short-term results will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient.Trial registrationNCT02248519.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Compared with open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer has achieved rapid development and popularities in the past decades. However, lack of comprehensive analysis in long-term oncological outcomes such as recurrence and mortality hinder its full support as a valid procedure. Therefore, there are still debates on whether one of these options is superior. AIM:To evaluate the primary and secondary outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients METHODS: Two authors independently extracted study data. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for binary outcomes, mean difference (MD) or the standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes, and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. Review Manager 5.3 and STATA software were used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS:Seventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 5204 participants were included in this meta-analysis. There were no differences in the primary outcomes including the number of lymph nodes harvested during operation, severe complications, short-term and long-term recurrence, and mortality. As for secondary outcomes, compared with the OG group, longer operative time was required for patients in the LG group (MD = 58.80 min, 95% CI = [45.80, 71.81], P < 0.001), but there were less intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 54.93 ml, 95% CI = [- 81.60, - 28.26], P < 0.001), less analgesic administration (frequency: MD = - 1.73, 95% CI = [- 2.21, - 1.24], P < 0.001; duration: MD = - 1.26 days, 95% CI = [- 1.40, - 1.12], P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (MD = - 1.37 days, 95% CI = [- 2.05, - 0.70], P < 0.001), shorter time to first flatus (MD = - 0.58 days, 95% CI = [- 0.79, - 0.37], P < 0.001), ambulation (MD = - 0.50 days, 95% CI = [- 0.90, - 0.09], P = 0.02) and oral intake (MD = - 0.64 days, 95% CI = [- 1.24, - 0.03], P < 0.04), and less total complications (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = [0.71, 0.93], P = 0.003) in the OG group. There was no difference in blood transfusions (number, quantity) between these two groups. Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and the adjustment of Duval's trim and fill methods for publication bias did not change the conclusions. CONCLUSION:LG was comparable to OG in the primary outcomes and had some advantages in secondary outcomes for gastric cancer patients. LG is superior to OG for gastric cancer patients.

Dataset Information

Study protocol for comparing the efficacy of left-open single-flap technique versus double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Clinical trial registration

Publications

Study protocol for comparing the efficacy of left-open single-flap technique versus double-flap technique after proximal gastrectomy: A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets