Effect of Four Main Gastrectomy Procedures for Proximal Gastric Cancer on Patient Quality of Life: A Nationwide Multi-Institutional Study

15Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to examine the effects of 4 main types of gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer on postoperative symptoms, living status, and quality of life (QOL) using the Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale-45 (PGSAS-45). Materials and Methods: We surveyed 1,685 patients with upper one-third gastric cancer who underwent total gastrectomy (TG; n=1,020), proximal gastrectomy (PG; n=518), TG with jejunal pouch reconstruction (TGJP; n=93), or small remnant distal gastrectomy (SRDG; n=54). The 19 main outcome measures (MOMs) of the PGSAS-45 were compared using the analysis of means (ANOM), and the general QOL score was calculated for each gastrectomy type. Results: Patients who underwent TG experienced the lowest postoperative QOL. ANOM showed that 10 MOMs were worse in patients with TG. Four MOMs improved in patients with PG, while 1 worsened. One MOM was improved in patients with TGJP versus 8 MOMs in patients with SRDG. The general QOL scores were as follows: SRDG (+39 points), TGJP (+6 points), PG (+3 points), and TG (−1 point). Conclusions: The TG group experienced the greatest decline in postoperative QOL. SRDG and PG, which preserve part of the stomach without compromising curability, and TGJP, which is used when TG is required, enhance the postoperative QOL of patients with proximal gastric cancer. When selecting the optimal gastrectomy method, it is essential to understand the characteristics of each and actively incorporate guidance to improve postoperative QOL.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nakada, K., Kimura, A., Yoshida, K., Futawatari, N., Misawa, K., Aridome, K., … Kodera, Y. (2023). Effect of Four Main Gastrectomy Procedures for Proximal Gastric Cancer on Patient Quality of Life: A Nationwide Multi-Institutional Study. Journal of Gastric Cancer, 23(2), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.5230/jgc.2023.23.e14

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free