Advertisement

Revisiting Laparoscopic Reconstruction for Billroth 1 Versus Billroth 2 Versus Roux-en-Y After Distal Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in the Modern Era

  • Min Seo Kim
  • Yeongkeun Kwon
  • Eun Pyung Park
  • Liang An
  • Haeyeon Park
  • Sungsoo ParkEmail author
Scientific Review

Abstract

Background

In this modern era, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) has largely replaced open distal gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer; however, a quantitative review of reconstruction methods applied exclusively using LDG has not yet been published. Thereafter, we compared three reconstruction methods (Billroth I, Billroth II, and Roux-en Y) using the data derived solely from LDG patients.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted using electronic bibliographic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, and Embase), for articles that compared reconstruction methods in LDG, published within the last decade. A systematic review comparing 12 outcome parameters and sensitivity analyses were performed to increase the statistical power and minimize the inconsistency and heterogeneity of results.

Results

Twenty-three clinical trials involving 5797 patients were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in the postoperative recovery and intraoperative parameters, except for operation time. B1 demonstrated a significantly shorter operation time when compared with B2 and RY by 21.6 min (P < 0.0001) and 44.69 min (P < 0.0001), respectively. In terms of postoperative endoscopic symptoms, RY was significantly superior to B1 and B2 for bile reflux (P < 0.001) and remnant gastritis (P < 0.001). For postoperative complications, B1 showed a significantly lower rate of postoperative morbidity than did RY and B2 (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0005, respectively).

Conclusions

Our study is the first meta-analysis comparing anastomoses in LDG and introduces novel criteria for consideration when selecting reconstructions in LDG. Considering the significant differences in postoperative complications and endoscopic symptoms, these two parameters lay reasonable groundwork for guiding the surgeon’s choice of reconstruction.

Abbreviations

LDG

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy

ODG

Open distal gastrectomy

B1

Billroth 1

B2

Billroth 2

RY

Roux-en-Y

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI) and funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (Grant Number: HC17C0050).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

268_2019_4943_MOESM1_ESM.docx (30 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 30 kb)
268_2019_4943_MOESM2_ESM.tif (10.5 mb)
Supplementary Fig. 1 Forest plot comparing operation time for laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. a. Billroth I versus Roux-en Y, b. Billroth II versus Roux-en Y, and c Billroth I versus Billroth II. An inverse variance random-effects model (a, b) and fixed-effect model(c) were used for meta-analysis. (TIFF 10702 kb)
268_2019_4943_MOESM3_ESM.tif (8.1 mb)
Supplementary Fig. 2 Forest plot comparing remnant gastritis after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. a. Billroth I versus Roux-en Y, b. Billroth II versus Roux-en Y, and c. Billroth I versus Billroth II. A Mantel–Haenszel random-effects model was used for meta-analysis. (TIFF 8311 kb)
268_2019_4943_MOESM4_ESM.tif (7.9 mb)
Supplementary Fig. 3 Forest plot comparing bile reflux after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. a. Billroth I versus Roux-en Y, b. Billroth II versus Roux-en Y, and c. Billroth I versus Billroth II. A Mantel–Haenszel random-effects model (b) and fixed-effect model (a, c) were used for meta-analysis. (TIFF 8063 kb)
268_2019_4943_MOESM5_ESM.tif (4.7 mb)
Supplementary Fig. 4 Forest plot comparing reflux esophagitis after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. a. Billroth I versus Roux-en Y and b. Billroth II versus Roux-en Y. A Mantel–Haenszel fixed-effect model (a) and random-effects model (b) were used for meta-analysis. (TIFF 4819 kb)
268_2019_4943_MOESM6_ESM.tif (1.7 mb)
Supplementary Fig. 5 Funnel plot for publication bias evaluation(B1 versus RY overall complications). (TIFF 1739 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Viñuela EF, Gonen M, Brennan MF et al (2012) Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized studies. Ann Surg 255:446–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim W, Song KY, Lee H-J et al (2008) The impact of comorbidity on surgical outcomes in laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy: a retrospective analysis of multicenter results. Ann Surg 248:793–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee HW, Kim H-I, An JY et al (2011) Intracorporeal anastomosis using linear stapler in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: comparison between gastroduodenostomy and gastrojejunostomy. J Gastric Cancer 11:212–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kang K-C, Cho GS, Han SU et al (2011) Comparison of Billroth I and Billroth II reconstructions after laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy: a retrospective analysis of large-scale multicenter results from Korea. Surg Endosc 25:1953–1961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen Y-S, Wu S-D, Kong J (2014) Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy and total intracorporeal reconstruction of the digestive tract in the treatment of benign peptic ulcers. J Surg Res 192:421–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shim JH, Oh SI, Yoo HM et al (2014) Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy after totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: comparison with Billorth II reconstruction. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 24:448–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choi CI, Baek DH, Lee SH et al (2016) Comparison between Billroth-II with Braun and Roux-en-Y reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 20:1083–1090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim JJ, Kim SK, Jun KH et al (2007) Comparison of an uncut Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy with a Billroth I gastroduodenostomy after totally laproscopic distal gastrectomy. J Korean Gastric Cancer 7:139–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim TG, Hur H, Ahn CW et al (2011) Efficacy of Roux-en-Y reconstruction using two circular staplers after subtotal gastrectomy: results from a pilot study comparing with Billroth-I reconstruction. J Gastric Cancer 11:219–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nomura E, Lee S-W, Bouras G et al (2011) Functional outcomes according to the size of the gastric remnant and type of reconstruction following laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 14:279–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oki E, Sakaguchi Y, Ohgaki K et al (2011) Surgical complications and the risk factors of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 21:146–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kumagai K, Hiki N, Nunobe S et al (2011) Different features of complications with Billroth-I and Roux-en-Y reconstruction after laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 15:2145–2152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee S-W, Tanigawa N, Nomura E et al (2012) Benefits of intracorporeal gastrointestinal anastomosis following laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. World J Surg Oncol 10:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    An JY, Cho I, Choi YY et al (2014) Totally laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: analysis of initial 50 consecutive cases of single surgeon in comparison with totally laparoscopic Billroth I reconstruction. Yonsei Med J 55:162–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Inokuchi M, Kojima K, Yamada H et al (2013) Long-term outcomes of Roux-en-Y and Billroth-I reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Gastric Cancer 16:67–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Okabe H, Obama K, Tsunoda S et al (2014) Advantage of completely laparoscopic gastrectomy with linear stapled reconstruction: a long-term follow-up study. Ann Surg 259:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kitagami H, Morimoto M, Nozawa M et al (2014) Evaluation of the delta-shaped anastomosis in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: midterm results of a comparison with Roux-en-Y anastomosis. Surg Endosc 28:2137–2144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suh Y-S, Park J-H, Kim TH et al (2015) Unaided stapling technique for pure single-incision distal gastrectomy in early gastric cancer: unaided delta-shaped anastomosis and uncut Roux-en-Y anastomosis. J Gastric Cancer 15:105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Komatsu S, Ichikawa D, Kubota T et al (2015) Clinical outcomes and quality of life according to types of reconstruction following laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 25:69–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Park JY, Kim YJ (2014) Uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy can be a favorable method in terms of gastritis, bile reflux, and gastric residue. J Gastric Cancer 14:229–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim CH, Song KY, Park CH et al (2015) A comparison of outcomes of three reconstruction methods after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. J Gastric Cancer 15:46–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee S-W, Kawai M, Tashiro K et al (2016) Laparoscopic gastrointestinal anastomoses using knotless barbed absorbable sutures are safe and reproducible: a single-center experience with 242 patients. Jpn J Clin Oncol 46:329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yang D, He L, Tong W-H et al (2017) Randomized controlled trial of uncut Roux-en-Y vs Billroth II reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: which technique is better for avoiding biliary reflux and gastritis? World J Gastroenterol 23(34):6350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Choi YY, Noh SH, An JY (2017) A randomized controlled trial of Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy vs. gastroduodenostomy with respect to the improvement of type 2 diabetes mellitus after distal gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients. PLoS ONE 12(12):e0188904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ et al (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Higgins J, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21:1539–1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25(9):603–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 151:264–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fleiss J (1993) Review papers: the statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 2:121–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zong L, Chen P (2010) Billroth I vs. Billroth II vs. Roux-en-Y following distal gastrectomy: a meta-analysis based on 15 studies. Hepatogastroenterology 58:1413–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xiong J-J, Altaf K, Javed MA et al (2013) Roux-en-Y versus Billroth I reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 19:1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chareton B, Landen S, Manganas D et al (1996) Prospective randomized trial comparing Billroth I and Billroth II procedures for carcinoma of the gastric antrum. J Am Coll Surg 183:190–194Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zeng Y-K, Yang Z-L, Peng J-S et al (2012) Laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: evidence from randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. Ann Surg 256:39–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fukuhara K, Osugi H, Takemura M et al (2002) Reconstructive procedure after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer that best prevents duodenogastroesophageal reflux. World J Surg 26(12):1452–1457.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-002-6363-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ishikawa M, Kitayama J, Kaizaki S et al (2005) Prospective randomized trial comparing Billroth I and Roux-en-Y procedures after distal gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma. World J Surg 29(11):1415–1420.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7830-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Osugi H, Fukuhara K, Takada N et al (2003) Reconstructive procedure after distal gastrectomy to prevent remnant gastritis. Hepatogastroenterology 51:1215–1218Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shinoto K, Ochiai T, Suzuki T et al (2003) Effectiveness of Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy based on an assessment of biliary kinetics. Surg Today 33:169–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Nunobe S, Okaro A, Sasako M et al (2007) Billroth 1 versus Roux-en-Y reconstructions: a quality-of-life survey at 5 years. Int J Clin Oncol 12:433–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Piessen G, Triboulet J-P, Mariette C (2010) Reconstruction after gastrectomy: which technique is best? J Visc Surg 147:e273–e283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lee M-S, Ahn S-H, Lee J-H et al (2012) What is the best reconstruction method after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer? Surg Endosc 26:1539–1547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Vogel SB, Drane WE, Woodward ER (1994) Clinical and radionuclide evaluation of bile diversion by Braun enteroenterostomy: prevention and treatment of alkaline reflux gastritis. Ann Surg 219:459–465Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cui LH, Son SY, Shin HJ et al (2017) Billroth II with Braun Enteroenterostomy Is a Good Alternative Reconstruction to Roux-en-Y Gastrojejunostomy in Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy. Gastroenterol Res Pract 180:38–51Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of SurgeryKorea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of MedicineSeoulKorea
  2. 2.Department of Family MedicineKorea University College of MedicineSeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations