Skip to main content

Reconstructive procedure after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer that best prevents duodenogastroesophageal reflux

World Journal of Surgery volume 26, pages 1452–1457 (2002)Cite this article

Abstract

Billroth I and II reconstructions are commonly performed after distal gastrectomy. Both may cause duodenogastric and duodenogastro-esophageal reflux, conditions reported to have carcinogenetic potential. The aim of this study was to investigate which reconstructive procedure would most effectively prevent bile reflux into the gastric remnant and esophagus after distal gastrectomy. A group of 92 patients who underwent curative distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer were subjected and classified into three groups retrospectively by the reconstructive procedure undertaken: group A, Roux-en-Y (Roux-Y) reconstruction (n=29); group B, Billroth I reconstruction (n=41); group C, Billroth II reconstruction (n=22). The bile reflux periods (percent time) for the gastric remnant and esophagus were measured with the Bilitec 2000 under standardized conditions. The percent time for the gastric remnant was significantly less in group A than in group B or C. In 61% of all patients, bile reflux into the esophagus was found to be more than 5.0% of the time; it was less in group A than in group B or C (p=0.057). A questionnaire revealed a good correlation between the incidence of reflux symptoms and the percent time for the gastric remnant and esophagus. Roux-Y reconstruction is superior to either Billroth I or II reconstruction for preventing bile reflux into the gastric remnant and esophagus after distal gastrectomy.

Résumé

Le rétablissement de continuité après gastrectomie distale est habituellement selon Billroth I ou selon Billroth II. Cependant, les deux types de reconstruction peuvent être responsables de reflux duodénogastrique et de reflux duodénogastroesophagien, avec un risque plus élevé de développer un cancer. Le but de cette étude a été de déterminer quel type de rétablissement serait le plus efficient dans la prévention du reflux de bile dans le moignon gastrique et dans l’œsophage après gastrectomie distale. Quatre-vingt-deux patients qui ont eu une gastrectomie distale à visée curatrice pour cancer ont été inclus et classés rétrospectivement en trois groupes selon le type de reconstruction: groupe A, reconstruction par anse en Y (n=29); groupe B, rétablissement de continuité selon Billroth I (n=41); et groupe C, rétablissement selon Billroth II (n=22). La durée du reflux (en pourcentage de temps) au niveau du moignon gastrique et de l’œsophage a été mesurée dans des conditions standardisées Bilitec 2000. Le pourcentage de temps pour le moignon gastrique a été signifieativement plus bas dans le groupe A que dans les groupes B et C. La durée du reflux de bile dans l’œsophage a dépassé 5% chez 61% des patients: elle a été moins longue dans le groupe I que dans les groupes B et C (p=0.057). Grâce à un questionnaire on a pu trouver une bonne corrélation entre l’incidence des symptômes de reflux et la durée du temps de reflux dans le moignon gastrique et dans l’œsophage. Le rétablissement de continuité par anse en Y est supérieur aux rétablissements de types Billroth I et II en ce qui concerne la prévention de reflux de bile dans le moignon gastrique et dans l’œsophage après gastrectomie distale.

Resumen

Las reconstrucciones tipos Billroth I y II son las más comunes cuando se practica una gastrectomía. Sin embargo, ambas pueden causar reflujo duodenogástrico y duodeno gastroesofágico, fenómeno que se reconocen como de potencial efecto carcinogenético. El propósito del presente estudio fue investigar cuál procedimiento de reconstrucción podría prevenir el reflujo al remanente gástrico y al esófago luego de una gastrectomía distal. Noventa y dos pacientes sometidos a gastrectomía distal curativa por cáncer fueron clasificados retrospectivamente en 3 grupos: grupo A, reconstrucción de Roux-en-Y (n=29); grupo B, reconstrucción Billroth I (n=41); grupo C, reconstrucción Billroth II (n=22). El periodo de reflujo biliar (por ciento del tiempo) al estómago residual y al esófago fue determinado mediante Bilitec 2000 bajo condiciones estandarizadas. El porcentaje de tiempo para el estómago residual fue significativamente menor en el grupo A en comparación con los grupos B y C. En 61% de la totalidad de los pacientes se encontró reflujo al esófago por más del 5% del tiempo; fue menor en el grupo A que en los grupos B y C (p=0.057). La aplicación de un cuestionario reveló buena correlación entre la incidencia de los síntomas de reflujo y el porcentaje de tiempo del reflujo al remanente gástrico y al esófago. La reconstrucción de Roux-en-Y es superior a las reconstrucciones Billroth I y II en cuanto a la prevención del reflujo biliar al remanente gástrico y al esófago luego de una gastrectomía distal.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Yoshino K. History of gastric cancer surgery. J. Jpn. Surg. Soc. 2000;101:855–860

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pera M, Trastek VF, Carpenter HA, et al. Influence of pancreatic and biliary reflux on the development of esophageal carcinoma. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 1993;55:1386–1393

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Attwood SEA, Smyrk TC, DeMeeter TR, et al. Duodenoesophageal reflux and the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma in rats. Surgery 1992;111:503–510

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hopewood D, Bateson MC, Milne G, et al. Effects of bile acids and hydrogen ion on the fine structure of esophageal epithelium. Gut 1981;22:306–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association Japanese classification of gastric carcinoma. Gastric Cancer 1998;1:10–24

    Google Scholar 

  6. Caldwell MT, Byrne PJ, Brazil N, et al. Ambulatory bile reflux monitoring system; an in vitro appraisal. Physiol. Meas. 1994;15:57–65

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Matsumoto K, Uchida Y, Noguchi T, et al. A device in reconstruction method after distal gastrectomy: special reference to double tract method with jejunal pouch. J. Jpn. Surg. Soc. 1997;98:565–570

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim BJ, O’Connell T. Gastroduodenostomy after gastric resection for cancer. Am. Surg. 1999;65:905–907

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Svensson JO. Duodenogastric reflux after gastric surgery. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 1983;18:729–734

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ochiai A, Hirohashi S. Genetic alterations in the precursors of gastric cancer. In Tahara E, editor, Molecular Pathology of Gastroenterological Cancer: Application to Clinical Practice, Tokyo, Springer, 1997: 43–53

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Werscher GJ, Hinder RA, Smyrk T, et al. Gastric acid blockade with omeprazole promotes gastric carcinogenesis induced by duodenogastric reflux. Dig. Dis. Sci. 1999;44:1132–1135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Xynos E, Vassilakis JS, Fountos A, et al. Enterogastric reflux after various types of antiulcer gastric surgery: quantitation by 99mTc-HIDA scintigraphy. Gastroenterology 1991;101:991–998

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bost R, Houstein J, Valenti M, et al. Is there an abnormal fasting duodenogastric reflux in nonulcer dyspepsia? Dig. Dis. Sci. 1990;35: 193–199

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Attwood SEA, Ball CS, Barlow AP, et al. Role of intragastric and intraoesophageal alkalinization in the genesis of complication in Barrett’s columnar lined lower oesophagus. Gut 1993;34:11–15

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Just RJ, Leite LP, Castell DO. Changes in overnight fasting intragastric pH show poor correlation with duodenogastric bile reflux in normal subjects. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 1996;91:1567–1570

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bechi P, Falciai R, Baldini F, et al. A new fiberoptic sensor for ambulatory entero-gastric reflux detection. In Katzir A, editor. Fiber Optic Medical and Fluorescent Sensors and Applications, Proceedings of the Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers, Bellinsham, Society of Photo-optical instrumentation Engineers, 1992: 130–135

  17. Vaezi MF, Lacamera RG, Richter JE. Validation studies of Bilitec 2000: an ambulatory duodenogastric reflux monitoring svstcm. Am. J. Physiol. 1994;267:1050–1057

    Google Scholar 

  18. Barrett MW, Myers JC, Watson DI, et al. Dietary interference with the use of Bilitec to assess bile reflux. Dis. Esophagus 1999;12: 60–64

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pera M. Epidemiology of esophageal cancer, especially adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. Recent Results Cancer Res 2000;155:1–14

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Birgisson S, Rice TW, Easley KA, et al. The lack of association between adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastric surgery: a retrospective study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 1997;92:216–221

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Goldstein SR, Yang GY, Curtis SK, et al. Development of esophageal metaplasia and adenocarcinoma in rat surgical model without the use of a carcinogen. Carcinogenesis 1997;18:2265–2270

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Abe S. Experimental and clinical studies on lower esophageal sphincter motor function with special reference to the influence of vagal denervation. J. Smooth Muscle Res. 1994;30:97–110

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Osugi H, Higashino M, Tokuhara T, et al. Significance of ambulatory intraesophageal bilirubin monitoring in diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux. Jpn. J. Gastroenterol. 1999;32:2051–2057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Marshall REK, Anggiansah A, Owen WA, et al. The relationship between acid and bile reflux and symptoms in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Gut 1997;40:182–187

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim JP. Surgical results in gastric cancer. Semin. Surg. Oncol. 1999;17:132–138

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Onate OLF, Aiello CV, Mondragon SR, et al. Survival benefit of D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2000;7:210–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Second Department of Surgery, Osaka City University Medical School, 1-4-3 Asahimachi Abeno-ku, 545-8586, Osaka, Japan

    Kenichiro Fukuhara M.D., Harushi Osugi M.D., Nobuyasu Takada M.D., Masashi Takemura M.D., Masayuki Higashino M.D. & Hiroaki Kinoshita M.D.

Authors
  1. Kenichiro Fukuhara M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harushi Osugi M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nobuyasu Takada M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Masashi Takemura M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Masayuki Higashino M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hiroaki Kinoshita M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Published Online: October 10, 2002

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fukuhara, K., Osugi, H., Takada, N. et al. Reconstructive procedure after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer that best prevents duodenogastroesophageal reflux. World J. Surg. 26, 1452–1457 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-002-6363-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-002-6363-z

Keywords

  • Gastric Cancer
  • Distal Gastrectomy
  • Percent Time
  • Gastric Remnant
  • Bile Reflux