Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Optimal Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer as assessed using the newly developed PGSAS-45 scale

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgery Today Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The optimal surgical procedure for distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (DGRY) remains to be determined. Recently, a self-report assessment instrument, the Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale-45 (PGSAS-45), was compiled to evaluate symptoms, the living status and the quality of life of patients who have undergone gastrectomy. We used this scale to evaluate procedures used for DGRY.

Methods

The subjects included 475 patients who underwent DGRY for stage IA/IB gastric cancer. We evaluated whether the size of the remnant stomach, length of the Roux limb, reconstruction route and anastomotic procedure affected the patients’ symptoms, living status and quality of life assessed using the PGSAS-45.

Results

Patients with a residual stomach of more than half had significantly worse esophageal reflux scores than the patients with a smaller residual stomach (P = 0.0462); a residual stomach of one-third or one-fourth was favorable. A shorter length of the Roux limb was shown to be preferable to a longer Roux limb based on the results of the PGSAS-45. In addition, antecolic reconstruction and the anastomotic procedure using a linear stapler were found to be more favorable.

Conclusions

The size of the remnant stomach and the length and route of the Roux limb significantly influence the patient-reported DGRY outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yoshino K. History of gastric cancer surgery. [Article in Japanese] (in jpn). Nihon Geka Gakkai zasshi 2000;101:855–60.

  2. Kelly KA, Becker JM, van Heerden JA. Reconstructive gastric surgery (in eng). Br J Surg. 1981;68:687–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fukuhara K, Osugi H, Takada N, Takemura M, Higashino M, Kinoshita H. Reconstructive procedure after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer that best prevents duodenogastroesophageal reflux (in eng). World J Surg. 2002;26:1452–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Osugi H, Fukuhara K, Takada N, Takemura M, Kinoshita H. Reconstructive procedure after distal gastrectomy to prevent remnant gastritis. Hepatogastroenterology. 2004;51:1215–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kauer WK, Peters JH, DeMeester TR, Feussner H, Ireland AP, Stein HJ, et al. Composition and concentration of bile acid reflux into the esophagus of patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Surgery. 1997;122:874–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Svensson JO. Duodenogastric reflux after gastric surgery. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1983;18:729–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nunobe S, Okaro A, Sasako M, Saka M, Fukagawa T, Katai H, et al. Billroth 1 versus Roux-en-Y reconstructions: a quality-of-life survey at 5 years (in eng). Int J Clin Oncol. 2007;12:433–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mathias JR, Fernandez A, Sninsky CA, Clench MH, Davis RH. Nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain after Roux-en-Y anastomosis: motility of the jejunal limb. Gastroenterology. 1985;88:101–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Woodward A, Sillin LF, Wojtowycz AR, Bortoff A. Gastric stasis of solids after Roux gastrectomy: is the jejunal transection important? Journal Surg Res. 1993;55:317–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Nakada K, Ikeda M, Takahashi M, Kinami S, Yoshida M, Uenosono Y, et al. Characteristics and clinical relevance of postgastrectomy syndrome assessment scale (PGSAS)-45: newly developed integrated questionnaires for assessment of living status and quality of life in postgastrectomy patients (in Eng). Gastric cancer: official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association 2014.

  11. Ware J, Kosinsk M, Dewey J, Gandek B. How to score and interpret single-item health status measures: a manual for users of the SF-8 health survey. In: Lincoln RI. Quality Metric Incorporated; (2001).

  12. Tokuda Y, Okubo T, Ohde S, Jacobs J, Takahashi O, Omata F, et al. Assessing items on the SF-8 Japanese version for health-related quality of life: a psychometric analysis based on the nominal categories model of item response theory (in eng). Value Health. 2009;12:568–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Svedlund J, Sjodin I, Dotevall G. GSRS–a clinical rating scale for gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and peptic ulcer disease (in eng). Dig Dis Sci. 1988;33:129–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ishikawa M, Kitayama J, Kaizaki S, Nakayama H, Ishigami H, Fujii S, et al. Prospective randomized trial comparing Billroth I and Roux-en-Y procedures after distal gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma (in eng). World J Surg 2005;29:1415–1420.

  15. Kim BJ, O’Connell T. Gastroduodenostomy after gastric resection for cancer (in eng). Am Surg. 1999;65:905–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Takiguchi S, Yamamoto K, Hirao M, Imamura H, Fujita J, Yano M, et al. A comparison of postoperative quality of life and dysfunction after Billroth I and Roux-en-Y reconstruction following distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: results from a multi-institutional RCT (in eng). Gastric Cancer. 2012;15:198–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nomura E, Lee SW, Bouras G, Tokuhara T, Hayashi M, Hiramatsu M, et al. Functional outcomes according to the size of the gastric remnant and type of reconstruction following laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer (in eng). Gastric Cancer. 2011;14:279–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Karlstrom L, Kelly KA. Ectopic jejunal pacemakers and gastric emptying after Roux gastrectomy: effect of intestinal pacing (in eng). Surgery. 1989;106:867–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li FY, Jiang LS, Cheng JQ, Mao H, Li N, Cheng NS. Clinical application prospects of gastric pacing for treating postoperative gastric motility disorders (in eng). J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;22:2055–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Imamura N, Chijiiwa K, Ohuchida J, Hiyoshi M, Nagano M, Otani K, Kondo K, et al. Prospective randomized clinical trial of a change in gastric emptying and nutritional status after a pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: comparison between an antecolic and a vertical retrocolic duodenojejunostomy. LID. doi:10.1111/hpb.12153 (in Eng).

  21. Masui T, Kubora T, Nakanishi Y, Aoki K, Sugimoto S, Takamura M, Takeda H, et al. The flow angle beneath the gastrojejunostomy predicts delayed gastric emptying in Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy (in eng).

  22. Leyba JL, Llopis SN, Isaac J, Aulestia SN, Bravo C, Obregon F. Laparoscopic gastric bypass for morbid obesity-a randomized controlled trial comparing two gastrojejunal anastomosis techniques (in eng). JSLS. 2008;12:385–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by grants from Jikei University and the Japanese Society for Gastro-surgical Pathophysiology. We thank all patients who participated in this study, as well as the staff members at the participating hospitals for their cooperation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroshi Kawahira.

Additional information

For the Japan Postgastrectomy Syndrome Working Party.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kawahira, H., Kodera, Y., Hiki, N. et al. Optimal Roux-en-Y reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer as assessed using the newly developed PGSAS-45 scale. Surg Today 45, 1307–1316 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-015-1111-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-015-1111-9

Keywords

Navigation