Objective: For gastric cancer patients undergoing total gastrectomy, the esophagojejunal anastomosis is the main site of postoperative anastomotic leakage. How to improve the safety of the esophagojejunal anastomosis is a hot topic. This study evaluated the safety of double and a half layered esophagojejunal anastomosis in total gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Clinical data of 764 gastric cancer patients, who were diagnosed as gastric adenocarcinoma by preoperative gastroscopicbiopsy and were judged to be able to complete R0 resection by imaging examination, in the Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Zhengzhou University (Henan Cancer Hospital) from May 2015 to May 2019 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. two and a half layered esophagojejunal anastomosis was used in the treatment group (295 cases), and the routine anastomosis was used in the control group (469 cases). Postoperative complicating including anastomosis-assisted complications were compared between the two groups. Results: The baseline data of two groups were not significantly different (all P>0.05). All the patients successfully completed the operation. In observation group and control group, the total operative time [(140.7±27.0) minutes vs. (139.6±22.8) minutes], intraoperative blood loss [(200.6±111.0) ml vs. (214.4±114.1) ml], anastomosis time [(20.4±4.3) minutes vs. (19.9±4.6) minutes], time to first flatus [(4.1±1.1) days vs. (4.2±1.1) days], time to fluid diet [(5.4±1.0) days vs. (5.5±0.9) days], time to postoperative nasointestinal tube removal [(9.8±3.2) days vs. (10.0±2.3) days], and postoperative hospital stay [(15.4±6.5) days vs. (15.9±5.6) days] were not significantly different (all P>0.05). Compared to the control group, the treatment group had lower rates of anastomosis-associated complications [1.7% (5/295) vs. 4.7% (22/469), χ(2)=4.768, P=0.029] and anastomotic leakage [1.0% (3/295) vs.3.4% (16/469), χ(2)=4.282, P=0.039]. The differences in the incidence of anastomotic stenosis and anastomotic bleeding were not statistically significant between the two groups (both P>0.05). In the treatment group and control group, rates of total postoperative complication [34.2% (101/295) vs. 32.2% (151/469), χ(2)=0.838, P=0.360] and severe complication [Clavinen-Dindo grade III and above; 4.7% (14/295) vs. 7.2% (34/469), Z=-1.465, P=0.143] were not significantly different as well. Conclusion: Two and a half layered esophagojejunal anastomosis is safe and feasible in total gastrectomy for gastric cancer and can reduce anastomosis-associated complications.
目的： 对于接受全胃切除的胃癌患者，食管空肠吻合口为术后吻合口漏的主要部位。如何提高食管空肠吻合口的安全性是目前临床讨论的热点。本文旨在评价食管空肠两层半吻合法在胃癌全胃切除手术中应用的安全性。 方法： 本研究采用回顾性队列研究方法。收集郑州大学附属肿瘤医院（河南省肿瘤医院）2015年5月至2019年5月期间，收治的术前经胃镜检查确诊为胃腺癌、经影像学检查判断为可完成R(0)切除的行根治性全胃切除的764例胃癌患者临床资料，排除术中非食管空肠端侧吻合或无法行食管空肠吻合口加固的患者。其中，采用食管空肠两层半吻合者295例（改良吻合组），常规方法吻合者为469例（常规吻合组）。比较两组术中、术后情况和吻合口相关并发症及术后并发症Clavien-Dindo分级情况（Ⅲ级及Ⅲ级以上并发症定义为严重并发症）。 结果： 两组患者基线资料比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。所有患者均顺利完成手术。改良吻合组与常规吻合组的手术时间[（140.7±27.0）min比（139.6±22.8）min]、术中出血量[（200.6±111.0）ml比（214.4±114.1）ml]、食管空肠吻合时间[（20.4±4.3）min比（19.9±4.6）min]、术后排气时间[（4.1±1.1）d比（4.2±1.1）d]、术后进流食时间[（5.4±1.0）d比（5.5±0.9）d]、术后鼻肠管拔出时间[（9.8±3.2）d比（10.0±2.3）d]以及术后住院时间[（15.4±6.5）d比（15.9±5.6）d]比较差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。与常规吻合组相比，改良吻合组吻合口相关并发症发生率[1.7%（5/295）比4.7%（22/469），χ(2)=4.768，P=0.029]和吻合口漏发生率[1.0%（3/295）比3.4%（16/469），χ(2)=4.282，P=0.039]更低，差异均有统计学意义（均P<0.05）。两者在吻合口狭窄和吻合出血方面差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。改良吻合组与常规吻合组术后总并发症发生率[34.2%（101/295）比32.2%（151/469），χ(2)=0.838，P=0.360]、严重并发症发生率[4.7%（14/295）比7.2%（34/469），Z=-1.465，P=0.143]比较，差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。 结论： 食管空肠两层半吻合在胃癌全胃切除手术中安全可行，能够降低吻合口并发症发生率。.
Keywords: Complications; Esophagojejunal anastomosis; Stomach neoplasms; Total gastrectomy.