• Genet Mol Res · Apr 2015

    Comparative Study

    Comparative study of clinical efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted radical gastrectomy versus open radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.

    • L M Wu, X J Jiang, Q F Lin, and C X Jian.
    • Department of Oncological Surgery, Putian Affiliated Hospital, Putian University, Fujian, China liminwucn@126.com.
    • Genet Mol Res. 2015 Apr 15; 14 (2): 3459-65.

    AbstractThe purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted radical gastrectomy (LARG) versus that of open radical gastrectomy (ORG). Clinical data of 355 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy (160 in the LARG group and 195 in the ORG group) were analyzed retrospectively. Efficacy indices were compared and analyzed between the two groups. The operating time of LARG was longer than that of ORG (228.43 ± 34.77 versus 207.59 ± 28.39 min). However, patients in the LARG group lost less blood than did those in the ORG group (169.46 ± 82.92 versus 193.86 ± 82.09 mL), and more lymph nodes were removed in the LARG group (19.84 ± 4.7 versus 18.04 ± 4.14 per case). The recovery of intestinal function was faster (3.72 ± 1.03 versus 4.41 ± 1.30 days) in the LARG group. Patients in the LARG group were administered a semi-fluid diet earlier (5.66 ± 2.27 versus 7.09 ± 2.33 days) and had a shorter hospital stay (9.44 ± 3.06 versus 11.07 ± 7.91 days) than did those in the ORG group, and these differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). No significant differences were found in the length of proximal and distal resection margin and the incidence of complications (P > 0.05) between the two groups. Thus, LARG is safe, feasible, and effective for treating advanced gastric cancer.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…