| Title |
Clinical Outcomes of Gastric Cancer Patients Who Underwent Proximal or Total Gastrectomy: A Propensity Score‐Matched Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-017-4306-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuki Ushimaru, Yoshiyuki Fujiwara, Yuji Shishido, Yoshitomo Yanagimoto, Jeong‐Ho Moon, Keijiro Sugimura, Takeshi Omori, Hiroshi Miyata, Masahiko Yano |
| Abstract |
Total gastrectomy (TG) and proximal gastrectomy (PG) are used to treat upper-third early gastric cancer. To date, no consensus has been reached regarding which procedure should be selected. The aim of this study was to validate the usefulness of preserving the stomach in early upper-third gastric cancer. Between 2004 and 2013, 201 patients underwent PG or TG at our institution for treatment of upper-third early gastric cancer. According to the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 192 cases were enrolled in this study. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the outcomes between the two groups. The operation time was shorter in the PG group. Although no significant difference was observed, the PG group had less bleeding and fewer postoperative complications. R0 resection rate was 100%, and no surgery-related deaths were observed. The frequencies of reflux symptoms and anastomotic stenosis were significantly higher in the PG group, but could be controlled by balloon dilation and drug therapy. The maintenance rates of body mass index and lean body mass were significantly higher in patients who underwent PG than TG. The total protein and serum albumin values were higher in the PG group than in the TG group and remained statistically superior. PG group exhibited better perioperative performance. Furthermore, better nutritional results were obtained in the PG group. Although the late stenosis and reflux symptoms must be addressed, the PG is a preferable surgical procedure for the treatment of early proximal gastric cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 18% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 64% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 October 2017.
All research outputs
#18,574,814
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,493
of 4,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,817
of 328,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#88
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,259 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.