Abstract
BACKGROUND Recently, the incidence of proximal early gastric cancer (EGC) has been rising rapidly. Prevalent surgical methods are proximal gastrectomy (PG) and total gastrectomy (TG); however, which method is superior remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of original articles to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of PG with TG for proximal EGC. METHODS Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched up to October 2018. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was utilized to conduct quality assessments, and publication bias was evaluated using Egger test. STATA version 14.0 was used to perform the meta-analysis. RESULTS A total of 2036 patients with proximal EGC in 18 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that PG was potentially superior to TG regarding operation time, intraoperative blood loss volume, and long-term nutritional status. Overall survival between the PG and TG groups was not significantly different. PG was associated with a high incidence of 2 kinds of postoperative complications: anastomotic stenosis and reflux esophagitis. However, the incidence of these complications associated with esophagojejunostomy with double-tract reconstruction (DTR) was comparable with that of TG. CONCLUSIONS PG has several advantages over TG for the treatment of proximal EGC, including surgical outcomes and long-term nutritional status. However, anastomotic stenosis and reflux esophagitis frequently occurred in patients undergoing PG. Esophagojejunostomy with DTR could offer a solution to reducing the incidence of these complications.
