UNASSIGNED: To clarify the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with our novel reconstruction methods.
UNASSIGNED: Novel method is a reconstruction with a long and narrow gastric tube with widening of the proximal side created by linear stapler, and esophagogastrostomy is performed by linear stapler. In conventional method, esophagogastrostomy is performed by a circular stapler. Short- and long-term outcomes of a novel method were compared with those of conventional method.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 44 patients whom LPG was performed were enrolled in this retrospective study. No cases of anastomotic leakage and stenosis were observed in both groups. The cases of postoperative reflux esophagitis (Grade B or higher) at 1 year after operation in the Novel group were less than those in the Conventional group (17% vs. 44%).
UNASSIGNED: LPG with novel reconstruction method can be easily performed, and may be feasible for the treatment of proximal gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The optimal reconstruction method for laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) remains controversial. The present study aimed to compare short-term outcomes, including assessment of nutritional parameters and skeletal muscle, between two different methods, double-tract reconstruction (DTR) versus esophagogastrostomy (EG).
METHODS: Data from patients who underwent LPG for gastric tumor(s) between 2018 and 2021, were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two group: DTR (n=11) and EG (n=17). Since 2020, the authors have applied the modified side overlap with fundoplication by Yamashita (mSOFY) method as the EG technique.
RESULTS: Compared with DTR, EG was associated with a shorter reconstruction time (p=0.003). Complications of grade ≥3 occurred only in the EG group [n=4 (23.5%)] and the incidence of abnormal endoscopic findings after surgery was numerically higher in the EG group (n=2 vs. n=9; p=0.047). Across virtually all data points on the line graph, the EG group exhibited greater changes in post-discharge nutritional parameters, with Skeletal Muscle Index also demonstrating significant superiority (0.83 vs. 0.89; p=0.045).
CONCLUSIONS: Among reconstruction methods for LPG, EG demonstrated superiority over DTR in preserving nutritional parameters and skeletal muscle mass. However, further research, including larger cohorts and longer-term follow-up, is necessary to validate this finding.

BACKGROUND: There is no optimal reconstruction method after proximal gastrectomy. The valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy can reduce postoperative reflux esophagitis, but it is technically complex with a long operation time. The gastric tube anastomosis is technically simple, but the incidences of reflux esophagitis and anastomotic stricture are higher.
METHODS: We have devised a modified valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy after laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy (LAPG), the arch-bridge anastomosis. After reviewing our prospectively maintained gastric cancer database, 43 patients who underwent LAPG from November 2021 to April 2023 were included in this cohort study, with 25 patients received the arch-bridge anastomosis and 18 patients received gastric tube anastomosis. The short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups to evaluate the efficacy of the arch-bridge anastomosis. Reporting was consistent with the STROCSS 2021 guideline.
RESULTS: The median operation time was 180 min in the arch-bridge group, significantly shorter than the gastric tube group (p = 0.003). In the arch-bridge group, none of the 25 patients experienced anastomotic leakage, while one patient (4%) experienced anastomotic stricture requiring endoscopic balloon dilation. The postoperative length of stay was shorter in the arch-bridge group (9 vs. 11, p = 0.034). None of the patients in the arch-bridge group experienced gastroesophageal reflux and used proton pump inhibitor (PPI), while four (22.2%) patients in the gastric tube group used PPI (p = 0.025). The incidence of reflux esophagitis (Los Angeles grade B or more severe) by endoscopy was lower in the arch-bridge group (0% vs. 25.0%).
CONCLUSIONS: The arch-bridge anastomosis is a safe, time-saving, and feasible reconstruction method. It can reduce postoperative reflux and anastomotic stricture incidences in a selected cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the optimal reconstruction technique after proximal gastrectomy. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the surgical outcomes among esophagogastrostomy (EG) anastomosis, gastric tube (GT) reconstruction and double-tract (DT) reconstruction in patients who underwent laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) to clarify the superior reconstruction method.
METHODS: This study enrolled 164 patients who underwent LPG at the Northern Jiangsu People\'s Hospital in Jiangsu between January 2017 to January 2022 (EG: 51 patients; GT: 77 patients; DT: 36 patients). We compared the clinical and pathological characteristics, surgical features, postoperative complications, nutritional status, and quality of life (QOL) among the above three groups.
RESULTS: Mean operative time was longer with the DT group than the remaining two groups (p = 0.001). With regard to postoperative complications, considerable differences in the postoperative reflux symptoms (p = 0.042) and reflux esophagitis (p = 0.040) among the three groups were found. For the nutritional status, total protein, hemoglobin and albumin reduction rates in the GT group were significantly higher than the other two groups at 12 months postoperatively. In the PGSAS-45, three assessment items were better in the DT group significantly compared with the esophageal reflux subscale (p = 0.047, Cohen\'s d = 0.44), dissatisfaction at the meal (p = 0.009, Cohen\'s d = 0.58), and dissatisfaction for daily life subscale (p = 0.012, Cohen\'s d = 0.56).
CONCLUSIONS: DT after LPG is a valuable reconstruction technique with satisfactory surgical outcomes, especially regarding reduced reflux symptoms, improving the postoperative nutritional status and QOL.

Treatment of esophageal perforation or rupture is complicated and controversial, especially in advanced cases. In fact, it is generally accepted that this disease must be treated individually according to the location, causes and clinical features of rupture or perforation. A very rare case was admitted to our department, who was injured 5 days ago by high-pressure gas of a running air compressor and resulted in a long-term longitudinal rupture of the thoracic esophagus. Although the patient suffered from empyema and mediastinitis at the same time, and his condition was very serious, the debridement and desquamation of empyema were still implemented, followed by left thoracic esophagectomy and left neck approach esophagogastrostomy in the same period successfully. The patient got a good result finally.

UNASSIGNED: The current study compared the postoperative quality of life (QOL) between the esophagogastrostomy method (PGEG) and double tract method (PGDT) after proximal gastrectomy using the Postgastretomy Syndrome Assessment Scale (PGSAS)-45.
UNASSIGNED: Among the 2364 patients who received the PGSAS-45 questionnaire, 300 PGEG and 172 PGDT cases responded. The main outcomes measures (MOMs) consisted of seven subscales (SS) covering symptoms, meals (amount and quality), ability to work, dissatisfaction with daily life, physical and mental component summary of the 8-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-8), and change in body weight, and were compared between PGEG and PGDT.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, PGDT promoted significantly better constipation SS scores (p < 0.05), whereas PGEG tended to promote better body weight (BW) loss% (p < 0.10). A stratified analysis based on the remnant stomach size revealed that among those with a remnant stomach size of 1/2, PGDT had significantly better constipation and dumping SS scores (p < 0.05) and tended to have better working conditions (p < 0.10) compared to PGEG. Even among those with the remnant stomach size of 2/3, PGDT had significantly better diarrhea SS scores, lesser dissatisfaction with symptoms, and better dissatisfaction with daily life SS scores (p < 0.05) and tended to have better constipation SS scores and lesser dissatisfaction with work (p < 0.10) compared to PGEG.
UNASSIGNED: After comparing the QOLs of PGEG and PGDT, the stratified analysis according to remnant stomach sizes of 1/2 and 2/3 revealed that PGDT was relatively superior to PGEG for several MOMs.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard reconstruction method following proximal gastrectomy, of which gastroesophageal reflux and anastomotic complications are of great concern. Though several techniques have been devised to overcome these postoperative complications, such as double tract reconstruction, double-flap technique and side overlap fundoplication by Yamashita, none of them is considered a perfect solution. Herein, we designed a novel method of esophagogastrostomy after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG), named right-sided overlap and single-flap valvuloplasty (ROSF).
METHODS: Between March 2021 and December 2021, 20 consecutive patients underwent LPG-ROSF at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. Surgical outcomes and postoperative complications were recorded. All patients were followed-up until December 2022. Endoscopy and assessment of gastrointestinal symptoms were performed 1 year after surgery. Nutrition-related parameters including total body weight, hemoglobin, lymphocyte count, serum total protein, serum albumin and serum prealbumin were evaluated 1 year after surgery and compared with those before surgery.
RESULTS: The mean surgery time and anastomosis time was 285.3 ± 71.3 and 61.3 ± 11.2 min respectively. None of the patients had gastrointestinal early postoperative complications. Symptomatic reflux was observed in one patient (5%) while reflux esophagitis (Los Angeles Grade A) was observed in another patient (5%). Four patients (20%) had mild dysphagia (Visick score = II) but none of them had anastomotic stenosis. There were no significant changes in nutritional status postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: ROSF can be safely performed after LPG and has satisfactory outcomes in preventing reflux and stenosis, and maintaining nutritional status. This technique requires further validation.

BACKGROUND: Gastric tube formation and pull-up is the most common technique of reconstruction following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. If previous treatment with radiotherapy for gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT)-lymphoma restricts suitability of the stomach for anastomosis to the esophagus is unknown.
METHODS: A 57-year-old man underwent sequential chemotherapy and radiotherapy for gastric MALT-lymphoma seven years prior to diagnosis of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Esophagectomy without neoadjuvant treatment was recommended by the multidisciplinary tumor board due to early tumor stage [uT1 (sm2) uN+ cM0 according to TNM-classification of malignant tumors, 8th edition] without lymph node involvement. Minimal invasive esophageal resection with esophagogastrostomy was performed. Due to gastric tube necrosis with anastomotic leakage on the twelfth postoperative day, diverting resection with construction of a cervical salivary fistula was necessary. Rapid recovery facilitated colonic interposition without any complications six months afterwards.
CONCLUSIONS: This case report may represent the start for further investigation to know if it is reasonable to refrain from esophagogastrostomy in patients with a long interval between gastric radiotherapy and surgery.

OBJECTIVE: While proximal gastrectomy is being performed increasingly frequently for the treatment of gastric cancer, a standard reconstruction method to obtain optimal postoperative quality of life (QOL) still remains to be established. We modified the original esophagogastrostomy technique by introducing an additional posterolateral fundoplication (PLF) technique to minimize the risk of reflux esophagitis in patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy. The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical benefit of PLF.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the database was conducted to evaluate the effects of PLF. The data were compared between 44 patients in whom PLF was performed (PLF group) and 17 patients in whom conventional esophagogastrostomy without PLF was performed (C group). A number of incidence of postoperative reflux esophagitis and symptoms were assessed by findings of endoscopic examination and the PGSAS-45 questionnaire, respectively.
RESULTS: The incidence of grade B or worse esophagitis after surgery was significantly lower in the PLF group than in the C group (0% vs. 58.8%, P < 0.01). The score for the esophageal reflux subscale, as the main outcome measure of PGSAS-45, was significantly better in the PLF group (PLF: 1.5 vs C: 2.4, P < 0.01). Cohen\'s d value was 1.75, which suggested a rather large effect size. Postoperative benign anastomotic stricture was encountered in 10 cases (22.7%) of the PLF group and 4 cases (23.5%) of the C group, all of whom were successfully treated by brief endoscopic mechanical dilatation.
CONCLUSIONS: PLF is an expedient procedure for reconstruction after proximal gastrectomy.

We report a new method of esophagogastrostomy after proximal gastrectomy, side overlap with fundoplication by Yamashita (SOFY) in 2017. Recently, even better treatment results can be obtained by modifying the SOFY method. We describe the technical details of the modified SOFY (mSOFY) after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy. The stomach was dissected in the short axis direction and the esophagus was dissected in the left and right direction. After the proximal gastrectomy, the bilateral diaphragmatic crus were dissected to enhance gastric elevation. After confirming that the esophagus overlapped more than 5 cm at the center of the remnant stomach (we call it SOFY check), the remnant stomach was suture-fixed to the dissected diaphragmatic crus. The right wall of the esophageal stump and the remnant stomach were anastomosed using the full length of a 45 mm-linear stapler. The entry hole was closed in a direction that did not widen the anastomotic hole. Both sides of the esophagus, remnant stomach, and diaphragmatic crus were suture-fixed on the cranial side 1-2 cm away from the anastomosis. Moreover, the left wall and lower end of the esophagus was suture-fixed to the remnant stomach. The preserved dorsal esophageal wall is pressed and flattened by pressure from the pseudofornix, which is the reflux prevention mechanism. The mSOFY method had favorable treatment outcomes. In conclusion, mSOFY can be one of the safe and feasible reconstruction methods after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy.