Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 23, 2025

Single Incision Plus One Port Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy with Double Channel Anastomosis for Gastric Cancer Treatment
Published on: December 27, 2024
Different Methods of Minimally Invasive Esophagojejunostomy After Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Outcomes from
Yongjia Yan1,2, Daohan Wang2, Kelly Mahuron1
1Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA, USA.
Background:
Esophagojejunostomy after minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MITG) for gastric cancer (GC) is technically challenging. Failure of the esophagojejunal anastomosis can lead to significant morbidity, leading to short- and long-term quality of life (QoL) impairment or mortality. The optimal reconstruction method following MITG remains controversial. We evaluated outcomes of minimally invasive esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic or robotic total gastrectomies.
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed MITG patients between 2015 and 2020 at two high-volume centers in China and the United States. Eligible patients were divided into groups by different reconstruction methods. We compared clinicopathologic characteristics, postoperative outcomes, including complication rates, overall survival rate (OS), disease-free survival rate (DFS), and patient-reported QoL.
Results:
GC patients (n = 105) were divided into intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (IEJ, n = 60) and extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EEJ, n = 45) groups. EEJ had higher incidence of wound infection (8.3% vs 13.3%, P = 0.044) and pneumonia (21.7% vs 40.0%, P = 0.042) than IEJ. The linear stapler (LS) group was inferior to the circular stapler (CS) group in reflux [50.0 (11.1-77.8) vs 44.4 (0.0-66.7), P = 0.041] and diarrhea [33.3 (0.0-66.7) vs 0.0 (0.0-66.7), P = 0.045] while LS was better than CS for dysphagia [22.2 (0.0-33.3) vs 11.1 (0.0-33.3), P = 0.049] and eating restrictions [33.3 (16.7-58.3) vs 41.7 (16.7-66.7), P = 0.029] at 1 year. OS and DFS did not differ significantly between LS and CS.
Conclusions:
IEJ anastomosis generated better results than EEJ. LS was associated with a better patient eating experience, but more diarrhea and reflux compared with CS. Clinical and patient-reported outcomes show the superiority of IEJ with the LS reconstruction method in MITG for GC.
Related Concept Videos
Enteral Nutrition II: Nasointestinal and Gastrostomy Feeding
Nasointestinal Feeding
Nasointestinal feeding involves placing a tube...
Peptic Ulcer Disease V: Surgical Management and Nursing Care
Surgical Interventions for Peptic Ulcer Disease
Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:
Esophageal Strictures-II: Clinical Features and Management
Healthcare providers should gather a comprehensive medical history and conduct a physical examination for diagnosis. If esophageal stricture is...
Esophageal Strictures-I: Introduction
Etiology
The primary cause of esophageal strictures is long-standing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), accounting for about 70 to 80% of adult cases. Chronic acid reflux can lead to injury and scarring of the esophageal lining, culminating in...
Inflammatory Bowel Disease V: Surgical Management
Here are some common surgical interventions for IBD:

