Objective： Ultrasonically activated shears （UAS） have been applied in open gastric surgeries with no or little evidence. It was previously reported about the surgical outcome and effectiveness of UAS based on a ran...Objective： Ultrasonically activated shears （UAS） have been applied in open gastric surgeries with no or little evidence. It was previously reported about the surgical outcome and effectiveness of UAS based on a randomized controlled trial of 256 patients with gastric cancer. We aimed to clarify the long-term oncological safety of the use of UAS in the aspect of overall survival and recurrence.Methods： Gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the conventional surgery group （n=125） or the UAS group （n=128）. Survival, recurrence and long-term postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. The median follow-up period was 56 months.Results： Gastric cancer-related death was higher in patients of the UAS group compared with the conventional group （P=0.019）. Overall survival rates stratified by stage were not significantly different between the two groups （P=0.170）. Disease-free survival rates stratified by stage and recurrence-free survival rates of gastric cancer were similar between the conventional group and the UAS group （P=0.313 and 0.199, respectively）. The postoperative complication rate was not significantly different between the groups （P=1.000）. Conclusions： It is suggested that the use of UAS in gastrectomy for gastric cancer showed oncologically acceptable safety compared with conventional electric instruments even in long-term period.展开更多
文摘Objective： Ultrasonically activated shears （UAS） have been applied in open gastric surgeries with no or little evidence. It was previously reported about the surgical outcome and effectiveness of UAS based on a randomized controlled trial of 256 patients with gastric cancer. We aimed to clarify the long-term oncological safety of the use of UAS in the aspect of overall survival and recurrence.Methods： Gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were enrolled and randomly assigned to either the conventional surgery group （n=125） or the UAS group （n=128）. Survival, recurrence and long-term postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. The median follow-up period was 56 months.Results： Gastric cancer-related death was higher in patients of the UAS group compared with the conventional group （P=0.019）. Overall survival rates stratified by stage were not significantly different between the two groups （P=0.170）. Disease-free survival rates stratified by stage and recurrence-free survival rates of gastric cancer were similar between the conventional group and the UAS group （P=0.313 and 0.199, respectively）. The postoperative complication rate was not significantly different between the groups （P=1.000）. Conclusions： It is suggested that the use of UAS in gastrectomy for gastric cancer showed oncologically acceptable safety compared with conventional electric instruments even in long-term period.
