Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Reevaluation of routine gastrointestinal decompression after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Authors: Ho Young, Chung; Wansik, Yu;

Reevaluation of routine gastrointestinal decompression after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Abstract

We reviewed postoperative courses of patients with gastric cancer who underwent gastrectomy to evaluate the need for routine postoperative gastrointestinal decompression.Three hundred patients who underwent gastrectomy during 1998 and 1999 were enrolled in this study. A nasogastric tube was placed in all patients just after induction of the anesthesia. The patients were divided into two groups, 150 patients for each. In group 1, the nasogastric tube was maintained until the passage of flatus per rectum. In group 2, the nasogastric tube was removed immediately after the operation.The return of bowel function, return to a diet and postoperative length of hospital stay were similar in both groups. In group 1, only one patient (0.7%) had abdominal distension and no patient vomited, while four patients (2.7%) had abdominal distension and one patient (0.7%) vomited in group 2. There were no significant differences in the incidence of respiratory complications, anastomotic leakage and wound complications between the two groups. Postoperative death was rare, with the incidence of 0.7% in each group. There was a significantly high incidence of patient's discomfort in group 1. The major complaint was sore throat and it caused sleep disturbance when severe.It is desirable to insert a nasogastric tube while the patient is in the anesthetized state and keep it during operation and remove it immediately after operation, when no active bleeding is detected.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Male, Gastrectomy, Stomach Neoplasms, Humans, Female, Postoperative Period, Middle Aged, Decompression, Surgical, Intubation, Gastrointestinal, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    16
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
16
Average
Top 10%
Top 10%
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!