Skip to main content
. 2024 May 9;24(3):280–290. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2024.24.e21

Table 2. Clinical characteristics of the MRGCs after PG that were eligible for ER and not eligible (n=32).

Variables Non-ER group (n=12) ER group (n=20) P-values Multivariate analysis
OR (95% CI) P-values
Tumor location 0.006* 27.88 (1.958–396.9) 0.014
Pseudo-fornix 6 1
Corpus 4 5
Antrum 2 14
Cross-sectional circumference 0.703 0.531 (0.058–4.844) 0.575
Posterior wall 5 8
Lesser curvature 4 5
Anterior wall 2 4
Greater curvature 1 3
Sex 0.619 0.353 (0.026–4.733) 0.432
Male 10 18
Female 2 2
Age of MRGC (yr, median (range)) 69 (45–79) 72 (62–86) 0.058 0.691 (0.108–4.365) 0.691
<65 4 5
≥65 8 15
Reconstruction methods 1
JI 12 19
EG 0 1
Interval time (mo, median (range)) 72 (24–111) 60 (11–132) 0.642 2.103 (0.331–13.35) 0.431
<60 5 9
≥60 7 11

Italicized P-values indicate statistically significant results (<0.05).

MRGC = metachronous remnant gastric cancer; PG = proximal gastrectomy; ER = endoscopic resection; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; JI = jejunal interposition; EG = esophagogastrostomy.

*Pseudo-fornix vs. corpus and antrum, Posterior wall vs. anterior wall, lesser curvature, and greater curvature.