Table 1.
Comparison of general data between the PG-TEA and TG-RY groups
| Factors | PG-TEA (n = 43) | TG-RY (n = 80) | t/X2 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 0.116 | 0.733 | ||
| Male | 36 | 65 | ||
| Female | 7 | 15 | ||
| Age (years, x ± s) | 61 ± 10 | 61 ± 9 | 0.082 | 0.935 |
| BMI (kg/m2, x ± s) | 22.54 ± 1.56 | 22.71 ± 1.40 | 0.642 | 0.522 |
| Siewert type | 0.218 | 0.641 | ||
| II | 18 | 37 | ||
| III | 25 | 43 | ||
| ASA Score | 1.846 | 0.379 | ||
| I | 11 | 14 | ||
| II | 31 | 61 | ||
| III | 1 | 5 | ||
| WBC before surgery (× 109/L, x ± s) | 5.5 ± 1.4 | 5.2 ± 1.3 | -0.980 | 0.332 |
| Hb before surgery (g/L, x ± s) | 110 ± 17 | 113 ± 18 | -1.120 | 0.265 |
| ALB before surgery (g/L, x ± s) | 36.4 ± 3.1 | 36.7 ± 3.9 | 0.445 | 0.675 |
| Tumor diameter(cm, x ± s) | 2.3 ± 0.6 | 2.5 ± 0.6 | 1.968 | 0.051 |
| Degree of differentiation | 1.514 | 0.469 | ||
| Well | 14 | 26 | ||
| Moderate | 28 | 47 | ||
| Worse | 1 | 6 | ||
| Pathologic T classification | 5.246 | 0.144 | ||
| 1 | 15 | 39 | ||
| 2 | 23 | 26 | ||
| 3 | 4 | 13 | ||
| 4 | 1 | 2 | ||
| Pathologic N classification | 4.043 | 0.242 | ||
| 0 | 2 | 2 | ||
| 1 | 22 | 29 | ||
| 2 | 14 | 31 | ||
| 3 | 5 | 18 | ||
| Pathological stage | 3.066 | 0.091 | ||
| IIA | 28 | 38 | ||
| IIB | 15 | 42 | ||
| Presence of vascular thrombus invasion | 0.158 | 0.691 | ||
| Yes | 13 | 27 | ||
| No | 30 | 53 | ||
| Neurological violation | 3.607 | 0.072 | ||
| Yes | 14 | 14 | ||
| No | 29 | 66 |
PG-TEA proximal gastrectomy tubular esophagogastric anastomosis, TG-RY total gastrectomy Roux-en-Y reconstruction, BMI body mass index, WBC white blood cell, Hb hemoglobin, ALB albumin