3D laparoscopic-assisted vs open gastrectomy for carcinoma in the remnant stomach: A retrospective cohort study

Table 1 Demographic and clinicopathological characteristics for patients in two cohorts

	OG (n = 48)	3DLAG (n = 36)	P value
Age (yr)	60.62 (10.11)	61.19 (9.90)	0.797
Gender (%)			1.000
Male	42 (87.5)	32 (88.9)
Female	6 (12.5)	4 (11.1)
BMI (kg/m2)	21.65 (3.22)	22.26 (2.59)	0.355
ASA (%)			0.384
1	1 (2.1)	0 (0.0)
2	33 (68.8)	29 (80.6)
3	14 (29.2)	7 (19.4)
Previous disease (%)			0.54
Benign	17 (35.4)	16 (44.4)
Malignant	31 (64.6)	20 (55.6)
Primary reconstruction (%)			0.617
Billroth Ⅰ	16 (33.3)	12 (33.3)
Billroth Ⅱ	22 (45.8)	20 (55.6)
Roux-en-Y	4 (8.3)	1 (2.8)
Tube-like Stomach esophagogastrostomy	6 (12.5)	3 (8.3)
Interval time (d)	211.56 (197.35)	237.97 (209.01)	0.556
Site of CRS (%)			0.352
Non-anastomosis	22 (45.8)	12 (33.3)
Anastomosis	26 (54.2)	66.7)

All continuous variables were described by mean ± SD; enumeration data were presented by percentage (%). OGC: Open gastrectomy for carcinoma in the remnant stomach; 3DLAGC: 3D laparoscopic assisted gastrectomy for carcinoma in the remnant stomach; BMI: Body mass index; CRS: Carcinoma in the remnant stomach.