Study of celiac artery variations and related surgical techniques in gastric cancer

Table 1 Hepatic artery categories of 238 patients with gastric cancer (according to Hiatt’s classification criteria) n (%)

Hiatt’s classification	In Hiatt’s study	In this study	χ2value	P value
I	757 (75.70)	170 (71.43)	1.865	0.172
II	97 (9.70)	33 (13.87)	3.549	0.060
III	106 (10.60)	14 (5.88)	4.888	0.027
IV	23 (2.30)	7 (2.94)	0.334	0.563
V	15 (1.50)	6 (2.52)	0.668	0.414
VI	2 (0.20)	0 (0.00)	0.000	1.000
Others	0 (0.00)	8 (3.36)	27.831	0.000
In total	1000 (100.00)	238 (100.00)

The remaing eight cases of abnormal hepatic artery were: three cases of left or right hepatic artery deriving directly from the common hepatic artery, two cases of left or right hepatic artery deriving directly from the celiac trunk, and one case of complicated variation: the common hepatic artery derived from the superior mesenteric artery, and the left gastric and splenic arteries derived from the abdominal aorta, respectively.

Table 2 Comparison of general data between vascular variation group and no vascular variation group (case)

Clinical data	Vascular variation group	No vascular variation group	Statistics value	P value
Total cases	80	158
Age (yr)	58.3 + 12.5	56.3 + 12.4	1.195	0.233
Sex			0.633	0.426
Male	61	112
Female	19	46
Tumor location			0.115	0.944
Fundus ventriculi	17	33
Corpus ventriculi	13	24
Gastric antrum	50	101
Gastric cancer staging			1.343	0.246
Stage I-II	31	75
Stage III-IV	49	83
Postoperative complications			0.086	0.770
Yes	5	7
No	75	151

Table 3 Comparison of observations between vascular variation group and no vascular variation group

Observations index	Vascular variation group	No vascular variation group	t value	P value
Operation time (min)	215.7 ± 32.7	204.2 ± 31.3	2.624	0.009
Intraoperative blood loss (mL)	220.0 ± 56.7	163.1 ± 52.3	7.674	0.000
Total number of lymph nodes dissected	23.0 ± 9.1	21.2 ± 8.5	1.505	0.134
Time required for postoperative recovery of bowel function (d)	3.0 ± 1.2	3.2 ± 1.4	1.260	0.209
Time to ambulation (d)	3.9 ± 0.8	4.1 ± 1.0	2.760	0.060
Postoperative hospitalization (d)	7.6 ± 1.2	8.1 ± 0.9	1.356	0.121
Mean drainage amount in 3 d after operation (mL)	193.6 ± 41.4	175.3 ± 34.1	1.639	0.032
Total hospitalization cost (RMB)	35862.8 ± 2965.3	36759.3 ± 2732.5	1.356	0.130

Table 4 Comparison of observations between ultrasonic harmonic scalpel subgroup and electrical unit subgroup among vascular variation population

Observation	Ultrasonic harmonic scalpel group	Electrical unit subgroup	t value	P value
Cases (persons)	44	36
Operation duration (min)	209.5 ± 34.9	226.9 ± 29.4	1.168	0.046
Intraoperative blood loss (mL)	207.5 ± 57.1	235.6 ± 52.9	2.242	0.028
Total number of lymph nodes dissected	25.5 ± 9.2	19.9 ± 7.8	2.903	0.005
Time required for postoperative recovery of bowel function (d)	3.0 ± 0.9	3.1 ± 0.8	0.442	0.660
Time to ambulation (d)	4.0 ± 0.9	3.9 ± 0.8	0.291	0.772
Postoperative hospitalization (d)	7.4 ± 1.3	8.1 ± 1.1	1.251	0.101
Mean drainage amount in 3 d after operation (mL)	184.4 ± 38.2	205.0 ± 42.9	2.255	0.027
Total hospitalization cost (RMB)	36167.3 ± 2845.6	35246.4 ± 2789.5	1.236	0.102

Table 5 Comparison of observations between ultrasonic harmonic scalpel subgroup and electrical unit subgroup among no vascular variation population

Observation	Ultrasonic harmonic scalpel group	Electrical unit subgroup	t value	P value
Cases (persons)	81	77
Operation duration (min)	188.4 ± 25.4	220.4 ± 28.3	7.481	0.000
Intraoperative blood loss (mL)	168.1 ± 49.6	158.0 ± 55.3	1.210	0.228
Total number of lymph nodes dissected	23.3 ± 7.9	19.2 ± 8.6	3.085	0.002
Time required for postoperative recovery of bowel function (d)	3.3 ± 1.1	3.1 ± 0.9	1.359	0.176
Time to ambulation (d)	4.4 ± 1.0	4.2 ± 1.0	1.330	0.185
Postoperative hospitalization (d)	7.3 ± 1.5	7.9 ± 1.2	1.251	0.132
Mean drainage amount in 3 d after operation (mL)	191.3 ± 37.0	187.7 ± 30.0	2.349	0.080
Total hospitalization cost (RMB)	35917.6 ± 2741.6	36186.9 ± 2717.3	1.016	0.161