Efficacy of the fat-dissociation method for nodal harvesting in gastric cancer

Table 1 Background factors between the study groups

	Group F	Group C	P value
n	24	32
Age, median (range)	69 (51-82)	66 (39-90)	NS
Sex, male/female	18 /6	25/7	NS
BMI, median (range)	23.2 (15.9-28.7)	21.9 (14.6-27.7)	NS
Location, U/M/L	2/12/10	5/12/15	NS
Tumor size, mm (mean ± SD)	50.9 ± 31.3	54.6 ± 26.1	NS
McT, 0/1/2/3/4/5	12/0/3/7/1/1	14/1/7/4/3/3	NS
sT factor, 1/2/3/4	8/1/3/12	12/2/8/10	NS
sN factor, 0/1/2/3	9/4/6/5	20/7/3/2	NS
Approach, open/laparoscopic	17/7	27/5	NS
Surgery, DG/TG	22/2	26/6	NS
D number, 1+/2	14/10	19/13	NS
pN factor. 0/1/2/3	8/5/2/9	16/5/7/4	NS

NS: No significance; Group F: Fat dissociation group; Group C: Conventional harvesting group; BMI: Body mass index; McT: Macroscopic type (Borrmann); sT: Surgical diagnosis of depth of invasion; sN: Surgical diagnosis of nodal metastasis; DG: Distal gastrectomy; TG: Total gastrectomy; D number: Degree of lymph node dissection; pN: Pathological diagnosis of nodal metastasis.

Table 2 Comparisons of the numbers of harvested lymph nodes and the duration of lymph node harvest and mapping between the two groups

	Group F	Group C	P value
Total number of harvested nodes	45.9 (21-82)	44.3 (20-89)	NS
Number of the left gastric artery, area nodes (No. 1, 3a, 7)	16.9 (8-29)	14.1 (7-26)	NS
Number of the right gastric artery, area nodes (No. 3b, 5)	2.2 (0-9)	2.8 (0-10)	NS
Number of the right gastroepiploic, artery area nodes (No. 4d, 6)	16.9 (7-27)	16.8 (8-39)	NS
Time for harvesting and mapping (min)	38.2 (25-55)	101.1 (50-160)	< 0.0001

All numerical data are mean (range). NS: No significance; Group F: Fat dissociation group; Group C: Conventional harvesting group.