A Study Comparing Billroth II With Roux-en-Y Reconstruction for Gastric Cancer (SCAR)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01257711|
Recruitment Status : Unknown
Verified April 2012 by Asim Shabbir, National Healthcare Group, Singapore.
Recruitment status was: Recruiting
First Posted : December 10, 2010
Last Update Posted : April 16, 2012
Both Billroth II and Roux en Y are acceptable techniques of reconstruction after subtotal gastrectomy, however the debate one which is better remains unanswered. The aim of this study is to compare Billroth II and Roux en Y reconstruction techniques after radical distal subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in terms of postoperative outcomes and quality of life. The investigators hypothesize that Roux en Y will have lesser gastrointestinal symptoms and reflux problems when compared to Billroth II reconstruction. Patients with resectable gastric cancer meeting the inclusion criteria will be consented and enrolled. Data on demographics, nutrition, gastrointestinal symptoms, and quality of life will be collected. They will be randomized after completion of distal subtotal gastrectomy to under go either Roux en Y or Billroth II reconstruction. Surgery data will be collected post-operatively.
At 6 months follow up a repeat nutritional assessment using clinical and biochemical parameters will be carried out. The biochemical markers are part of routine follow up. The final assessment will be at the one year post surgery visit when by interview using EORTC 30 questionnaire quality of life data, gastrointestinal symptoms and nutritional assessment and surgery data for recurrence will be repeated. At one year patients will also have upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, which is part of routine follow up. At endoscopy stump gastritis will be graded and esophageal reflux assessed as per Los Angeles classification. It is postulated that 5% of the patients on Roux en Y reconstruction will experience poor clinical symptoms compared to 25% of those on Billroth II based on reflux symptoms. To achieve a statistical significance with 95% power and a 2-sided test of 5% for this 20% clinical difference, 80 subjects for each arm will be required. Factoring a 10% attrition rate for mortality and lost to follow up, a total of 160 subjects to be randomized equally will be recruited.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Gastric Cancer Stomach Cancer Gastrectomy||Procedure: Roux-en-Y or Billroth II||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||160 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Single Group Assignment|
|Masking:||Double (Participant, Investigator)|
|Official Title:||A Prospective Randomised Study Comparing Billroth II With Roux-en-Y Reconstruction After Radical Distal Subtotal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer|
|Study Start Date :||October 2008|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||October 2014|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||December 2016|
Radical Distal Subtotal Gastrectomy
Following the removal of the stomach, patient will be randomised to restore the continuity of the intestine with the stomach using either of the two procedure named Roux-en-Y or Billroth II reconstruction by randomisation
Procedure: Roux-en-Y or Billroth II
Roux-en-Y had fewer problems related to reflux of bile but a higher incidence of stasis in the Roux limb resulting in longer hospital stay. Some surgeon avoids doing Roux-en-Y is a triad of post operative symptoms including abdominal pain, vomiting and nausea called Roux-en-Y loop syndrome. Billroth II reconstruction is a simpler operation with only one anastomosis and faster operating time. This has implications while managing gastric cancer patients who may be malnourished and a simpler procedure may have lesser risk of complications and yield better outcomes. Billroth II has increased reflux associated problem like esophagitis and gastritis, risk of afferent loop and dumping syndrome. Long term nutritional outcomes are similar for both procedures.
Other Name: Reconstruction
- The aim of this study is to compare Billroth II and Roux En Y reconstruction after radical distal subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in terms of postoperative outcomes. [ Time Frame: 1 year ]The outcomes include postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms, nutritional status, gastritis and/or esophagitis on endoscopy and quality of life up to one year after surgery. With the results, we can have a scientific basis in choosing the more suitable method of reconstruction for our patients.
- Quality of life pre and post operatively will be compared between Billroth II and Roux En Y reconstruction after radical distal subtotal gastrectomy. [ Time Frame: 1 year ]Symptomatic outcomes of both procedures have significant bearing on quality of life of patients and at the end be able to identify the better among the two procedure.
- Gastrointestinal symptoms assessment [ Time Frame: 1 year ]Grading of clinical symptom is based on the total score of the the five items epigastric pain, heartburn, vomiting bile, postprandial bloating and nausea)pre and post operatively at 1 year. The higher the grade the poorer the outcome.
- Assessing nutritional status [ Time Frame: 1 year ]Biochemical parameters as well as the height and weight of patients are measured pre operatively, 6 months and 1 year post operatively to compute the BMI. The nutrition assessment are scored by using the NRI and total lymphocyte count.
- Grading of gastritis and/or esophagitis on endoscopy [ Time Frame: 1 year ]Endoscopic classification of inflammation of the remnant stomach to be graded one year after surgery. The gastritis will be reported according to the updated Sydney classification with the morphologic pattern, etiology & topography being reported.
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT01257711
|Contact: Amy YL Tay, Nursing||(65)firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Contact: Asim Shabbir, MBBS||(65)email@example.com|
|The Chinese University of Hong Kong||Recruiting|
|Shatin, NT, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong|
|Principal Investigator: Enders Ng, MBChB|
|National University Hospital||Recruiting|
|Kent Ridge, Singapore, 119074|
|Contact: Amy YL Tay, BSc (65)6772 3192 firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Contact: Asim Shabbir, MBBS (65)6772 4296 email@example.com|
|Principal Investigator: Asim Shabbir, MBBS|
|Sub-Investigator: Jimmy BY So, MBChB|
|Changi General Hospital||Recruiting|
|Simei, Singapore, 529889|
|Principal Investigator: Andrew Wong, MBBS|
|Tan Tock Seng Hospital||Recruiting|
|Tan Tock Seng, Singapore, 308433|
|Principal Investigator: Khong Hee Lim, MBBS|
|Sub-Investigator: Rao Jaideepraj, MBBS|
|Principal Investigator:||Asim Shabbir, MBBS||National University Hospital System|