Comparing Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) Classifications in Reporting Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy: A Population-Based Nationwide Study in Finland
Putila, Emilia; Helminen, Olli; Helmiö, Mika; Huhta, Heikki; Jalkanen, Aapo; Junttila, Anna; Kallio, Raija; Koivukangas, Vesa; Kokkola, Arto; Lietzen, Elina; Louhimo, Johanna; Meriläinen, Sanna; Pohjanen, Vesa-Matti; Rantanen, Tuomo; Ristimäki, Ari; Räsänen, Jari V; Saarnio, Juha; Sihvo, Eero; Toikkanen, Vesa; Tyrväinen, Tuula; Valtola, Antti; Kauppila, Joonas H; on behalf of the FINEGO Group (2025-06-23)
Springer
23.06.2025
Putila, E., Helminen, O., Helmiö, M. et al. Comparing Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) Classifications in Reporting Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy: A Population-Based Nationwide Study in Finland. Ann Surg Oncol (2025). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-025-17674-2
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
© The Author(s) 2025. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
© The Author(s) 2025. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:oulu-202506254958
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:oulu-202506254958
Tiivistelmä
Abstract
Background:
Previously, no international consensus on reporting complications after gastric cancer surgery existed, making comparisons between studies difficult. In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) published a standardized list for classification of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, which also was applied for gastric cancer. In 2019 the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) reported outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer with a list of different complication types. This study aimed to compare the two classifications in reporting postoperative outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Methods:
This population-based study, based on the Finnish National Esophago-Gastric Cancer Cohort, included all patients age 18 years or older undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer in Finland during 2010–2016. For classifying and describing different postoperative outcomes, both the ECCG and GCCG lists of complications were used separately.
Results:
The study analyzed 1115 patients. The occurrence of complications 90 days postoperatively was 23.0% according to the GCCG classification (504 individual complications) and 43.0% according to the ECCG classification (1084 individual complications). Most of the notable differences between the classifications in reporting complications were in cardiac dysrhythmia, infections, and myocardial infarction, with the GCCG classification reporting a lower incidence. Additionally, 131 complications occurring in 13 individual types of complications defined only in the ECCG and not in the GCCG were recorded.
Conclusions:
This study suggests that the ECCG classification is more comprehensive and sensitive in evaluating complications of gastrectomy than the GCCG classification. Use of the ECCG classification may be preferable in the context of gastrectomy.
Background:
Previously, no international consensus on reporting complications after gastric cancer surgery existed, making comparisons between studies difficult. In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) published a standardized list for classification of postoperative complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, which also was applied for gastric cancer. In 2019 the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) reported outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer with a list of different complication types. This study aimed to compare the two classifications in reporting postoperative outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Methods:
This population-based study, based on the Finnish National Esophago-Gastric Cancer Cohort, included all patients age 18 years or older undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer in Finland during 2010–2016. For classifying and describing different postoperative outcomes, both the ECCG and GCCG lists of complications were used separately.
Results:
The study analyzed 1115 patients. The occurrence of complications 90 days postoperatively was 23.0% according to the GCCG classification (504 individual complications) and 43.0% according to the ECCG classification (1084 individual complications). Most of the notable differences between the classifications in reporting complications were in cardiac dysrhythmia, infections, and myocardial infarction, with the GCCG classification reporting a lower incidence. Additionally, 131 complications occurring in 13 individual types of complications defined only in the ECCG and not in the GCCG were recorded.
Conclusions:
This study suggests that the ECCG classification is more comprehensive and sensitive in evaluating complications of gastrectomy than the GCCG classification. Use of the ECCG classification may be preferable in the context of gastrectomy.
Kokoelmat
- Avoin saatavuus [38841]
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/