Comparing Conventional and Partial Partitioning Gastrojejunostomy in Malignant and Benign Gastric Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Publisher



Chinisaz F ; Siri MA ; Miratashi Yazdi SA
Source: International Journal of Surgery Open Published:2026

Abstract

Background: – Gastrojejunostomy (GJ) is a widely used surgical procedure for managing benign and malignant gastric conditions. Partial stomach partitioning gastrojejunostomy (SPGJ) has been proposed as an alternative to conventional gastrojejunostomy (CGJ), potentially reducing delayed gastric emptying (DGE) and postoperative complications. However, the comparative effectiveness of these approaches remains unclear. Methods: – A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from 2015 onward. Adult patients undergoing SPGJ or CGJ for gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) were included in the study. Outcomes assessed included DGE, postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo classification), gastric outlet obstruction scoring system (GOOS), length of hospital stay (LOH), and operative time. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA 17. Results: – Eight studies involving 422 patients (SPGJ = 233, CGJ = 189) were included. SPGJ was associated with significantly reduced DGE (OR: 6.64, 95% CI: 1.09–2.70), improved GOOS, and shorter LOH. No significant difference was found in major postoperative complications. Operative time was moderately longer in the SPGJ group. Conclusion: – SPGJ appears to provide meaningful clinical advantages over CGJ, including reduced rates of DGE, improved functional outcomes, and shorter hospital stays, without an associated rise in postoperative complications. These findings support the selective implementation of SPGJ in both malignant and benign gastric procedures. However, due to variability among existing studies, further high-quality research is necessary to validate these results and strengthen the evidence base. Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.