Laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: Are the long-term results comparable with conventional open gastrectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2013 ◽  
Vol 108 (8) ◽  
pp. 550-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon Young Choi ◽  
Jung Min Bae ◽  
Ji Yeong An ◽  
Woo Jin Hyung ◽  
Sung Hoon Noh
2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-121
Author(s):  
Sandrie Mariella Mac ◽  
Ashish Bahadur Malla

For many decades, D2 procedure has been accepted in the far-east as the standard treatment for both early (EGC) and advanced gastric cancer (AGC). In case of AGC, the debate on the extent of nodal dissection has been open for many years in order to highlight the safety and efficacy of treatment, hence this study. A comprehensive literature research was performed in PubMed to identify studies that compared laparoscopic- assisted gastrectomy (LAG) and open gastrectomy (OG) with D2 lymph node dissection (D2-LND) for treatment of AGC for the last five years. Data of interest were checked and subjected to meta-analysis with RevMan 5.3 software. The pooled risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Overall, 19 studies were included in this meta-analysis. LG had some advantages over OG, including shorter hospitalization (WMD -2.31; 95% CI -4.09 to -0.53; P = 0.01), less blood loss (WMD -120.49; 95% CI -174.27 to -66.71; P < 0.01), faster bowel recovery (WMD -0.55; 95% CI -0.86 to -0.24; P ˂ 0.01) and earlier ambulation (WMD -0.75; 95% CI -1.38 to -0.11; P = 0.02). In terms of surgical and oncological safety, LG could achieve similar lymph nodes (WMD, -0.94, 95% CI, -2.95 to 1.06; P=0.36), a lower complication rate [odds ratio (OR)=0.80; 95%CI, 0.68-0.97; P=0.02], and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) comparable to OG. In conclusion, for AGCs both techniques (LAG and OG) appeared comparable in short- and long-term results. More time was needed to perform LAG; nonetheless, it had some advantages in achieving faster postoperative recovery over OG. In order to clarify this controversial issue ongoing trials and future studies are needed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianglei Ma ◽  
Xiaoyao Li ◽  
Shifu Zhao ◽  
Ruifu Zhang ◽  
Dejun Yang

Abstract Background To date, robotic surgery has been widely used worldwide. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate short-term and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) in gastric cancer patients to determine whether RG can replace laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was applied to perform the study. Pubmed, Cochrane Library, WanFang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and VIP databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before May 2020 that compared RG with LG. Next, two independent reviewers conducted literature screening and data extraction. The quality of the literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Random effects or fixed effects models were applied according to heterogeneity. Results A total of 19 studies including 7275 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 4598 patients were in the LG group and 2677 in the RG group. Compared with LG, RG was associated with longer operative time (WMD = −32.96, 95% CI −42.08 ~ −23.84, P < 0.001), less blood loss (WMD = 28.66, 95% CI 18.59 ~ 38.73, P < 0.001), and shorter time to first flatus (WMD = 0.16 95% CI 0.06 ~ 0.27, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference between RG and LG in terms of the hospital stay (WMD = 0.23, 95% CI −0.53 ~ 0.98, P = 0.560), overall postoperative complication (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 ~ 1.25, P = 0.430), mortality (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.24 ~ 1.90, P = 0.450), the number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD = −0.96, 95% CI −2.12 ~ 0.20, P = 0.100), proximal resection margin (WMD = −0.10, 95% CI −0.29 ~ 0.09, P = 0.300), and distal resection margin (WMD = 0.15, 95% CI −0.21 ~ 0.52, P = 0.410). No significant differences were found between the two treatments in overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 ~ 1.18, P = 0.640), recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 ~ 1.21, P = 0.530), and recurrence rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 ~ 1.21, P = 0.500). Conclusions The results of this study suggested that RG is as acceptable as LG in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. RG can be performed as effectively and safely as LG. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of the robotic surgery for gastric cancer.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 161-161
Author(s):  
Lin Chen ◽  
Jiyang Li ◽  
Hongqing Xi ◽  
Yunhe Gao ◽  
Jianxin Cui ◽  
...  

161 Background: As robotic surgery techniques advances, robotic gastrectomy has emerged as an alternative modality for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, there is a lack of supporting evidence regarding the safety, effectiveness and surgeon acceptance of robotic gastrectomy for AGC patients. Methods: An ambispective cohort study was conducted. We compared surgical and oncological outcomes between robotic and traditional laparoscopic gastrectomy for AGC patients. The Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) method was developed and used to analyze the learning curves of robotic gastrectomy for AGC by two surgeons who had different surgical experience. Results: From August 2011 to June 2017, a total of 134 AGC patients were performed robotic gastrectomy by surgeon A (n = 42) and surgeon B (n = 147). And there were 238 AGC patients received traditional laparoscopic gastrectomy which performed by the same two surgeons over the same period. There were no significant differences between the two operation methods regarding the clinicopathologic characteristics and long-term outcomes (p=0.737). However, robotic gastrectomy group had less operative blood loss (229 ml vs. 240 ml, p=0.031) and less Clavien-Dindo Grade II to IV complications (p=0.006) than laparoscopic group. Clinicopathologic characteristics, short-term and long-term outcomes of the patients treated by surgeon A and surgeon B are similarity. CUSUM analysis showed that operative time reached a stable state after around 12 cases in surgeon A who had more open gastrectomy experience than laparoscopic gastrectomy experience, and 21 cases in surgeon B who had more laparoscopic gastrectomy experience than open gastrectomy experience. The stable operation time was 242 min for surgeon A and 236 min for surgeon B. The number of lymph node dissections was 38 for surgeon A and 28 for surgeon B during their capacity-increasing phase. Conclusions: Robotic gastrectomy achieved superior short-term outcomes and comparable long-term outcomes compared with traditional laparoscopic gastrectomy for AGC patients. Surgeons with sufficient experience in either open or laparoscopic gastrectomy can rapidly overcome the learning curve and performed gastrectomy for AGC patients safely.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianglei Ma ◽  
Xiaoyao Li ◽  
Shifu Zhao ◽  
Ruifu Zhang ◽  
Dejun Yang

Abstract Background To date, robotic surgery has been widely used worldwide. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) in gastric cancer patients to determine whether RG can replace laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG).Methods Pubmed, Cochrane Library, WanFang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and VIP databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before May 2020 that compared RG with LG. Next, two independent reviewers conducted literature screening and data extraction. The quality of the literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS),and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Random effects or fixed effects models were applied according to heterogeneity.Results A total of 19 studies including 7275 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 4598 patients were in the LG group and 2677 in the RG group. Compared with LG,RG was associated with longer operative time (WMD=−32.96 min; 95% CI:-42.08~-23.84, P<0.00001),less blood loss (WMD=28.66 ml; 95% CI: 18.59~38.73, P<0.00001),and shorter time to first flatus (WMD=0.16days; 95%CI:0.06~0.27, P=0.003).There was no significant difference between RG and LG in terms of the hospital stay (WMD=0.23days, 95 % CI:-0.53~0.98, P=0.56),overall postoperative complication (OR=1.07, 95 % CI:0.91~1.25, P=0.43),mortality (OR=0.67, 95% CI=0.24~1.90, P=0.45),the number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD=-0.96, 95% CI:-2.12~0.20, P=0.10),proximal resection margin (WMD=-0.10 cm,95% CI:-0.29~0.09, P=0.30),and distal resection margin (WMD=0.15cm,95% CI:-0.21~0.52, P=0.41).No significant differences were found between the two treatments in overall survival(OS) (HR=0.95, 95% CI:0.76~1.18; P=0.64), recurrence-free survival(RFS) (HR=0.91, 95% CI:0.69~1.21;P=0.53), and recurrence rate (OR=0.90, 95% CI:0.67~1.21; P=0.50). Conclusions The results of this study suggested that RG is as acceptable as LG in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. RG can be performed as effectively and safely as LG. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of the robotic surgery for gastric cancer.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 369-369
Author(s):  
Kazuaki Shibuya ◽  
Hideki Kawamura ◽  
Yosuke Ohno ◽  
Nobuki Ichikawa ◽  
Tadashi Yoshida ◽  
...  

369 Background: To investigate the oncological feasibility and technical safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer. Methods: 186 advanced gastric cancer patients treated by gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy were eligible for inclusion including those with invasion into the muscularis propria, subserosa, and serosa without involvement of other organs, and stages N0–2 and M0. We retrospectively compared the short- and-long term outcomes between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy. Results: We analyzed short-term outcomes by comparing distal- with total gastrectomy results. We found no significant difference for distal gastrectomy for postoperative morbidity (laparoscopic vs. open: n = 4 (4.6%) vs. n = 1 (3.6%); p= 1.00). We also found no significant difference in postoperative morbidity for total gastrectomy (laparoscopic vs. open: n = 2 (4.0%) vs. n = 1 (4.0%); p= 1.00). No deaths occurred in any group. The entire cohort analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in overall- or recurrence-free survival between the laparoscopic and open groups. For overall survival, there were no significant differences between open and laparoscopic groups for clinical stage II or III ( p= 0.29 and 0.27, respectively), and for pathological stage II or III ( p= 0.88 and 0.86, respectively). For recurrence-free survival, there were no significant differences between open and laparoscopic groups for clinical stage II or III ( p= 0.63 and 0.60, respectively), and for pathological stage II or III (p = 0.98 and 0.72, respectively). Conclusions: Laparscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer compared favorably with open gastrectomy regarding short- and long-term outcomes. Clinical trial information: 160907.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document