Robot-assisted gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: lessons learned from an initial 100 consecutive procedures

Robotics in general surgery: an evidence-based review

Since its introduction, robotic surgery has been rapidly adopted to the extent that it has already assumed an important position in the field of general surgery. This rapid progress is quantitative as well as qualitative. In this review, we focus on the relatively common procedures to which robotic surgery has been applied in several fields of general surgery, including gastric, colorectal, hepato-biliary-pancreatic, and endocrine surgery, and we discuss the results to date and future possibilities. In addition, the advantages and limitations of the current robotic system are reviewed, and the advanced technologies and instruments to be applied in the near future are introduced. Such progress is expected to facilitate the widespread introduction of robotic surgery in additional fields and to solve existing problems.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy and oesophagectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery is a technically feasible alternative to open and laparoscopic surgery, which is being more frequently used in general surgery. We undertook this review to investigate whether robotic assistance provides a significant benefit for oesophagogastric cancer surgery.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for original English-language publications for robotic-assisted gastrectomy and oesophagectomy between January 1990 and October 2013.

RESULTS

Sixty-one publications were included. Thirty-five included gastrectomy, 31 included oesophagectomy and five included both operations. Several publications suggest that robot-assisted subtotal gastrectomy can be as safe and effective as an open or laparoscopic procedure, with equal outcomes with regard to the number of lymph nodes resected, overall morbidity and perioperative mortality, and length of hospital stay. Robotic assistance is associated with longer operation times but also with less blood loss in some reports. A significant benefit for robotic assistance has not been shown for the more extensive operations of oesophagectomy or total gastrectomy with D2-lymphadenectomy. There are very few oncologic data regarding local recurrence or long-term survival for any of the robotic operations.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in morbidity, mortality or number of lymph node harvested have been shown between robot-assisted and laparoscopic gastrectomy or oesophagectomy. Robotic surgery, with its relatively short learning curve, may facilitate reproducible minimally invasive surgery in this field but operation times are reportedly longer and cost differences remain unclear. Randomized trials with oncologic outcomes and cost comparisons are needed.

Current role of minimally invasive approaches in the treatment of early gastric cancer

Despite declining incidence, gastric cancer remains one of the most common cancers worldwide. Early detection in population-based screening programs has increased the number of cases of early gastric cancer, representing approximately 50% of newly detected gastric cancer cases in Asian countries. Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection have become the preferred therapeutic techniques in Japan and Korea for the treatment of early gastric cancer patients with a very low risk of lymph node metastasis. Laparoscopic and robotic resections for early gastric cancer, including function-preserving resections, have propagated through advances in technology and surgeon experience. The aim of this paper is to discuss the recent advances in minimally invasive approaches in the treatment of early gastric cancer.

Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Robotic systems recently have been introduced to overcome technical limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, especially for complex procedures. Laparoscopic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node (LN) dissection (LTGD2) is one of the most complicated procedures. We hypothesized that robotic LN dissection would be more thorough and accurate. We compared robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy with D2 LN dissection (RTGD2) with LTGD2 to investigate the impact of robotics.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes of RTGD2 (n = 51) versus LTGD2 (n = 58) in gastric adenocarcinoma patients were extracted from a prospectively designed database and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

There was no difference of patients' characteristics between groups. Mean operation time of RTGD2 was longer than LTGD2 (p < 0.001), and no differences in tumor histology, size, location, and TNM stage were seen. Total retrieved LNs from RTGD2 was similar to LTGD2 (mean 47.2 vs. 42.8, respectively), as were retrieved LNs at splenic hilum (1.3 vs. 0.8). However, mean numbers of retrieved LNs along the splenic artery from RTGD2 was higher than LTGD2 (2.3 vs. 1.0, respectively; p = 0.013), as was also the case at the splenic hilum and artery (3.6 vs. 1.9, p = 0.014). Postoperative complication (16 vs. 22 %, p = 0.374) and overall and disease-free survival between the two groups were not significantly different (p = 0.767 and p = 0.666, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy with D2 LN dissection is feasible. Operation time and retrieved total LNs and splenic hilar LNs in the robotic procedure are acceptable.

Simplified technique for reconstruction of the digestive tract after total and subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied to gastric cancer surgery. Gastrointestinal tract reconstruction totally done by laparoscopy also has been a challenge for those who developed this procedure.

AIM

To describe simplified reconstruction after total or subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer by laparoscopy and the results of its application in a series of cases.

METHODS

In the last four years, 75 patients were operated with gastric cancer and two with GIST. Thirty-four were women and 43 men. The age ranged from 38 to 77 years with an average of 55 years. In two patients with GIST a total and a subtotal gastrectomy were performed. In the other 75 patients were done 21 total gastrectomies and 54 subtotal. In all cancers, gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was completed with at least 37 lymph nodes removed. Was used in these operations a modified laparoscopic technique proposed by the authors consisting in a latero lateral esophagojejunal anastomosis with linear stapler in TG as well in STG, and reconstruction of the digestive continuity also in the upper abdomen.

RESULTS

The intraoperative and immediate postoperative course were uneventful, except for one case of bleeding due to an opening clip, necessitating re-intervention. The operative time was 300 minutes, with no difference between total or subtotal gastrectomy. The number of lymph nodes removed varied from 28 to 69, averaging 37. Postoperative staging showed one case in T4 N2 M0; 13 in T2 N0 MO; 27 in T2 N1 M0; 24 in T3 N1 M0 and 10 in T3 N2 M0. Complication in only one case was observed on the 10th postoperative day with a small anastomotic leakage in esophagojejunal anastomose with spontaneous closure.

CONCLUSION

The patient's evolution with no complications, no mortality and just one small anastomotic leakage with no systemic repercussions is a strong indication of the liability and feasibility of this innovative technical method.

Novel application of simultaneous multi-image display during complex robotic abdominal procedures

Background

The surgical robot offers the potential to integrate multiple views into the surgical console screen, and for the assistant’s monitors to provide real-time views of both fields of operation. This function has the potential to increase patient safety and surgical efficiency during an operation. Herein, we present a novel application of the multi-image display system for simultaneous visualization of endoscopic views during various complex robotic gastrointestinal operations.

All operations were performed using the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) with the assistance of Tilepro, multi-input display software, during employment of the intraoperative scopes. Three robotic operations, left hepatectomy with intraoperative common bile duct exploration, low anterior resection, and radical distal subtotal gastrectomy with intracorporeal gastrojejunostomy, were performed by three different surgeons at a tertiary academic medical center.

Results

The three complex robotic abdominal operations were successfully completed without difficulty or intraoperative complications. The use of the Tilepro to simultaneously visualize the images from the colonoscope, gastroscope, and choledochoscope made it possible to perform additional intraoperative endoscopic procedures without extra monitors or interference with the operations.

Conclusion

We present a novel use of the multi-input display program on the da Vinci Surgical System to facilitate the performance of intraoperative endoscopies during complex robotic operations. Our study offers another potentially beneficial application of the robotic surgery platform toward integration and simplification of combining additional procedures with complex minimally invasive operations.

Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes

PURPOSE

This study was designed to compare robot-assisted gastrectomy with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy in surgical performance and short-term clinical outcomes for gastric cancer and evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective database of patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer between March 2010 and May 2013 was examined. After screening, 514 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer were enrolled in this study: 120 robotic and 394 laparoscopic surgery. Patient demographics, surgical performance, and short-term clinical outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

All operations were performed successfully. The clinicopathologic characteristics were similar between the two groups. Compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had less intraoperative blood loss (118.3 ± 55.8 vs. 137.6 ± 61.6 ml, P < 0.001), more lymph nodes dissection (34.6 ± 10.9 vs. 32.7 ± 11.2, P = 0.013), and longer operation time (234.8 ± 42.4 vs. 221.3 ± 44.8 min, P = 0.003). The survival rates were 90.2% at 1 year, 78.1% at 2 years, and 67.8% at 3 years in the RAG group compared with 87.3% at 1 year, 77.1% at 2 years, and 69.9% at 3 years in the LAG group. The difference in overall survival rate between the two groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.812). In view of lymph node involvement, the 3-year survival rates for patients with negative nodal metastasis were 84.4% in the RAG group versus 82.6% in the LAG group (P = 0.972) and 57.5% in the RAG group versus 60.3% in the LADG group (P = 0.653) for those with positive nodal metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing well with laparoscopic gastrectomy, robot-assisted gastrectomy is a feasible and safe surgical procedure with clear operation field, precise dissection, minimal trauma, and fast recovery. Longer follow-up time and randomized, clinical trials are needed to evaluate the clinical benefits and long-term oncological outcomes of this new technology.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) surgery for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

This literature review focuses on the potential benefits and eventual limitations of robotic surgery with respect to the traditional minimally invasive laparoscopic surgical technique for gastric cancer.

METHODS

A literature survey was performed using specific search phrases in PubMed. Series including < 10 cases and series including only an 'open group' of patients in comparison with the 'robotic group' were excluded. Characteristics such as patient demographics, perioperative outcomes and oncological results were analysed.

RESULTS

According to the analysis of 12 series, robotic gastric surgery has been shown to be a safe and feasible method. However, a considerable number of studies are composed of early-stage gastric cancer cases and there seems to be a lack of randomized controlled studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Large prospective randomized studies are still required in order to demonstrate the exact benefits of robotic surgery and its effects on survival in gastric cancer.

Safety of transorally-inserted anvil for esophagojejunostomy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

To assess the safety of transorally-inserted anvil (TOA) for use during esophagojejunostomy (EJ) reconstruction during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG).

METHODS

Between March 2009 and December 2011, 39 consecutive open total gastrectomies (OTGs) and 36 LTGs using TOA for gastric cancer were comparatively evaluated. We investigated postoperative complications, using the Clavien-Dindo classification. To evaluate the effect of a learning period in using TOA for LTG, we also investigated shifts in the patterns of complications and changes in total operation time over the course of the study.

RESULTS

The patient characteristics at baseline were not different between both groups, except for the extent of lymphadenectomy (P < 0.001) and depth of tumor invasion (P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis revealed that TOA usage elevated the occurrence of infectious complications significantly (OR = 3.32, P = 0.042), but was not associated with EJ-related complications. TOA usage did not need a learning period for the length of time required to complete the operation, or the likelihood of developing an EJ-related or infectious complication.

CONCLUSIONS

TOA use for EJ during LTG is relatively simple and easy enough not to require a learning period for surgeons. This procedure did not elevated the occurrence of EJ-related complications compared to circular stapling in open surgery, but it does require special prevention efforts to avoid infectious complications.

Robotic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

Aim

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge was performed. Systematic review was carried out to identify studies comparing robotic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy in gastric cancer. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were also analyzed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the surgery. A fixed effects model or a random effects model was utilized according to the heterogeneity.

Results

Four studies involving 5780 patients with 520 (9.00%) cases of robotic gastrectomy and 5260 (91.00%) cases of open gastrectomy were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy has a significantly longer operation time (weighted mean differences (WMD) =92.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 55.63 to 129.12, P<0.00001), lower blood loss (WMD: -126.08, 95% CI: -189.02 to -63.13, P<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.87; 95% CI: -4.17 to -1.56; P<0.0001). No statistical difference was noted based on the rate of overall postoperative complication, wound infection, bleeding, number of harvested lymph nodes, anastomotic leakage and postoperative mortality rate.

Conclusions

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that robotic gastrectomy is a better alternative technique to open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. However, more prospective, well-designed, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are necessary to further evaluate the safety and efficacy as well as the long-term outcome.

Full robot-assisted gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis produces satisfying outcomes

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of full robot-assisted gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot hand-sewn anastomosis in the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS: From September 2011 to March 2013, 110 consecutive patients with gastric cancer at the authors’ institution were enrolled for robotic gastrectomies. According to tumor location, total gastrectomy, distal or proximal subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was fully performed by the da Vinci Robotic Surgical System. All construction, including Roux-en-Y jejunal limb, esophagojejunal, gastroduodenal and gastrojejunal anastomoses were fully carried out by the intracorporeal robot-sewn method. At the end of surgery, the specimen was removed through a 3-4 cm incision at the umbilicus trocar point. The details of the surgical technique are well illustrated. The benefits in terms of surgical and oncologic outcomes are well documented, as well as the failure rate and postoperative complications.

RESULTS: From a total of 110 enrolled patients, radical gastrectomy could not be performed in 2 patients due to late stage disease; 1 patient was converted to laparotomy because of uncontrollable hemorrhage, and 1 obese patient was converted due to difficult exposure; 2 patients underwent extra-corporeal anastomosis by minilaparotomy to ensure adequate tumor margin. Robot-sewn anastomoses were successfully performed for 12 proximal, 38 distal and 54 total gastrectomies. The average surgical time was 272.52 ± 53.91 min and the average amount of bleeding was 80.78 ± 32.37 mL. The average number of harvested lymph nodes was 23.1 ± 5.3. All specimens showed adequate surgical margin. With regard to tumor staging, 26, 32 and 46 patients were staged as I, II and III, respectively. The average hospitalization time after surgery was 6.2 d. One patient experienced a duodenal stump anastomotic leak, which was mild and treated conservatively. One patient was readmitted for intra-abdominal infection and was treated conservatively. Jejunal afferent loop obstruction occurred in 1 patient, who underwent re-operation and recovered quickly.

CONCLUSION: This technique is feasible and can produce satisfying postoperative outcomes. It is also convenience and reliable for anastomoses in gastrectomy. Full robotic hand-sewn anastomosis may be a minimally invasive technique for gastrectomy surgery.

Rapid and safe learning of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: multidimensional analysis in a comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

The learning curve of robotic gastrectomy has not yet been evaluated in comparison with the laparoscopic approach. We compared the learning curves of robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy based on operation time and surgical success.

METHODS

We analyzed 172 robotic and 481 laparoscopic distal gastrectomies performed by single surgeon from May 2003 to April 2009. The operation time was analyzed using a moving average and non-linear regression analysis. Surgical success was evaluated by a cumulative sum plot with a target failure rate of 10%. Surgical failure was defined as laparoscopic or open conversion, insufficient lymph node harvest for staging, resection margin involvement, postoperative morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

Moving average and non-linear regression analyses indicated stable state for operation time at 95 and 121 cases in robotic gastrectomy, and 270 and 262 cases in laparoscopic gastrectomy, respectively. The cumulative sum plot identified no cut-off point for surgical success in robotic gastrectomy and 80 cases in laparoscopic gastrectomy. Excluding the initial 148 laparoscopic gastrectomies that were performed before the first robotic gastrectomy, the two groups showed similar number of cases to reach steady state in operation time, and showed no cut-off point in analysis of surgical success.

CONCLUSIONS

The experience of laparoscopic surgery could affect the learning process of robotic gastrectomy. An experienced laparoscopic surgeon requires fewer cases of robotic gastrectomy to reach steady state. Moreover, the surgical outcomes of robotic gastrectomy were satisfactory.

Robot-assisted gastroesophageal surgery: usefulness and limitations

Robot-assisted surgery overcomes some of the limitations of traditional laparoscopic surgery. We present our experience and lessons learned in two surgical units dedicated to gastro-esophageal surgery. From June 2009 to January 2013, we performed 130 robot-assisted gastroesophageal procedures, including Nissen fundoplication (29), paraesophageal hernia repair (18), redo for failed antireflux surgery (11), esophagectomy (19), subtotal (5) or wedge (4) gastrectomy, Heller myotomy for achalasia (22), gastric bypass for morbid obesity (12), thoracoscopic leiomyomectomy (4), Morgagni hernia repair (3), lower-third esophageal diverticulectomy (1) and two diagnostic procedures. There were 80 men and 50 women with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range: 46-65). Ten patients (7.7 %) had severe postoperative complications: eight after esophagectomy (three leaks-two cervical and one thoracic-managed conservatively), one stapler failure, one chylothorax, one case of gastric migration to the thorax, one case of biliary peritonitis, and one patient with a transient ventricular dyskinesia. One redo procedure needed reoperation because of port-site bleeding, and one patient died of pulmonary complications after a giant paraesophageal hernia repair; 30-day mortality was, therefore, 0.8 %. There were six elective and one forced conversions (hemorrhage), so total conversion was 5.4 %. Median length of stay was 4 days (IQ range 3-7). Robot-assisted gastroesophageal surgery is feasible and safe, and may be applied to most common procedures. It seems of particular value for Heller myotomy, large paraesophageal hernias, redo antireflux surgery, transhiatal dissection, and hand-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis.

[Robotic hepatobiliary and gastric surgery]

Hepatobiliary surgery is a challenging surgical subspecialty that requires highly specialized training and an adequate level of experience in order to be performed safely. As a result, minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery has been met with slower acceptance as compared to other subspecialties, with many surgeons in the field still reluctant about the approach. On the other hand, gastric surgery is a very popular field of surgery with an extensive amount of literature especially regarding open and laparoscopic surgery but not much about the robotic approach especially for oncological disease. Recent development of the robotic platform has provided a tool able to overcome many of the limitations of conventional laparoscopic hepatobiliary surgery. Augmented dexterity enabled by the endowristed movements, software filtration of the surgeon's movements, and high-definition three-dimensional vision provided by the stereoscopic camera, allow for steady and careful dissection of the liver hilum structures, as well as prompt and precise endosuturing in cases of intraoperative bleeding. These advantages have fostered many centers to widen the indications for minimally invasive hepatobiliary and gastric surgery, with encouraging initial results. As one of the surgical groups that has performed the largest number of robot-assisted procedures worldwide, we provide a review of the state of the art in minimally invasive robot-assisted hepatobiliary and gastric surgery.The English full-text version of this article is available at SpringerLink (under supplemental).

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer is rapidly becoming popular because of the technical developments and the accumulated data of laparoscopic surgery in gastric cancer patients. The aim of this review is to present the current body of evidence and to highlight controversial issues of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) provides better or comparable outcomes compared to conventional open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in terms of short-term results. The long-term survival of LDG is expected to be comparable to that of ODG in early-stage gastric cancer, and an ongoing Korean multicenter randomized controlled trial (KLASS-01) will provide more clear evidence. Laparoscopic total gastrectomy is still selectively performed compared to LDG, and there is still debate on the safety of the laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy technique. Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving gastrectomy seems to be preferred for early gastric cancer in the middle third of the stomach in terms of functional advantages and comparable oncologic outcome. Evidence for LDG for advanced gastric cancer is still insufficient and the issue of lack of generalization still remains, even after ongoing multicenter randomized controlled trials have revealed clinical evidence. Laparoscopic sentinel node navigation surgery is still experimental and the surgical procedure has yet to be standardized. Robotic gastrectomy is feasible for early gastric cancer in terms of similar outcome, but is much more expensive in comparison to laparoscopic surgery. Its benefit over the conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy has not yet been proven.

Risk of limited lymph node dissection in patients with clinically early gastric cancer: indications of extended lymph node dissection for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is usually indicated in T1 N0-1 early gastric cancer (EGC). Limited lymph node dissection, such as D1+, is applied in these cases. However, preoperative staging is not always correct, and the risk of undertreatment thus exists.

METHODS

Patients with clinically early gastric cancer (cEGC) who underwent gastrectomy with lymph node dissection of D2 and over were selected from 4,021 patients with gastric cancer. The station numbers of all metastatic lymph nodes (MLNs) were identified, and MLNs were classified into groups 1 and 2 (including lymph nodes of second tier and over) on the basis of the system of the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, irrespective of the number of MLNs. Clinicopathological data were compared according to the existence of lymph node metastasis and the classification of MLNs.

RESULTS

Of 1,308 patients with cEGC who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 1,184 (90.5 %) were diagnosed pathologically with EGC. Among 126 patients with cEGC who were diagnosed with lymph node metastasis, 93 patients had only group 1 MLNs and 33 patients had group 2 MLNs. Tumor location in the proximal third of the stomach (odds ratio 5.450) and ulceration (odds ratio 11.928) were significant factors for group 2 metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended lymph node dissection is recommended in cEGC with ulceration or disease located in the proximal third of the stomach.

Operative outcomes of robot-assisted transaxillary thyroid surgery for benign thyroid disease: early experience in 50 patients

PURPOSE

The main benefits of robot-assisted transaxillary thyroid surgery are to overcome the technical limitations of other endoscopic procedures for this surgical pathology and to avoid any cervical skin incision. This article describes the first experience of a Romanian team with the endoscopic robot-assisted thyroid surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We used the da Vinci SI intuitive surgical system to carry out 50 thyroid operations: 33 unilateral total lobectomies with isthmectomy (TL), 8 unilateral total lobectomies, with contralateral subtotal lobectomy, and 9 total thyroidectomies. Preoperatively, the patients were diagnosed with nodular goiter in 42 cases, nodular autoimmune thyroiditis in 3 cases, Basedow disease in 2 cases, toxic thyroid adenoma in 2 cases, and diffuse goiter in 1 case. We analyzed the clinical characteristics, size and location of the nodules, surgery duration, postoperative complications, pain medication, histopathological findings and postoperative cosmetic results.

RESULTS

All surgical procedures were carried out without major incidents. One case required conversion to open approach. The mean length of surgery was 159 ± 38.2 min and the average console time was 68 ± 39.9 min; postoperatively, we recorded one case of transient brachial plexus neurapraxia, one transient vocal cord paresis, one transient hypocalcemia, and four postoperative wound complications. The final histopathological examination revealed two cases of well-differentiated carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper reports the largest series to date in Southeast Europe about robot-assisted transaxillary thyroidectomy. On a group of selected Caucasian patients, postoperative results were similar to open cervicotomy in terms of postoperative complications. The major cosmetic advantage is the absence of scar in the anterior cervical region.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer

The interest in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has rapidly increased in recent decades and surgeons have adopted minimally invasive techniques due to its reduced invasiveness and numerous advantages for patients. With increased surgical experience and newly developed surgical instruments, MIS has become the preferred approach not only for benign disease but also for oncologic surgery. Recently, robotic systems have been developed to overcome difficulties of standard laparoscopic instruments during complex procedures. Its advantages including three-dimensional images, tremor filtering, motion scaling, articulated instruments, and stable retraction have created the opportunity to use robotic technology in many procedures including cancer surgery. Gastric cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. While its overall incidence has decreased worldwide, the proportion of early gastric cancer has increased mainly in eastern countries following mass screening programs. The shift in the paradigm of gastric cancer treatment is toward less invasive approaches in order to improve the patient's quality of life while adhering to oncological principles. In this review, we aimed to summarize the operative strategy and current literature in laparoscopic and robotic surgery for gastric cancer.

Robot-assisted spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy: a single surgeon's experiences and proposal of clinical application

BACKGROUND

Advanced and delicate laparoscopic techniques are usually required for safe and successful laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy. The unique characteristics of robotic surgical system are thought to be useful for this minimally invasive procedure.

METHODS

From September 2007 to May 2011, patients who underwent robot-assisted, spleen-preserving, distal pancreatectomy for benign and borderline malignant tumors of the pancreas were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative clinicopathologic surgical outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were attempted for robot-assisted, spleen-preserving, distal pancreatectomy, and in 21 patients (95.5 %), the spleen was saved either by splenic vessels conservation (SVC; n = 17, 81 %) or by splenic vessels sacrifice (SVS; n = 4, 19 %). Seven patients were male and 15 were female with a mean age of 43.2 ± 15.2 years. Pathologic diagnosis included MCT in five patients, SCT in five, SPT in four, IPMT in three, NET in three, and other benign conditions in two. The mean operation time was 398.9 ± 166.3 min, but it gradually decreased as experiences were accumulated (Rsq = 0.223, p = 0.023). Intraoperative blood loss was 361.3 ± 360.1 ml, and intraoperative transfusion was required in four patients (18.1 %). A soft diet was given for 1.2 ± 0.4 days, and the length of hospital stay was 7.0 ± 2.4 days postoperatively. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula was noted in two patients (9.1 %) but was successfully managed conservatively. Most patients (87.5 %) showed patency in conserved both splenic vessels, and only two patients (12.5 %) had partially or completely obliterated in splenic veins in the SVC-SpDP group. Partially impaired splenic perfusion was observed in one patient in the SVS-SpDP group. The perfusion defect area decreased without any clinical symptom after 4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic surgical system is thought to be beneficial for improving the spleen-preservation rate in laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy. Robot-assisted approach can be chosen for patients who require spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy.

Clinical application of image-enhanced minimally invasive robotic surgery for gastric cancer: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to validate the feasibility and role of image-guided robotic surgery using preoperative computed tomography (CT) images for the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS

Twelve patients scheduled to undergo robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer were registered. Vessels encountered during gastrectomy were reconstructed using 3D software and their anatomical variation was evaluated using preoperatively performed CT-angiography. The vascular information was transferred to a robot console using a multi-input display mode. Radiologic findings acquired from preoperative CT by the radiologist were compared with intraoperative findings of the surgeon. This study is registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01338948.

RESULTS

All 12 robotic gastrectomies were performed without any problems. All anatomical data acquired using 3D software were transferred successfully during surgery. Intraoperative vascular images depicted vasculatures around the stomach and could identify important vascular variations. During surgery, relevant vascular information led the surgeon to branch sites and facilitated lymphadenectomy around the vessels. Image-guidance during the operation provided a vascular map and enabled the surgeon to avoid accidental bleeding and damage to other organs by preventing vascular injuries.

CONCLUSION

Image-guided robotic surgery for gastric cancer using preoperative CT-angiography reconstructed during operation by a surgically trained radiologist who could adjust the images by anticipating the operative procedure was feasible and improved the efficiency of surgery by eliminating the possibility of vascular injuries.

Trends and outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: 750 consecutive cases in seven years at a single center

BACKGROUND

The aims of this study were to investigate trends in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer through the experience of a single center and to predict the direction of the development of MIS.

METHODS

During a 7-year period, 2,160 patients underwent curative gastric cancer surgery. Changes in the proportion and pathologic features of a total of 750 cases that involved MIS, as well as the surgical methods and outcomes of MIS, were analyzed.

RESULTS

An analysis of the patient population treated by MIS revealed that the proportion of patients with T2 or greater tumors on the basis of pathologic findings was initially <5.0% but had recently increased to 24.3%. Although the proportions of intracorporeal anastomosis and robotic surgery had recently increased, the complication rate and operative time had stabilized 2 years after the 1st MIS.

CONCLUSIONS

Given these results, the application of MIS for gastric cancer is expected to become more frequent. In addition, new modalities will be preferred by both surgeons and patients to reduce the invasiveness of gastric cancer surgery.

Surgical stress after robot-assisted distal gastrectomy and its economic implications

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of reports evaluating the outcomes of robotic gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical stress response and costs of robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) with those of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG).

METHODS

This prospective study compared a cohort of patients who had RADG with a cohort that underwent conventional LADG for early gastric cancer between March 2010 and May 2011. The surgical outcomes including Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and complications, surgical stress response and overall costs were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were enrolled in the RADG group and 120 in the LADG group. There were no conversions. Median duration of operation was longer in the RADG group (218 (interquartile range 200-254) versus 140 (118-175) min; P < 0·001). Postoperative abdominal drain production was less (P = 0·001) and postoperative performance status was worse (P < 0·001) in the RADG group. C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on postoperative days 1 and 3, and interleukin (IL) 6 level on the third postoperative day, were lower in the LADG compared with the RADG group (CRP: P = 0·002 and P = 0·014 respectively; IL-6: P < 0·001). Costs for robotic surgery were much higher than for laparoscopic surgery (difference €3189).

CONCLUSION

RADG did not reduce surgical stress compared with LADG. The substantial RADG costs due to robotic system expenses may not be justified.

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy versus open total gastrectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The possible advantages of laparoscopic (assisted) total gastrectomy (LTG) versus open total gastrectomy (OTG) have not been reviewed systematically. The aim of this study was to systematically review the short-term outcomes of LTG versus OTG in the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Embase was conducted. All original studies comparing LTG with OTG were included for critical appraisal. Data describing short-term outcomes were pooled and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of eight original studies that compared LTG (n = 314) with OTG (n = 384) in patients with gastric cancer fulfilled quality criteria and were selected for review and meta-analysis. LTG compared with OTG was associated with a significant reduction of intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference = 227.6 ml; 95 % CI 144.3-310.9; p < 0.001), a reduced risk of postoperative complications (risk ratio = 0.51; 95 % CI 0.33-0.77), and shorter hospital stay (weighted mean difference 4.0 = days; 95 % CI 1.4-6.5; p < 0.001). These benefits were at the cost of longer operative time (weighted mean difference = 55.5 min; 95 % CI 24.8-86.2; p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality rates were comparable for LTG (0.9 %) and OTG (1.8 %) (risk ratio = 0.68; 95 % CI 0.20-2.36).

CONCLUSION

LTG shows better short term outcomes compared with OTG in eligible patients with gastric cancer. Future studies should evaluate 30- and 60-day mortality, radicality of resection, and long-term follow-up in LTG versus OTG, preferably in randomized trials.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer

Gastric cancer is common worldwide. Tumor location and disease stage differ between Asian and Western countries. Western patients often have higher BMIs and comorbidities that may make laparoscopic resections challenging. Multiple trials from Asian countries demonstrate the benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer while maintaining equivalent short-term and long-term oncologic outcomes compared with open surgery. The outcomes of laparoscopy seem to offer equivalent results to open surgery. In the United States, laparoscopic gastrectomy remains in its infancy and is somewhat controversial. This article summarizes the literature on the epidemiology, operative considerations and approaches, and outcomes for laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Robot versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer by an experienced surgeon: comparisons of surgery, complications, and surgical stress

BACKGROUND

No previous robotic studies present an equivalent surgical quality comparison in an experienced setting for gastric cancer. In addition, a reliable postoperative complication assessment is needed to accurately evaluate surgical outcomes.

METHODS

After 20 cases of robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG), a total of 121 consecutive gastric cancer patients underwent gastrectomy (38 RAG vs 83 laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy [LAG]) from February 2009 to November 2010 at the Department of Surgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Seoul, Korea. The Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification was used to classify surgical complications. The granulocyte-to-lymphocyte (G:L) ratio was analyzed to evaluate surgical stress.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics, with the exception of age, were similar. The mean total operation time for RAG (234.4 ± 48.0 min) was not significantly different than that for LAG (220.0 ± 60.6 min; P = 0.198). However, in obese patients, fewer lymph nodes were harvested by RAG (23.4 ± 7.0) than by LAG (32.2 ± 12.5, P = 0.006). Overall C-D complications were more common for RAG (47.3 vs 38.5 %), but the difference was not significant (P = 0.361). The mean hospital stay was similar for the 2 groups. Surgical stress as estimated by the G:L ratio was comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RAG performed by an experienced surgeon resulted in similar postoperative outcomes and complications to those of LAG. Assessment of operation time, C-D complication grade, and G:L ratio revealed that RAG is a practical and feasible alternative to LAG, with the possible exception of obese patients.

Major early complications following open, laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy have been adopted rapidly despite lack of evidence concerning technical safety and controversy regarding additional benefits. This study aimed to compare clinically relevant complications after open, laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on surgical complications in patients undergoing gastrectomy with curative intent for histologically proven adenocarcinoma between 2005 and 2010 at the Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine in Seoul, Korea. Complications were categorized into wound infection, bleeding, anastomotic leak, obstruction, fluid collection and other.

RESULTS

In a total of 5839 patients (4542 open, 861 laparoscopic and 436 robotic gastrectomies), overall complication, reoperation and mortality rates were 10·5, 1·0 and 0·4 per cent respectively. There were no significant differences between the three groups. Ileus (P = 0·001) and intra-abdominal fluid collections (P = 0·013) were commoner after conventional open surgery. However, tumour stage was higher and more complex resections were performed in the open group. Anastomotic leak, the leading cause of death, occurred more often after a minimally invasive approach (P = 0·017).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy had overall complication and mortality rates similar to those of open surgery, but anastomotic leaks were more common with the minimally invasive techniques.

Comparison of Surgical Outcomes between Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Learning Curve of Robotic Surgery

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is a widely accepted surgical technique. Recently, robotic gastrectomy has been developed, as an alternative minimally invasive surgical technique. This study aimed to evaluate the question of whether robotic gastrectomy is feasible and safe for the treatment of gastric cancer, due to its learning curve.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the prospectively collected data of 100 consecutive robotic gastrectomy patients, from November 2008 to March 2011, and compared them to 282 conventional laparoscopy patients during the same period. The robotic gastrectomy patients were divided into 20 initial cases; and all subsequent cases; and we compared the clinicopathological features, operating times, and surgical outcomes between the three groups.

RESULTS

The initial 20 robotic gastrectomy cases were defined as the initial group, due to the learning curve. The initial group had a longer average operating time (242.25±74.54 minutes vs. 192.56±39.56 minutes, P>0.001), and hospital stay (14.40±24.93 days vs. 8.66±5.39 days, P=0.001) than the experienced group. The length of hospital stay was no different between the experienced group, and the laproscopic gastrectomy group (8.66±5.39 days vs. 8.11±4.10 days, P=0.001). The average blood loss was significantly less for the robotic gastrectomy groups, than for the laparoscopic gastrectomy group (93.25±84.59 ml vs. 173.45±145.19 ml, P<0.001), but the complication rates were no different.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that robotic gastrectomy is a safe and feasible procedure, especially after the 20 initial cases, and provides a satisfactory postoperative outcome.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer

Application of minimally invasive techniques to gastric cancer in the West has been curbed by concerns of feasibility and oncologic adequacy. Growing evidence supports improved short-term and equivalent oncologic outcomes in selected patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for early-stage disease. Laparoscopic resection for advanced gastric cancer remains controversial due to few reliable studies on long-term outcomes. We focus on important studies from Asia and highlight the Western experience with laparoscopic and robotic surgery for gastric carcinoma.

Minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer-Korean experience

Laparoscopic surgery in Korea increased rapidly because of the early detection of gastric cancer by the development of diagnostic tools and nationwide screening. The Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study Group (KLASS group) played a leading role in various projects related with minimally invasive surgery. The justification of minimally invasive procedures including robotic surgery, sentinel-node biopsy, or single-port surgery/Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) must be predetermined by the clinical trial before a wide application, and the medical industry as well as surgeons should have great responsibility.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of short outcomes

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer remains controversial. The main aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Literature searches of electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Ovid, and Web of Science databases) and manual searches up to December 30, 2011 were performed. Comparative clinical trials were eligible if they reported perioperative outcomes for RG and LG for gastric cancer. Fixed and random effects models were used. The RevMan 5.1 was used for pooled estimates.

RESULTS

Three NRCTs enrolling 918 patients (268 in the RG group and 650 in the LG group) were included in the meta-analysis. RG for gastric cancer was associated with a significantly longer operative time (WMD: 68.77, 95% CI: 35.09-102.45; P < 0.0001), but significantly less intraoperative blood loss (WMD: -41.88, 95% CI: -71.62 to -12.14; P = 0.006). We found no significant differences in the number of lymph nodes (WMD: -0.71, 95% CI: -6.78 to 5.36; P = 0.82), overall morbidity (WMD: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.16; P = 0.19), perioperative mortality rates (WMD: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.30 to 10.89; P = 0.52) and length of hospital stay (WMD: 0.42, 95% CI: -1.87 to 0.79; P = 0.42) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

It may be concluded that RG is a safe and effective alternative to LG and is justifiable under the setting of clinical trials. Additional RCTs that compare RG and LG and investigate the long-term oncological outcomes are required to determine potential advantages or disadvantages of RG.

Initial experience of robotic gastrectomy and comparison with open and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy has become more popular in the treatment of gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries. Until now, few studies have compared robotic surgery with open or laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected between January 2006 and February 2012. A total of 689 patients underwent curative resection of adenocarcinoma of the stomach. Patients were separated into three groups according to the different surgical approaches used (586 open, 64 laparoscopic, and 39 robotic). The clinicopathological characteristics and surgical outcomes of the three groups were compared.

RESULTS

The open group was associated with a larger tumor size, more D2 dissection, more advanced tumor stage, and more blood loss than the groups treated with laparoscopic and robotic methods. Robotic gastrectomy was associated with female predominance, less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and longer operative time than open and laparoscopic gastrectomy. The retrieved lymph node numbers were similar between the open and robotic groups. Postoperative morbidity rates were similar among the three groups. In terms of the learning curve of robotic gastrectomy, operative time and docking time were significantly reduced in the recent robotic group (n=14) compared to the initial robotic group (n=25).

CONCLUSION

Robotic gastrectomy could achieve extended lymph node dissection similar to open surgery. Our results showed a significant learning curve effect in the initial 25 cases of the robotic group.

Robotic gastrectomy: the current state of the art

Since the first laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer was reported in 1994, minimally invasive surgery is enjoying its wide acceptance. Numerous procedures of this approach have developed, and many patients have benefited from its effectiveness, which has been recently demonstrated for early gastric cancer. However, since laparoscopic surgery is not exempt from some limitations, the robotic surgery system was introduced as a solution by the late 1990's. Many experienced surgeons have embraced this new emerging method that provides undoubted technical and minimally invasive advantages. To date, several studies have concentrated to this new system, and have compared it with open and laparoscopic approach. Most of them have reported satisfactory results concerning the post-operative short-term outcomes, but almost all believe that the role of robotic gastrectomy is still out of focus, especially because long-term outcomes that can prove robotic oncologic equivalency are lacking, and operative costs and time are higher in comparison to the open and laparoscopic ones. This article is a review about the current status of robotic surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer, especially, focusing on the technical aspects, comparisons to other approaches and future prospects.

Robot-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in a situs inversus totalis patient

A 47-year-old man was referred to Seoul National University Bundang Hospital with an ulcerative lesion in the midbody of the stomach. Computed tomography revealed that he was a situs inversus totalis (SIT) patient. Robot-assisted distal gastrectomy with D1+β lymph node dissection and Billroth II anastomosis were performed. With the aid of robotic surgery, the surgeon didn't need to change his position and could perform the surgery without any confusion resulting from the patient's reversed anatomy. The operation took 300 minutes, with no intraoperative complications. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on postoperative day 8. The final pathologic report was pT3N3a by American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th tumor-node-metastasis staging. We successfully performed robot-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in a SIT patient. We believe that this is the first case of robotic surgery reported in a SIT patient with gastric cancer.

Minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer-Japanese experiences

Since development of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with lymph node dissection in 1991 in Japan, laparoscopic gastrectomy (LAG) is improving and evolving. Recently, advanced LAG techniques including D2 lymph node dissection or anastomosis after total gastrectomy have been developed. Retrospective and prospective multicenter studies have been conducted for early and non-early gastric cancers to establish high-quality evidence. This review summarizes the current trends of minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer based on current Japanese experiences.

History of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Korea

Laparoscopic gastrectomy was begun in 1995 in Korea. But, there was 4 years gap to reactivate in 1999. High incidence of gastric cancer and increasing proportion of early cancer through national screening program along with huge effort and enthusiasm of laparoscopic gastric surgeon, and active academic exchange with Japanese doctors contributed development of laparoscopic gastrectomy in Korea. Study group activity of Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group and Collaborative Action for Gastric Cancer (COACT) group were paramount to evoke large scale multicenter clinical study and various well performed clinical studies. This review encompasses mainly international publications about this area so far in Korea.

Comparative analysis of station-specific lymph node yield in laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials and cohort studies show that laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) achieves similar oncological results to open distal gastrectomy (ODG). However, studies have consistently demonstrated lower lymph node yield (LNY) for laparoscopic lymphadenectomy. Analysis of station-specific LNY may be useful in evaluating the reasons behind this difference.

OBJECTIVES

Comparison of station-specific LNY, surgical, and oncological outcomes between LDG and ODG for early gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent R0 distal gastrectomy with histologically confirmed early gastric cancer were eligible for the study. All consecutive cases of LDG since the beginning of our experience with laparoscopic gastrectomy and synchronous cases of ODG with R0 resection were included in the study. Demographic, operative, histopathologic, and follow-up data were recorded in all patients.

RESULTS

A total of 259 cases of LDG and 95 cases of ODG were performed between 2000 and 2009. Patients undergoing LDG had longer operations but less bleeding (P<0.05). Postoperative complications were similar in both groups. The preoperatively planned extent of lymphadenectomy was D1 (stations 1, 3, 4sb, 4d, 5, 6, and 7), D1+ (D1with stations 8a and 9), or D2 (D1+ with stations 11p and 12a). During surgery, dissection of stations 3, 4d, 5, 6, and 7 was performed in all cases of LDG and ODG. Dissection of stations 1, 4sb, 8a, 9, 11p, and 12a was performed more frequently during ODG than during LDG. Consequently, the total LNY was 26.71 and 31.43 for LDG and ODG, respectively. Station-specific LNY was significantly lower for LDG than for ODG in the common hepatic artery nodes only (P<0.05). The mean follow-up was 43.6 months. Lymph node metastases, metastatic-to-resected lymph node ratio, recurrence, and cancer-related deaths were similar for LDG and ODG.

CONCLUSIONS

LDG was associated with less extensive lymph node dissection compared with ODG. Station-specific LNY was similar in all nodal stations except for the common hepatic artery nodes. In our experience, laparoscopic sub-D2 lymphadenectomy was adequate in the context of early gastric cancer and represents the future of gastric cancer resection in Japan.

Robotic liver resection: technique and results of 30 consecutive procedures

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery can enhance a surgeon's laparoscopic skills through a magnified three-dimensional view and instruments with seven degrees of freedom compared to conventional laparoscopy.

METHODS

This study reviewed a single surgeon's experience of robotic liver resections in 30 consecutive patients, focusing on major hepatectomy. Clinicopathological characteristics and perioperative and short-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 52.4 years and 14 were male. There were 21 malignant tumors and 9 benign lesions. There were 6 right hepatectomies, 14 left hepatectomies, 4 left lateral sectionectomies, 2 segmentectomies, and 4 wedge resections. The average operating time for the right and left hepatectomies was 724 min (range 648-812) and 518 min (range 315-763), respectively. The average estimated blood loss in the right and left hepatectomies was 629 ml (range 100-1500) and 328 ml (range 150-900), respectively. Four patients (14.8%) received perioperative transfusion. There were two conversions to open surgery (one right hepatectomy and one left hepatectomy). The overall complication rate was 43.3% (grade I, 5; grade II, 2; grade III, 6; grade IV, 0) and 40% in 20 patients who underwent major hepatectomy. Among the six (20.0%) grade III complications, a liver resection-related complication (bile leakage) occurred in two patients. The mean length of hospital stay was 11.7 days (range 5-46). There was no recurrence in the 13 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma during the median follow-up of 11 months (range 5-29).

CONCLUSIONS

From our experience, robotic liver resection seems to be a feasible and safe procedure, even for major hepatectomy. Robotic surgery can be considered a new advanced option for minimally invasive liver surgery.

Novel integrated robotic approach for suprapancreatic D2 nodal dissection for treating gastric cancer: technique and initial experience

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer has been reported, but the technique is not yet established. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of our novel integrated procedure for robotic suprapancreatic D2 nodal dissection during distal gastrectomy.

METHODS

At our hospital from January 2009 to December 2010, a total of 25 consecutive cases of gastric cancer were treated by robotic distal gastrectomy with intracorporeal Billroth I reconstruction. These patients were enrolled in a prospective study to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection by our novel integrated approach, which consists of three elements: arm formation, the surgical approach, a cutting device. To evaluate the learning curves involved in this approach, clinicopathologic features and surgical outcomes were compared between the initial (n = 12) and late (n = 13) phases.

RESULTS

All operations were completed without the need for open or conventional laparoscopic surgery. The mean operating time was 361 ± 58.1 min (range 258-419 min), and blood loss recorded was 51.8 ± 38.2 ml (range 4-123 ml). The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 44.3 ± 18.4 (range 26-95). R0 resection was accomplished in all cases. There were no deaths or complications related to pancreatic damage. Operating time and surgeon console time for the late phase were significantly shorter than those for the initial phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Our novel robotic approach for D2 nodal dissection in gastric cancer is feasible and safe.

The roles of surgical oncologists in the new era: minimally invasive surgery for early gastric cancer and adjuvant surgery for metastatic gastric cancer

In the new era of technical development in surgery, operative devices, molecular targeting and chemotherapeutic agents, surgical oncologists have two main roles in the treatment of gastric cancer. One is to provide patients with minimally invasive surgery, including laparoscopy- or robot-assisted surgery in early gastric cancer patients, and the new concept of surgical intervention toward advanced and metastatic disease. Since recently, laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy has become prevalent in Japan as a surgery which is minimally invasive for the patients and provides them with a good quality of life afterwards. However, the provision of advanced surgical techniques, including lymph node dissection and reconstruction, is more important for patient survival. The second role of surgical oncologists is to evaluate the significant values of the aggressive treatment which we term 'adjuvant surgery' for stage IV gastric cancer patients who have successfully responded to initial chemotherapy for curative intent. Stage IV gastric cancer patients are now being informed about the possibility of longer survival with the new chemotherapeutic and surgical strategic approach.

Robot-assisted surgery for gastric cancer: experience at our institute

OBJECTIVE

The robot-assisted surgical system was developed for minimally invasive surgery and is thought to have the potential to overcome the shortcomings of laparoscopic surgery. We introduced this system for the treatment of gastric cancer in 2008. Here we report our initial experiences of robot-assisted surgery using the da Vinci system.

METHODS

A retrospective review of robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients was performed in our institute. The clinicopathological features and surgical outcomes were analyzed. Whereas the procedures of the gastrectomy were similar to those of the usual laparoscopic surgery, several aspects such as the port placement and the role of the assistant were modified from those for conventional laparoscopic surgery.

RESULTS

From January 2008 to December 2010, 61 patients with gastric cancer underwent robot-assisted surgery. Gastrectomy was distal in 46 patients, total in 14, proximal in 1 and no operation was converted to the open procedure. D2 lymph node dissection was performed on 28 patients in the distal gastrectomy group and on 11 in the total gastrectomy group. Complications occurred in 2 cases (4%): these consisted of ruptured sutures and hemorrhage from the anastomotic site.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that robot-assisted gastrectomy using the da Vinci system can be applied safely and effectively for patients with gastric cancer.

Robot-assisted total gastrectomy is comparable with laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) is technically difficult. Robot surgery has theoretical advantages such as increased degrees of freedom of instruments and a three-dimensional view. The current study aimed to determine whether a robot-assisted total gastrectomy (RATG) has a real benefit over LATG in terms of surgical and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

A single-center case-control study was conducted. The study included 36 patients who underwent RATG and 65 patients who underwent LATG at the National Cancer Center in Korea between February 2009 and May 2011. No patients were excluded from the analysis within the study period. Clinicopathologic data, operative data, postoperative morbidity, and pathologic data were analyzed by Student's t-tests and Chi-square tests, as indicated.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 53.9 ± 11.7 years in the RATG group and 56.9 ± 12.3 years in the LATG group (P = 0.236). The mean BMI was 23.2 ± 2.5 kg/m(2) in the RATG group and 23.6 ± 3.4 kg/m(2) in the LATG group (P = 0.494). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 8.8 ± 3.3 days in the RATG group and 10.3 ± 10.8 days in the LATG group (P = 0.416). The mean operative time was 305.8 ± 115.8 min in the RATG group and 210.2 ± 57.7 min in the LATG group (P < 0.001). The mean number of dissected lymph nodes was 42.8 ± 12.7 in the RATG group and 39.4 ± 13.4 in the LATG group (P = 0.209). Postoperative complications were experienced by 6 patients (16.7%) in the RATG group and 10 patients (15.4%) in the LATG group (P = 0.866).

CONCLUSION

Despite early experiences, RATG was shown to be comparable with LATG in terms of surgical and oncologic outcomes. However, no apparent benefit is associated with RATG to date.

Gastric adenocarcinoma surgery and adjuvant therapy

Gastric adenocarcinoma is one of the most common causes of death worldwide. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of therapy, offering the only chance for complete cure. Resection is based on the principles of obtaining adequate margins, with the extent of lymphadenectomy remaining controversial. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies are used to reduce local recurrence and improve long-term survival. This article reviews the literature and provides a summary of surgical management options and neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapies for gastric adenocarcinoma.