Quality of D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: is laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy as effective as open distal gastrectomy?

Short-Term Outcomes Analysis Comparing Open, Laparoscopic, Laparoscopic-Assisted, and Robotic Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Trials Network Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is debated. The aim of this study was to execute a comprehensive assessment of principal surgical treatments for resectable distal gastric cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) network meta-analysis. Open (Op-DG), laparoscopic-assisted (LapAs-DG), totally laparoscopic (Lap-DG), and robotic distal gastrectomy (Rob-DG) were compared. Pooled effect-size measures were the risk ratio (RR), the weighted mean difference (WMD), and the 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

RESULTS

Ten RCTs (3823 patients) were included. Overall, 1012 (26.5%) underwent Lap-DG, 902 (23.6%) LapAs-DG, 1768 (46.2%) Op-DG, and 141 (3.7%) Rob-DG. Anastomotic leak, severe complications (Clavien-Dindo > 3), and in-hospital mortality were comparable. No differences were observed for reoperation rate, pulmonary complications, postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion, surgical-site infection, cardiovascular complications, number of harvested lymph nodes, and tumor-free resection margins. Compared to Op-DG, Lap-DG and LapAs-DG showed a significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss with a trend toward shorter time to first flatus and reduced length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

LapAs-DG, Lap-DG, and Rob-DG performed in referral centers by dedicated surgeons have comparable short-term outcomes to Op-DG for locally AGC.

Comparison of estimated treatment effects between randomized controlled trials, case-matched, and cohort studies on laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

In actual surgical research, case-matched studies are frequently conducted as an alternative to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, it is still unclear what differences there are between RCTs and case-matched studies in upper gastrointestinal surgery, and clarifying them is a very important clinical issue. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate estimated treatment effects between RCTs, case-matched studies, and cohort studies regarding laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases for studies that compared LDG versus open distal gastrectomy for AGC published from the inception of the databases until July 2021. A meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager version 5.3 software program from the Cochrane Collaboration, and six short-term outcomes and three long-term outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies with 13698 patients were included. There was no difference in estimated treatment effects between RCTs and case-matched studies for all outcomes except for the number of retrieved lymph nodes and postoperative complications. In terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, number of retrieved lymph nodes, and recurrence, observational studies tended to overestimate the treatment effects.

CONCLUSION

The estimated treatment effects of LDG for AGC in the case-matched study were almost the same as in the RCTs. However, to assess the true magnitude of the treatment effect, the design and actual implementation of the analysis must be critically evaluated.

Laparoscopic vs. Open Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Case-Control Study

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries, the use of minimally invasive techniques has not attained the same widespread acceptance for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its feasibility and oncological adequacy. We aimed to examine the safety and oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic technique with radical intent for the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer by comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy at two Western regional institutions. Methods: The trial was designed as a retrospective comparative matched case-control study for postoperative pathological diagnoses of locally advanced gastric carcinoma. Between January 2015 and September 2021, 120 consecutive patients who underwent curative-intent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were retrospectively recruited and compared with 120 patients who received open gastrectomy. In order to obtain a comparison that was as homogeneous as possible, the equal control group of pairing (1:1) patients submitted to open gastrectomy who matched those of the laparoscopic group was statistically generated by using a propensity matched score method. The following potential confounder factors were aligned: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidity, ASA, adjuvant therapy, tumour location, type of gastrectomy, and pT stage. Patient demographics, operative findings, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: In the case-control study, the two groups were clearly comparable with respect to matched variables, as was expected given the intentional primary selective criteria. No statistically significant differences were revealed in overall complications (16.7% vs. 20.8%, p = 0.489), rate of reoperation (3.3% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.714), and mortality (4.2% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.987) within 30 days. Pulmonary infection and wound complications were observed more frequently in the OG group (0.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.01, for each of these two categories). Anastomotic and duodenal stump leakage occurred in 5.8% of the patients after laparoscopic gastrectomy and in 3.3% after open procedure (p = 0.072). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly longer operative time (212 vs. 192 min, p < 0.05) but shorter postoperative length of stay (9.1 vs. 11.6 days, p < 0.001). The mean number of resected lymph nodes after D2 dissection (31.4 vs. 33.3, p = 0.134) and clearance of surgical margins (97.5% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.432) were equivalent between the groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection appears to be safe and feasible in terms of perioperative morbidity for locally advanced gastric cancer, with comparable oncological equivalency with respect to traditional open surgery.

Assessment of indocyanine green fluorescence lymphography on lymphadenectomy during minimally invasive gastric cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In recent years, indocyanine green fluorescence lymphography has been introduced for lymphatic mapping in gastric cancer surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of ICGFL in lymph node dissection during minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure was performed from the inception to January 2021 for all studies comparing ICGFL with non-ICGFL in GC patients undergoing minimal access gastrectomy. The primary outcome was the total number of harvested lymph nodes. The secondary endpoints were the number of metastatic LNs, operative time, estimated blood loss, and postoperative complications. The registration number of this protocol is PROSPERO CRD42020203443.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies including 1882 participants were included. In this meta-analysis, the use of ICGFL was associated with a higher number of harvested LNs (40.33 vs. 33.40; MD = 6.93; 95%CI: 4.28 to 9.58; P < 0.0001; I2 = 86%). No significant difference was found between the ICGFL and control groups in terms of metastatic LNs (2.63 vs. 2.42; MD = 0.21; 95%CI: -0.46 to 0.87; P = 0.54; I2 = 0%). In addition, the use of ICGFL could be safely performed without increasing the operative time (P = 0.49), estimated blood loss (P = 0.26) and postoperative complications (P = 0.54).

CONCLUSION

The use of ICGFL may be a useful tool facilitating complete lymph node dissection during minimally invasive GC resection. However, more high-quality RCTs with large sample size are needed to validate this issue.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: has the time come for considered it a standard procedure?

Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymphadenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer. A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase III evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer. At present, laparoscopic gastrectomy is considered a standard procedure for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries. On the other hand, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer have been recently published, in particular concerning the latest results obtained by laparoscopic approach to advanced gastric cancer. It seems very useful to update the review of literature in light of these new evidences for this subject and draw some considerations.

The effect and clinical significance of using nathanson liver retractor on liver function tests in laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery

ABSTRACT Aim: There are very few studies in the literature investigating the changes caused by the Nathanson retractors in liver function tests (LFT) after LG and its clinical significance. The present study investigated the changes made by the Nathanson retractor used during LG on LFT and its clinical significance. Material and Method: The data of 236 patients, who underwent radical gastrectomy for primary gastric cancer at Surgical Oncology Unit in the period between January 2015 and January 2020 were retrospective studied. The patients were divided into two groups: laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG; 136 cases) and open gastrectomy (OG; 106 cases). Patients who have undergone cholecystectomy, with primary or secondary liver tumors, with chronic hepatic disease, who have preoperative high ALT, AST and bilirubin values were excluded from the study. LFT were measured preoperatively and postoperative day 1 (LFT1), LFT3, LFT5 and LFT7. LFT: ALT, AST and Total bilirubin (BIL). Results: ALT1, ALT3, ALT5, ALT7 ALT values and AST1, AST3, AST5 AST values of the patients in the LG group were found to be significantly higher (P <0.001). Mean total bilirubin values of the groups were similar (P >0.05). In order to evaluate how the increase in LFT due to the use of the Nathanson retractors reflected on the patients' clinic, we divided the patients who underwent LG into two groups based on ALT increase in ALT1: Normal and Elevated. The in-hospital mortality rates (P = 0.080) and oral nutrition time (P = 0.913) of the groups were similar. No liver infarction developed in any of the groups. The duration of stay in the ICU was significantly longer in individuals with elevated LFT (P = 0.019). Conclusion: Although the use of the Nathanson retractor during LG causes an increase in liver function tests, this does not cause major clinical problems in patients. Key Words: Gastrectomy; gastric cancer; laparoscopy; liver enzymes; liver dysfunciton

Systematic review and updated network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing open, laparoscopic-assisted, and robotic distal gastrectomy for early and locally advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of major surgical approaches for operable distal gastric cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were performed to compare open distal gastrectomy, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy, and robotic distal gastrectomy. Risk ratio, weighted mean difference, and 95% credible intervals were used as pooled effect size measures.

RESULTS

Seventeen randomized controlled trials (5,909 patients) were included. Overall, 2,776 (46.8%) underwent open distal gastrectomy, 2,964 (50.1%) laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy, and 141 (3.1%) robotic distal gastrectomy. Among these 3 groups, there were no significant differences in 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak, and overall complications. Compared to open distal gastrectomy, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative pain, time to first flatus, and hospital length of stay. Similarly, robotic distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced blood loss and time to first flatus compared to open distal gastrectomy. No differences were found in the total number of harvested lymph nodes, tumor-free resection margins, 5-year overall, and disease-free survival. The subgroup analysis in locally advanced gastric cancer showed trends toward reduced blood loss, time to first flatus, and hospital length of stay with minimally invasive approaches but similar overall and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and robotic distal gastrectomy performed by well-trained experienced surgeons, even in the setting of locally advanced gastric cancer, seem associated with improved short-term outcomes with similar overall and disease-free survival compared with open distal gastrectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Controversy persists about the effects of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) versus open distal gastrectomy (ODG) on short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival within the field of advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

METHODS

Studies published from January 1994 to February 2020 that compare LDG and ODG for AGC were identified. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. The selection of high-quality nonrandomized comparative studies (NRCTs) was based on a validated tool (Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies, MINORS). The short- and long-term outcomes of both procedures were compared.

RESULTS

Overall, 30 studies were included in this meta-analysis, which comprised of 8 RCTs and 22 NRCTs involving 16,029 patients (7864 LDGs, 8165 ODGs). The recurrence, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 3-year overall survival (OS), and 5-year OS rates for LDG and ODG were comparable. LDG was associated with a lower postoperative complication rate (OR 0.79; P < 0.00001), lower estimated volume of blood loss (WMD -102.21 mL; P < 0.00001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD -1.96 days; P < 0.0001), shorter time to first flatus (WMD -0.54 day; P = 0.0007) and shorter time to first liquid diet (WMD -0.66 day; P = 0.001). The number of lymph nodes retrieved, mortality, intraoperative complications, intraoperative blood transfusion, and time to ambulation were similar. However, LDG was associated with a longer surgical time (WMD 33.57 min; P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

LDG with D2 lymphadenectomy is a safe and effective technique for patients with AGC when performed by experienced surgeons at high-volume specialized centers.

Management of advanced gastric cancer: An overview of major findings from meta-analysis

This study aims to provide an overview of different treatment for advanced gastric cancer. In the present study, we systematically reviewed the major findings from relevant meta-analyses. A total of 54 relevant papers were searched via the PubMed, Web of Science, and Google scholar databases. They were classified according to the mainstay treatment modalities such as surgery, chemotherapy and others. Primary outcomes including overall survival, response rate, disease-free survival, recurrence-free survival, progression-free survival, time-to-progression, time-to failure, recurrence and safety were summarized. The recommendations and uncertainties regarding the treatment of advanced gastric cancer were also proposed. It was suggested that laparoscopic gastrectomy was a safe and technical alternative to open gastrectomy. Besides, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy were thought to benefit the survival over surgery alone. And it was demonstrated in the study that targeted therapy like anti-angiogenic and anti-HER2 agents but anti-EGFR agent might have a significant survival benefit.

Pancreas-related complications following gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus minimally invasive surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreas-related complications are quite uncommon but potentially life-threatening occurrences that may occasionally complicate the postoperative course of gastrectomy. A number of reports have described such conditions after both standard open and minimally invasive surgery. Our study has the purpose to systematically determine the pooled incidence of pancreatic events following radical gastrectomy. We also aimed to elucidate whether any difference in incidence exists between patients operated via conventional open or minimally invasive surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized or well-matched studies comparing conventional with minimally invasive oncological gastrectomy and reporting pancreas-related postoperative complications. We evaluated possible differences in outcomes between open and minimally invasive surgery. A meta-analysis of relevant comparisons was performed using RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

A total of 20 studies, whereby 6 randomized and 14 non-randomized comparative studies including a total of 7336 patients, were considered eligible for data extraction. Globally, more than 1% of patients experienced some pancreatic occurrences during the postoperative course. The use of minimally invasive surgery showed a trend toward increased overall pancreatic morbidity (OR 1.39), pancreatitis (OR 2.69), and pancreatic fistula (OR 1.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Although minimally invasive radical gastrectomy is currently established as a valid alternative to open surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer, a higher risk of pancreas-related morbidity should be taken into account.

Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a comparison with open procedure at the beginning of the learning curve

BACKGROUND

In the last decades, after some initial concern, laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LSG) is gaining popularity also for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study is to compare a single surgeon initial experience on LSG and open subtotal gastrectomy in terms of surgical safety and radicality, postoperative recovery and midterm oncological outcomes.

METHODS

a case control study was conducted matching the first 13 LSG for AGC with 13 open procedures performed by the same surgeon. Operative and pathological data, postoperative parameters and midterm oncological outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in mortality (0%) and morbidity, while the laparoscopic approach allowed lower analgesic consumption and faster bowel movement recovery. Operation time was significantly higher in LSG patients (301.5 vs 232 min, p: 0.023), with an evident learning curve effect. Both groups had a high rate of adequate lymph node harvest, but the number was significantly higher in LSG group (p: 0.033). No significant difference in survival was registered. Multivariate analysis identified age at diagnosis, diffuse-type tumor, pN and LODDS as independent predictors of worse prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG can be safely performed for the treatment of AGC, allowing faster postoperative recovery.

Technical pro & cons of the laparoscopic lymphadenectomy

Laparoscopy has been introduced in treatment of gastric cancer to reduce surgical trauma and to improve post-operative functional recovery. Most of international guidelines allow the use of this minimally invasive approach in general surgical practice only in clinical stage I. One of the most important concerns in fact is the feasibility of D2 lymphadenectomy through laparoscopy. Reduced numbers of harvested lymph nodes have been reported, particularly in stations with a more difficult access. Nevertheless subsequent papers reported adequate numbers of total number of nodes retrieved, even with D2 dissection and even in complex stations but results from randomized controlled trials still lack. Laparoscopic approach has been proven safe and effective also in extremely complex maneuvers as spleen-preserving retropancreatic lymphadenectomy. The minimally invasive approach in D2 lymphadenectomy seems to be associated to comparable incidence of specific complications as compared to open surgery. The use of laparoscopy has extended the operating time but has reduced the blood loss. Because of high complexity of this kind surgery, laparoscopic gastric surgery for cancer should be done only in referral centers.

Efficacy of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in elderly patients

Elderly patients are often considered as high-risk for major abdominal surgery due to reduced functional reserve and increased comorbidities. We herein evaluated the efficacy of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) in elderly patients with gastric cancer by measuring the postoperative systemic responses and postoperative analgesic consumption. A total of 102 patients with gastric cancer [57 who underwent TLDG and 45 who underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG)] were enrolled in this study. The patients were classified as elderly (aged ≥75 years) and non-elderly (aged <75 years) groups. The surgical outcome and postoperative analgesic consumption were evaluated. The elderly group exhibited a higher incidence of comorbidities and a longer postoperative hospital stay compared with those of younger patients, although there was no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications. In addition, the total consumption of additional analgesics until postoperative day 5 in patients who underwent TLDG was significantly lower compared with that in patients who underwent LADG in the elderly group; there was no such difference in the non-elderly group. The results suggested that TLDG was better for the management of postoperative pain in elderly patients with gastric cancer, who exhibit the highest mortality rates in the adult surgical population.

Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review

AIM: To review current applications of the laparoscopic surgery while highlighting the standard procedures across different fields.

METHODS: A comprehensive search was undertaken using the PubMed Advanced Search Builder. A total of 321 articles were found in this search. The following criteria had to be met for the publication to be selected: Review article, randomized controlled trials, or meta-analyses discussing the subject of laparoscopic surgery. In addition, publications were hand-searched in the Cochrane database and the high-impact journals. A total of 82 of the findings were included according to matching the inclusion criteria. Overall, 403 full-text articles were reviewed. Of these, 218 were excluded due to not matching the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS: A total of 185 relevant articles were identified matching the search criteria for an overview of the current literature on the laparoscopic surgery. Articles covered the period from the first laparoscopic application through its tremendous advancement over the last several years. Overall, the biggest advantage of the procedure has been minimizing trauma to the abdominal wall compared with open surgery. In the case of cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and adrenalectomy, the procedure has become the gold standard without being proven as a superior technique over the open surgery in randomized controlled trials. Faster recovery, reduced hospital stay, and a quicker return to normal activities are the most evident advantages of the laparoscopic surgery. Positive outcomes, efficiency, a lower rate of wound infections, and reduction in the perioperative morbidity of minimally invasive procedures have been shown in most indications.

CONCLUSION: Improvements in surgical training and developments in instruments, imaging, and surgical techniques have greatly increased safety and feasibility of the laparoscopic surgical procedures.

Outcome of laparoscopic gastrectomy with D1 plus lymph node dissection in gastric cancer patients postoperatively diagnosed with locally advanced disease or lymph node metastasis

BACKGROUND

Some laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) patients are postoperatively diagnosed with locally advanced disease or lymph node metastasis. Few reports have reviewed the outcomes or validity of LG in such patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively compared the outcomes of LG for gastric cancer patients postoperatively diagnosed with T3 (subserosal invasion) or higher or N1 (metastasis in 1-2 regional lymph nodes), or higher disease (n = 36), with open gastrectomy (OG) for c-stage I gastric cancer patients (n = 62).

RESULTS

D1 plus lymph node dissection was performed in all patients in the LG group. Blood loss was significantly lower in the LG group than in the OG group (P < 0.0010). The mean postoperative hospital stay duration was significantly shorter in the LG group than in the OG group (P = 0.0016). In the LG group, lymph node metastasis occurred in 1 patient, peritoneal dissemination in 2 patients, and liver metastasis in 1 patient. The 5-year survival rate did not significantly differ between the LG and OG groups (90.00 vs. 94.52 %; P = 0.6517).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the similarity in long-term outcomes between the LG and OG groups, LG is an appropriate indication for gastric cancer patients postoperatively diagnosed with locally advanced disease or lymph node metastasis.