Lower rate of conversion using robotic-assisted surgery compared to laparoscopy in completion total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer

Comprehensive comparison of technical performance, surgical outcomes, and oncologic prognosis between remnant gastric cancer and primary upper-third gastric cancer in the era of minimally invasive surgery: A pooled analysis of 3 prospective trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To compare the technical performances and short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer and primary upper gastric cancer.

METHODS

This prospective study (FUGES-004 study) enrolled 50 remnant gastric cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital between June 2016 and June 2020 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02792881). Propensity score matching (1:2) was used to select upper gastric cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy in the FUGES-001 and FUGES-002 studies. Technical performance was assessed using the General Error Reporting Tool, Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), and Intraoperative Complication Classification.

RESULTS

After matching, 46 remnant gastric cancer and 92 upper gastric cancer patients were included in the final analysis. Abdominal adhesions in the epigastrium, central abdomen, and bowel-to-bowel regions were more severe in the remnant gastric cancer group (P < .001). The remnant gastric cancer group had more technical errors and intraoperative adverse events (especially grade I bleeding) during surgery (P < .05). However, the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills scores were comparable between the remnant gastric cancer and upper gastric cancer groups (30.8 vs 31.0, P = .799). Although the severe postoperative complication rates were similar between the 2 groups (P = .333), the postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in the remnant gastric cancer group (28.3% vs 7.6%, P = .001). Additionally, the long-term oncologic outcomes (including 3-year disease-free survival, overall survival, and recurrence pattern) were comparable between the remnant gastric cancer and upper gastric cancer groups (log-rank P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the long-term oncologic outcomes were comparable between the groups, the remnant gastric cancer group had more intraoperative errors and adverse events and higher postoperative complication rates than the upper gastric cancer group. For complex remnant gastric cancer cases, laparoscopic total gastrectomy may serve as an effective therapeutic option. However, experienced surgeons at high-volume centers should exercise caution when performing laparoscopic total gastrectomy and implement more rigorous perioperative management strategies.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer (GC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search across PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science identified 86 eligible studies, including 68,755 patients (20,894 in the RG group and 47,861 in the LG group).

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that RG was associated with superior outcomes in several areas: more lymph nodes were harvested, intraoperative blood loss was reduced, postoperative hospital stays were shorter, and the time to first flatus and oral intake was shortened (all p < 0.001). Additionally, RG resulted in lower incidences of conversion to open surgery (OR = 0.62, p = 0.004), reoperation (OR = 0.68, p = 0.010), overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.82, p < 0.001), severe complications (OR = 0.65, p < 0.001), and pancreatic complications (OR = 0.60, p = 0.004). However, RG had longer operative times and higher costs (both p < 0.001). No significant differences were found between RG and LG in terms of resection margin distance, mortality, anastomotic leakage, or recurrence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

RG is a safe and effective surgical option for patients of GC, but further improvements in operative duration and costs are needed.

Current status of evaluation and treatment of early-stage remnant gastric cancer

Because of early diagnosis and improved prognosis, patients with gastric cancer are now surviving longer and remnant gastric cancer after gastrectomy is becoming more common. Remnant gastric cancer is traditionally considered a malignancy with a dismal outcome. However, recent advances in diagnostic and therapeutic strategies have improved outcomes. In recent years, the development of endoscopic therapy has provided us with new therapeutic ideas. Although with some drawbacks, such as limited working space, gastric fibrosis and staples under the suture line, endoscopic management is still an effective treatment option with potential long-term survival advantage. For gastrectomy patients, endoscopic surveillance should also be recommended, for prompt surveillance and detection in the early remnant gastric cancer. This review aims to provide an overview of remnant gastric cancer, especially focusing on its pathogenesis as well as new advances in the diagnosis and endoscopic treatment of early-stage remnant gastric cancer.

Impact of robotic and open surgery on patient wound complications in gastric cancer surgery: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis is intended to evaluate the effect of both robotic and open-cut operations on postoperative complications of stomach carcinoma. From the earliest date until June 2023, a full and systemic search has been carried out on four main databases with keywords extracted from 'Robot', 'Gastr' and 'Opene'. The ROBINS-I instrument has been applied to evaluate the risk of bias in nonrandomized controlled trials. In these 11 trials, a total of 16 095 patients had received surgical treatment for stomach cancer and all 11 trials were nonrandomized, controlled trials. Abdominal abscesses were reported in 5 trials, wound infections in 8 trials, haemorrhage in 7 trials, wound dehiscence in 2 trials and total postoperative complications in 4 trials. Meta-analyses revealed no statistically significantly different rates of postoperative abdominal abscesses among patients who had received robotic operations than in those who had received open surgical procedures (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.25, 3.36; p = 0.89). The incidence of bleeding after surgery was not significantly different from that in both groups (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.69, 2.75; p = 0.37). Similarly, there was no significant difference between the two groups (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.52, 1.18; p = 0.24). No significant difference was found between the two groups (OR, 1. 28; 95% CI, 0.75, 2.21; p = 0.36). No significant difference was found between the two groups of patients who had received the robotic operation and those who had received the surgery after the operation (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.78, 1.66; p = 0.49). Generally speaking, this meta-analysis suggests that the use of robotics does not result in a reduction in certain postsurgical complications, including wound infections and abdominal abscesses. Thus, the use of a microinvasive robot for stomach carcinoma operation might not be better than that performed on the surgical site after the operation. This is a valuable guide for the surgeon to select the operative method.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer: A single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains controversial because of its rarity and heterogeneity of clinical characteristics. Based on our experience, we posited that our established methodology in LG could be applied to the laparoscopic procedure for RGC surgery and introduced LG for RGC at our institution in 2004.

METHODS

This study enrolled 46 patients who underwent LG for RGC between January 2004 and December 2017. Data were obtained through a review of our prospectively maintained database. Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) was the standard surgical procedure for RGC. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LsTG) was performed as an alternative procedure for patients with RGC located near the anastomotic site after primary gastrectomy. The technical and oncological feasibility and safety of LG for RGC were evaluated.

RESULTS

LTG for RGC was performed on 36 patients. LsTG for RGC was performed on 10 patients. All patients completed LG procedure and succeeded R0 resection. Complications of Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ IIIa occurred in 4 (8.7%) patients. The retrospective video reviews showed that the time for adhesiotomy around the suprapancreatic area and the lesser curvature of the remnant stomach was significantly shorter in the primary-benign group than in the primary-malignant group. With the median follow-up period of 40 months, the 3-year recurrence-free survival and 3-year overall survival rates were 72.3% and 80.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

LG for RGC represents a safe and feasible surgical option with favorable short-term and long-term outcomes in patients with RGC.

Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Gastric Cancer Surgery: Short-Term Outcomes-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 25,521 Patients

Background: Gastric cancer has the third highest cancer-related mortality worldwide. There is no consensus regarding the optimal surgical technique to perform curative resection surgery. Objective: Compare laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and robotic gastrectomy (RG) regarding short-term outcomes in patients with gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched the following topics: "Gastrectomy," "Laparoscopic," and "Robotic Surgical Procedures." The included studies compared short-term outcomes between LG and RG. Individual risk of bias was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) scale. Results: There was no significant difference between RG and LG regarding conversion rate, reoperation rate, mortality, overall complications, anastomotic leakage, distal and proximal resection margin distances, and recurrence rate. However, mean blood loss (mean difference [MD] -19.43 mL, P < .00001), length of hospital stay (MD -0.50 days, P = .0007), time to first flatus (MD -0.52 days, P < .00001), time to oral intake (MD -0.17 days, P = .0001), surgical complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III (risk ratio [RR] 0.68, P < .0001), and pancreatic complications (RR 0.51, P = .007) were significantly lower in the RG group. Furthermore, the number of retrieved lymph nodes was significantly higher in the RG group. Nevertheless, the RG group showed a significantly higher operation time (MD 41.19 minutes, P < .00001) and cost (MD 3684.27 U.S. Dollars, P < .00001). Conclusion: This meta-analysis supports the choice of robotic surgery over laparoscopy concerning relevant surgical complications. However, longer operation time and higher cost remain crucial limitations. Randomized clinical trials are required to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of RG.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery with Open Surgery for Remnant Gastric Cancer: A Multi-institutional Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Despite growing evidence of the effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for primary gastric cancer, MIS for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains controversial due to the rarity of the disease. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncological outcomes of MIS for radical resection of RGC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with RGC who underwent surgery between 2005 and 2020 at 17 institutions were included, and a propensity score matching analysis was performed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of MIS with open surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 327 patients were included in this study and 186 patients were analyzed after matching. The risk ratios for overall and severe complications were 0.76 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45, 1.27] and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.32, 1.29), respectively. The MIS group had significantly less blood loss [mean difference (MD), -409 mL; 95% CI: -538, -281] and a shorter hospital stay (MD, -6.5 days; 95% CI: -13.1, 0.1) than the open surgery group. The median follow-up duration of this cohort was 4.6 years, and the 3-year overall survival were 77.9% and 76.2% in the MIS and open surgery groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR), 0.78; 95% CI: 0.45, 1.36]. The 3-year relapse-free survival were 71.9% and 62.2% in the MIS and open surgery groups, respectively (HR, 0.71; 95% CI: 0.44, 1.16).

CONCLUSIONS

MIS for RGC showed favorable short- and long-term outcomes compared to open surgery. MIS is a promising option for radical surgery for RGC.

Fluorescent Lymphography-Guided Lymphadenectomy during Minimally Invasive Completion Total Gastrectomy for Remnant Gastric Cancer Patients

Simple Summary

The altered lymphatic anatomy around the remnant stomach after initial surgery causes technical difficulties in systematic lymphadenectomy during the completion total gastrectomy. A fluorescent lymphography with indocyanine green under near-infrared imaging is a reliable intraoperative technique for lymphatic identification in minimally invasive gastric cancer surgery. This study aimed to assess the clinical application of fluorescent lymphography in minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy for remnant gastric cancer. More lymph node retrieval was demonstrated in minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy with fluorescent lymphography than without fluorescent lymphography. Fluorescent lymphography is an effective tool for the intraoperative assessment of lymphatics around the remnant stomach and systemic lymphadenectomy during minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy.

Abstract

No study has evaluated fluorescent lymphography for lymphadenectomy in remnant gastric cancer (RGC). This study aimed to assess the clinical application of fluorescent lymphography in minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy for RGC. Patients who had undergone minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy for RGC from 2013 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. The perioperative outcomes and long-term prognosis were compared between patients who had undergone minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy with fluorescent lymphography (the FL group) and those without fluorescent lymphography (the non-FL group). The FL group comprised 32 patients, and the non-FL group comprised 36 patients. FL visualized lymphatics in all 32 patients without complications related to the fluorescent injection. The median number [the interquartile range] of LN retrieval was significantly higher in the FL group (17 [9.3–23.5]) than in the non-FL group (12.5 [4–17.8]); p = 0.016). The sensitivity of fluorescent lymphography in detecting metastatic LN stations was 75%, and the negative predictive value was 96.9% in the FL group. The overall relapse-free survivals were comparable between the groups (p = 0.833 and p = 0.524, respectively). FL is an effective tool to perform a more thorough lymphadenectomy during minimally invasive completion total gastrectomy for RGC. Using FL in RGC surgery may improve surgical quality and proper staging.

Postoperative outcomes in robotic gastric resection compared with laparoscopic gastric resection in gastric cancer: A meta-analysis and systemic review

Background

Robotic gastrectomy is a commonly used procedure for early gastric cancer and it also overcomes the limitation of laparoscopic. However, the complications of robotic gastrectomy (RG) still need to be assessed. Our study was designed to compare postoperative complications of RG with laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG).

Materials and Methods

A meta-analysis and systemic review were prospectively collected using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE database of published studies by comparing the RG and LG with gastric cancer up to December 2021. To evaluate the postoperative outcomes, odds ratios were calculated for Dichotomous data and the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for continuous data, and measured by the random-effect model.

Results

Thirty-two retrospective studies describing 13,585 patients (4484 RG and 9101 LG) satisfied the inclusion criteria. A statistically significant result was in blood loss (MD = -17.97, 95% Cl: -25.61 to 10.32, p < 0.001), Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅲ (odds ratio (OR) = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76, p < 0.01), and harvested lymph node (MD = 2.62, 95% CI: 2.14-3.11, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between robotic gastrectomy surgery (RGS) and laparoscopic gastrectomy surgery (LGS) regarding distal resection margin (DRM), proximal resection margin (PRM), conversion rate, anastomotic leakage, and overall complications.

Conclusion

Having significant outcomes in Clavien-Dindo grade III, and blood loss, harvested lymph nodes are more common in RGS, and they also help in increasing the quality of life.

Postoperative Complications and Their Risk Factors of Completion Total Gastrectomy for Remnant Gastric Cancer Following an Initial Gastrectomy for Cancer

PURPOSE

Completion total gastrectomy (CTG) for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) is a technically demanding procedure and associated with increased morbidity. The present study aimed to evaluate postoperative complications and their risk factors following surgery for RGC after initial partial gastrectomy due to gastric cancer excluding peptic ulcer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 107 patients who had previously undergone an initial gastric cancer surgery and subsequently underwent CTG for RGC between March 2002 and December 2020. The postoperative complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Logistic regression analyses were used to determine the risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

Postoperative complications occurred in 34.6% (37/107) of the patients. Intra-abdominal abscess was the most common complication. The significant risk factors for overall complications were multi-visceral resections, longer operation time, and high estimated blood loss in the univariate analysis. The independent risk factors were multi-visceral resection (odds ratio [OR], 2.832; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.094-7.333; P=0.032) and longer operation time (OR, 1.005; 95% CI, 1.001-1.011; P=0.036) in the multivariate analysis. Previous reconstruction type, minimally invasive approach, and current stage were not associated with the overall complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-visceral resection and long operation time were significant risk factors for the occurrence of complications following CTG rather than the RGC stage or surgical approach. When multi-visceral resection is required, a more meticulous surgical procedure is warranted to improve the postoperative complications during CTG for RGC after an initial gastric cancer surgery.

Robot-assisted completion gastrectomy preserving interposed jejunum in remnant gastric cancer following a proximal gastrectomy reconstructed by jejunal interposition: A case report

Minimally invasive completion gastrectomy is technically demanding and comprises a variety of procedures depending on the previous operation. We present herein a case of robot-assisted completion gastrectomy preserving the interposed jejunum in remnant gastric cancer following a proximal gastrectomy reconstructed by jejunal interposition. A 76-year-old, male patient experienced newly developed stage cT1bN0M0 gastric cancer in the distal remnant stomach 5 years after his initial proximal gastrectomy. Endoscopic submucosal dissection was not feasible because of tumor depth and poor cancer cell differentiation. The robotic approach was chosen because of the early cancer stage, prior laparoscopic surgery, and the patient's advanced age. The interposed jejunum was successfully preserved, and a new overlap anastomosis was created between it and the retrocolic Roux-en-Y limb. Robot-assisted completion gastrectomy was safely performed even after a proximal gastrectomy with jejunal interposition.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Mega Meta-Analysis

Background

Laparoscopic gastrectomy and robotic gastrectomy are the most widely adopted treatment of choice for gastric cancer. To systematically assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis on short-term and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy.

Methods

In order to find relevant studies on the efficacy and safety of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in the treatment of gastric cancer, numerous medical databases including PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, and China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI) were consulted, and Chinese and English studies on the efficacy and safety of RG and LG in the treatment of gastric cancer published from 2012 to 2022 were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software.

Results

The meta-analysis inlcuded 48 literatures, with 20,151 gastric cancer patients, including 6,175 in the RG group and 13,976 in the LG group, respectively. Results of our meta-analysis showed that RG group had prololonged operative time (WMD = 35.72, 95% CI = 28.59–42.86, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 258.69 min ± 32.98; LG: mean ± SD = 221.85 min ± 31.18), reduced blood loss (WMD = −21.93, 95% CI = −28.94 to −14.91, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 105.22 ml ± 62.79; LG: mean ± SD = 127.34 ml ± 79.62), higher number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.99–3.63, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 35.88 ± 4.14; LG: mean ± SD = 32.73 ± 4.67), time to first postoperative food intake shortened (WMD = −0.20, 95% CI = −0.29 to −0.10, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 4.5 d ± 1.94; LG: mean ± SD = 4.7 d ± 1.54), and lower length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = −0.54, 95% CI = −0.83 to −0.24, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 8.91 d ± 6.13; LG: mean ± SD = 9.61 d ± 7.74) in comparison to the LG group. While the other variables, for example, time to first postoperative flatus, postoperative complications, proximal and distal mar gin, R₀ resection rate, mortality rate, conversion rate, and 3-year overall survival rate were all found to be statistically similar at P > 0.05.

Conclusions

In the treatment of gastric cancer, robotic gastrectomy is a safe and effective procedure that has both short- and long-term effects. To properly evaluate the advantages of robotic surgery in gastric cancer, more randomised controlled studies with rigorous research methodologies are needed.

A good preoperative immune prognostic index is predictive of better long-term outcomes after laparoscopic gastrectomy compared with open gastrectomy for stage II gastric cancer in elderly patients

BACKGROUND

It remains inconclusive whether laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has better long-term outcomes when compared with open gastrectomy (OG) for elderly gastric cancer (EGC). We attempted to explore the influence of the immune prognostic index (IPI) on the prognosis of EGCs treated by LG or OG to identify a population among EGC who may benefit from LG.

METHODS

We included 1539 EGCs treated with radical gastrectomy from January 2007 to December 2016. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare the LG and OG groups. The IPI based on dNLR ≥ cut-off value (dNLR) and sLDH ≥ cut-off value (sLDH) was developed, characterizing two groups (IPI = 0, good, 0 factors; IPI = 1, poor, 1 or 2 factors).

RESULTS

Of the 528 EGCs (LG: 264 and OG: 264), 271 were in the IPI = 0 group, and 257 were in the IPI = 1 group. In the entire cohort, the IPI = 0 group was associated with good 5-year overall survival (OS) (p = 0.001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (p = 0.003) compared to the IPI = 1 group; no significant differences in 5-year OS and PFS between the LG and OG groups were observed. In the IPI = 1 cohort, there was no significant difference in OS or PFS between the LG and OG groups across all tumor stages. However, in the IPI = 0 cohort, LG was associated with longer OS (p = 0.015) and PFS (p = 0.018) than OG in stage II EGC, but not in stage I or III EGC. Multivariate analysis showed that IPI = 0 was an independent protective factor for stage II EGC receiving LG, but not for those receiving OG.

CONCLUSION

The IPI is related to the long-term prognosis of EGC. Compared with OG, LG may improve the 5-year survival rate of stage II EGC with a good IPI score. This hypothesis needs to be further confirmed by prospective studies.

The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abdominal adhesions are a risk factor for conversion to open surgery. An advantage of robotic surgery is the lower rate of unplanned conversions. A systematic review was conducted using the terms "laparoscopic" and "robotic". Inclusion criteria were: comparative studies evaluating patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic surgery; reporting data on conversion to open surgery for each group due to adhesions and studies including at least five patients in each group. The main outcomes were the conversion rates due to adhesions and surgeons' expertise (novice vs. expert). The meta-analysis included 70 studies from different surgical specialities with 14,329 procedures (6472 robotic and 7857 laparoscopic). The robotic approach was associated with a reduced risk of conversion (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.10, p = 0.007). The analysis of the procedures performed by "expert surgeons" showed a statistically significant difference in favour of robotic surgery (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.03-2.12, p = 0.03). A reduced conversion rate due to adhesions with the robotic approach was observed in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.20-5.72, p = 0.02). The robotic approach could be a valid option in patients with abdominal adhesions, especially in the subgroup of those undergoing colorectal cancer resection performed by expert surgeons.

Assessment of the training program for Versius, a new innovative robotic system for use in minimal access surgery

Objectives

The Versius surgical system has been developed for use in robot-assisted minimal access surgery (MAS). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Versius training program.

Design

A 3.5-day program following 10 hours of online didactic training. Participants were assessed during the technical training using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS).

Setting

Dry box exercises were conducted in classrooms, and wet lab sessions simulated an operating room environment using cadaveric specimens.

Participants

Seventeen surgical teams participated; surgeons represented general, colorectal, obstetrics/gynecology, and urology specialties. All surgeons had previous laparoscopic MAS experience, while experience with robotics varied.

Main outcomes measures

Participants were scored on a five-point Likert Scale for each of six validated GEARS domains (depth perception, bimanual dexterity, efficiency, force sensitivity, autonomy, and robotic control). Additional metrics used to chart surgeon performance included: combined instrument path length; combined instrument angular path; and time taken to complete each task.

Results

Participants demonstrated an overall improvement in performance during the study, with a mean GEARS Score of 21.0 (SD: 1.9) in Assessment 1 increasing to 23.4 (SD: 2.9) in Validation. Greatest improvements were observed in the depth perception and robotic control domains. Greatest differences were observed when stratifying by robotic experience; those with extensive experience consistently scored higher than those with some or no experience.

Conclusions

The Versius training program is effective; participants were able to successfully operate the system by program completion, and more surgeons achieved intermediate-level and expert-level GEARS scores in Validation compared with Assessment 1.

Trends in clinical outcomes and long-term survival after robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single high-volume center experience of consecutive 2000 patients

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is now a standard treatment for gastric cancer. Many retrospective studies have reported that robotic gastrectomy is safe and feasible, with similar short- and long-term outcomes as laparoscopic gastrectomy. However, no studies have reported the details of surgical and survival outcomes for robotic gastrectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical trends and techniques of robotic gastrectomy and analyze the surgical outcomes of 2000 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent robotic gastrectomy over 14 years.

METHODS

Between July 2005 and January 2019, 2000 consecutive robotic gastrectomies were performed. We evaluated short- and long-term outcomes as well as surgical trends after robotic gastrectomy.

RESULTS

There were 1,560 subtotal gastrectomies (78%), 324 total gastrectomies (16.2%), 83 proximal gastrectomies (4.2%), and 33 completion total gastrectomies (1.7%). The rates of major complications and mortality were 3.1% and 0.3%, respectively. In a subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in the rate of complications over time (P = 0.696). Five-year overall survival rates were 97.6% for stage I, 91.9% for stage II, and 69.2% for stage III, with a total recurrence rate of 5.3%. Since its adoption in 2005, the proportion of robotic gastrectomies, as well as technically demanding procedures have increased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our 14 years' experience of 2000 robotic gastrectomies has shown the proportion, as well as the number of robotic gastrectomies, have tended to increase and trends toward to technically demanding procedures. Outcomes of robotic gastrectomy appear safe and feasible with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes.

Robotic total gastrectomy for carcinoma in the remnant stomach: a comparison with laparoscopic total gastrectomy

Background

Total gastrectomy for carcinoma in the remnant stomach (CRS) remains a technically demanding procedure. Whether robotic surgery is superior, equal, or inferior to laparoscopic surgery in patients with CRS is unclear. This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for the treatment of CRS.

Methods

In this cohort study, we retrospectively analysed the data from patients who underwent RTG or LTG for CRS at Southwest Hospital (Chongqing, China) between May 2006 and October 2019. The surgical outcomes, post-operative complications, and survival outcomes between the two groups were compared.

Results

Compared with LTG, RTG was associated with similar effective operation time (272.0 vs 297.9 min, P = 0.170), higher total costs (105,967.2 vs 81,629.5 RMB, P < 0.001), and less estimated blood loss (229.2 vs 288.8 mL, P = 0.031). No significant differences were found between the robotic and laparoscopic groups in terms of conversion rate, time to first flatus, time to first soft diet, post-operative hospital stay, post-operative complications, R0 resection rate, and number of retrieved lymph nodes (all P > 0.05). The 3-year disease-free survival and 3-year overall survival rates were comparable between the two groups (65.5% vs 57.5%, P = 0.918; 69.0% vs 60.0%, P = 0.850, respectively).

Conclusions

RTG is a safe and feasible procedure for the treatment of CRS and could serve as an optimal treatment for CRS.

Review on Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robotic Gastrectomy for Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive gastrectomy is currently considered a valid option to treat gastric cancer and is gaining increasing acceptance. Recent reports have suggested that the application of robots may confer some advantages over conventional laparoscopy, but the role of robotic surgery in clinical practice is still uncertain. We aimed to critically review the relevant evidence comparing robotic to standard laparoscopic surgery in performing radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

The Pubmed/Medline electronic databases were searched through February 2021. Paper conference and the English language was the only restriction applied to our search strategy.

RESULTS

According to the existing data, robotic gastrectomy seems to provide some benefits in terms of blood loss, rate of conversion, procedure-specific postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay. Robotic gastrectomy is also associated with a longer duration of surgery and a higher economic burden as compared to its laparoscopic counterpart. No significant differences have been disclosed in terms of long-term survivals, while the number of lymph nodes retrieved with robotic gastrectomy is generally higher than that of laparoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature suggests that robotic radical gastrectomy appears as competent as the conventional laparoscopic procedure and may provide some clinical advantages. However, due to the relative paucity of high-level evidence, it is not possible to draw definitive conclusions.

Laparoscopic Completion Total Gastrectomy for Remnant Gastric Cancer

Background: Remnant gastric cancer (RGC) is increasing due to past use of subtotal gastrectomy to treat benign diseases, improvements in the detection of gastric cancer, and increased survival rates after gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Laparoscopic access provides the advantages and benefits of minimally invasive surgery. However, laparoscopic completion total gastrectomy (LCTG) for RGC is technically demanding, even for experienced surgeons. Because of its rarity and heterogeneity, no standard surgical strategy has been established and few surgeons will develop technical expertise to carry out this procedure. Aim: To describe our standard technique, giving surgeons a head start in LCTG and report the early experience with this stepwise approach. Materials and Methods: We detail all the steps involved in the procedure, including trocar placement and surgical description. Results: Between 2009 and 2019, a total of 8 patients with past history of RGC were operated with this technique. All patients had been previously operated by open method, 7 due to peptic ulcer disease and 1 due to gastric cancer. Their mean age at the time of the first surgery was 38.9 years (range 25-56 years) and the mean interval between the first and the second gastrectomy was 32.1 years (range 13.6-49). Billroth II was the previous reconstruction in all cases. A 5-trocar technique was used followed by total gastrectomy with side-to-side stapled intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy anastomosis and Roux-en-Y reconstruction. The mean operation time was 272 minutes (range 180-330) and median blood loss was 247 mL (range 50-500). There was no conversion and no major intraoperative complication. Major postoperative complications occurred in 3 patients. Conclusion: Completion total gastrectomy for RGC is a morbid procedure and laparoscopic access is technically feasible, hopefully carrying the benefits of faster recovery, reduced postoperative pain, and wound complications. By standardizing the approach, the learning curve may be shortened and better results achieved.

Long-term Comparison of Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-weighted Analysis of 2084 Consecutive Patients

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term outcomes between robotic and LG approaches using propensity score weighting based on a generalized boosted method to control for selection bias.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Minimally invasive surgical approaches for GC are increasing, yet limited evidence exists for long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG).

METHODS

Patients (n = 2084) with GC stages I-III who underwent LG or RG between 2009 and 2017 were analyzed. Generalized boosted method was used to estimate a propensity score derived from all available preoperative characteristics. Long-term outcomes were compared using the adjusted Kaplan-Meier method and the weighted Cox proportional hazards regression model.

RESULTS

After propensity score weighting, the population was balanced. Patients who underwent RG showed reduced blood loss (16 mL less, P = 0.025), sufficient lymph node harvest from the initial period, and no changes in surgical outcomes over time. With 52-month median follow-up, no difference was noted in 5-year overall survival in unweighted [91.5% in LG vs 94% in RG; hazard ratio (HR), 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-1.1; P = 0.126] and weighted populations (94.2% in LG vs 93.2% in RG; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.52-1.48; P = 0.636). There were no differences in 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), with unweighted 5-year RFS of 95.4% for LG and 95.2% for RG (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.55-1.64; P = 0.845) and weighted 5-year RFS of 96.3% for LG and 95.3% for RG (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.66-2.33; P = 0.498).

CONCLUSIONS

After balancing covariates, RG demonstrated reliable surgical outcomes from the beginning. Long-term survival after RG and LG for GC was similar.

State of the art robotic distal pancreatectomy: a review of the literature

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy has become increasingly used in practice. While laparoscopic approach is the most commonly used technique, robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) has emerged as a safe, feasible and effective approach for distal pancreatectomy. Most studies have shown that RDP improved perioperative surgical outcomes and has equivalent oncologic outcomes to open technique. Widespread adoption is limited by a steep learning curve, higher costs and the need for institutional training protocols in place for safe integration of the platform into practice.

Surgical Merits of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Gastrectomy Techniques with D2 Lymphadenectomy in Obese Patients with Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has been widely adopted for complex procedures to overcome technical limitations of open or laparoscopic methods. However, evidence of any subsequent benefit is lacking. This study was undertaken to compare open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy in technically demanding procedure-D2 dissection in obese patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Data collected between 2010 and 2018 on D2 gastrectomy in obese patients with gastric cancer were used to conduct retrospective analysis, comparing short- and long-term outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic techniques.

RESULTS

In a total of 185 patients, there were 69 open, 62 laparoscopic, and 54 robotic gastrectomy procedures. Median ages for respective surgical groups were 66 (interquartile range [IQR]: 61-64 years), 63 (IQR: 59-63), and 59 years (IQR: 56-60 years) (p = 0.009). Early-stage gastric cancer ranked proportionately higher in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.005), but operative times were similar among groups. Estimated blood loss (p < 0.001) and drainage volumes (p = 0.001) were higher in the open group, relative to others. Although a robotic approach performed best in overall compliance and in mean number of retrieved lymph node, observed rates of early or late complications did not differ by technique. The open group experienced significantly poorer overall (p = 0.039) and relapse-free (p < 0.001) survival compared with the laparoscopic or robotic group. Robotic surgery emerged from multivariable Cox regression as a protective factor for relapse-free survival (HR = 0.314, 95% CI 0.116-0.851).

CONCLUSIONS

In obese patients with gastric cancer, robotic gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy proved comparable to open or laparoscopic technique short-term, yielding better long-term outcomes.

Conversions related to adhesions in abdominal surgery. Robotic versus laparoscopic approach: A multicentre experience

BACKGROUND

An advantage of robotic surgery over laparoscopy is the lower rate of unplanned conversion. One of the implicated reasons for conversion is adhesions from previous abdominal surgeries (PASs).

METHODS

A comparative analysis of 98 patients with history of open PAS treated by laparoscopic or robotic surgery was performed. Primary endpoint was the rate of conversion to open surgery related to adhesiolysis. Secondary endpoints were short-term outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

Conversion rate specifically related to adhesiolysis was significantly lower in robotic group (13 for laparoscopic group vs. 2 for robotic group; p = 0.046). Conversions occurred during adhesiolysis were significantly related to severity of adhesions expressed by peritoneal adhesion index (PAI) score (p < 0.001), number of abdominal areas involved by adhesions (p < 0.001) and severity of PAI into the target area of surgical intervention (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Benefits of robotic surgery are more noticeable in performing procedures with increasing technical difficulties.

Laparoscopic Completion Total Gastrectomy as a Standardized Procedure for Gastric Stump Cancer: A Case Control Study

Objective

Complete gastrectomy for gastric stump cancer (GSC) can be challenging due to severe adhesions; therefore, advanced techniques are required when being performed by laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic completion total gastrectomy (LCTG) for the treatment of GSC.

Methods

Patient records from January 2010 to October 2018 were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were classified into 2 groups depending on whether they underwent open or laparoscopic gastrectomy. We compared patient characteristics; operative, clinical, and pathological data between the groups.

Results

Twenty open and 17 LCTGs were performed. Laparoscopic gastrectomy resulted in a significantly longer operation time (230 versus 182.5 min; P = 0.026), lower blood loss (14 versus 105 mL; P &lt; 0.001), and shorter period to the first flatus passage (2 versus 3 days; P &lt; 0.001) than open gastrectomy. No significant differences in the number of retrieved lymph nodes, duration of hospital stay, complication rate, and postoperative analgesic usage between the 2 groups were observed. No patients required conversion to open surgery in the laparoscopic-treatment group. Pathologic findings revealed that the laparoscopic group had a smaller tumor size (not pathologic T category) and fewer metastatic lymph nodes than the open group, leading to an earlier distribution of the pathologic stage in the laparoscopic group.

Conclusions

LCTG for the treatment of GSC was safely conducted with fewer complications and mortalities than previously reported results. Advanced technologies and sophistication of laparoscopic skills may further yield minimal invasiveness with better short-term outcome.

Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy

Robotic systems were developed to overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery with its mechanical advantages. Along with the technical advances, robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer is increasing. However, the evidence regarding safety and efficacy for robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer is not mature yet. Although studies are limited, it is evident that robotic gastrectomy has a longer operation and less blood loss compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Studies revealed long-term oncological outcomes after robotic gastrectomy was comparable to those after laparoscopic gastrectomy. Taken together, robotic gastrectomy with systemic lymph node dissection is suggested as a safe procedure with equivalent short- and long-term oncologic outcomes to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy for the surgical treatment of gastric cancer. However, high cost is the most significant barrier to justify robotic surgery as a routine and standard treatment for patients with gastric cancer. In the meanwhile, robotic surgery will be expansively used as long as technologic developments continue.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: The largest meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has shown several advantages over open surgery in dealing with GC, although it is still considered a demanding procedure. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is now being employed with increased frequency worldwide and has been reported to overcome some limitations of conventional LG. The aim of this updated meta-analysis is to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of RG versus LG for gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE and Cochrane library database of published studies comparing RG and LG up to March 2020. The evaluated end-points were intra-operative, post-operative and oncological outcomes. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and a random-effect model was always applied.

RESULTS

Forty retrospective studies describing 17,712 patients met the inclusion criteria. With respect to surgical outcomes, robotic compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with higher operating time [MD 44.73, (95%CI 36.01, 53.45) p < 0.00001] and less intraoperative blood loss [MD -18.24, (95%CI -25.21, -11.26) p < 0.00001] and lower rate of surgical complication in terms of Dindo-Clavien ≥ 3 classification [OR 0.66, (95%CI 0.49, 0.88) p = 0.005]. With respect to oncological outcomes, the RG group showed a significantly increased mean number of retrieved lymph nodes [MD 1.84, (95%CI 0.84, 2.84) p = 0.0003], but mean proximal and distal resection margin distance and the recurrence rate were not significantly different between the two approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

With respect to safety, technical feasibility and oncological adequacy, robotic and laparoscopic groups were comparable, although the robotic approach seems to achieve better short-term surgical outcomes. Moreover, a higher rate of retrieved lymph nodes was observed in the RG group.

Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Remnant Gastric Cancer: A Single-institution Experience and Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND/AIM

The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of LTG with open total gastrectomy (OTG) for RGC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-two patients who underwent total gastrectomy for RGC were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

LTG was carried out in seven patients, and OTG was performed in the remaining 15 patients. The mean operation time in the LTG group was longer than that in the OTG group. The estimated blood loss in the LTG group was less than that in the OTG group. No cases in the LTG group required open conversion. Postoperatively, the first meal and defecation were earlier in the LTG group than in the OTG group. The overall survival rates of the two groups were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy is a feasible surgical option for RGC.