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

Effect of food loop and duodenal stump fixation on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing radical gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction for distal gastric cancer: a single-center propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and reliability of an innovative technique-fixation of the food loop and duodenal stump-by investigating its impact on postoperative complications and overall survival (OS) in patients undergoing distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent radical distal gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y reconstruction at Suzhou Ninth People's Hospital between January 2012 and December 2023. Patients were divided into with duodenum fixation and without duodenum fixation groups based on whether food loop and duodenal stump fixation was performed during surgery. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match 95 pairs of patients, and differences in baseline characteristics, postoperative complications, subgroup analysis, and survival outcomes were compared. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify independent risk factors for postoperative complications.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of baseline characteristics, operative time, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus, or postoperative length of hospital stay (P > 0.05). The overall incidence of postoperative complications showed no significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of Roux-en-Y stasis syndrome (RSS) was significantly lower in the fixation group (P = 0.035). Subgroup analysis revealed that duodenal stump fixation had no significant effect on the overall incidence of postoperative complications across various subgroups (all P > 0.05). Survival analysis indicated that duodenal stump fixation had no significant effect on OS (P = 0.33).

CONCLUSION

The novel technique of food loop and duodenal stump fixation significantly reduces the incidence of Roux-en-Y stasis syndrome without increasing the risk of postoperative complications or affecting long-term prognosis, demonstrating its safety and reliability in distal gastric cancer surgery.

Possibly more favorable short-term outcomes with minimally invasive surgery than with open surgery in total gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A single high-volume center study

Background

Minimally invasive total gastrectomy (MTG) requires advanced surgical skills and is still associated with a higher rate of postoperative complications than other types of gastrectomy. Additionally, the short-term outcomes of MTG compared to open total gastrectomy (OTG) for locally advanced gastric cancer have yet to be demonstrated.

Methods

We retrospectively compared short-term outcomes between MTG and OTG for locally advanced gastric and esophago-gastric junctional cancer, performed at the Cancer Institute Hospital, Tokyo, during the period from January 2017 to March 2024. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to adjust for potential confounders.

Results

In total, 359 patients were included, with 190 remaining after PSM, resulting in 95 in each group. The MTG group experienced a significantly lower incidence of postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo classification (C-D) ≥3 than the OTG group (3.2% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.026). Moreover, the rate of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications (IAIC) was significantly lower in the MTG than in the OTG group (C-D ≥ 2; 7.4% vs. 17.9%, p = 0.029 and C-D ≥ 3; 2.1% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.030, respectively). Subgroup analyses showed the odds ratios for IAIC with C-D ≥ 2 to be more favorable for the MTG than the OTG group in male patients, those ≥70 years of age, patients without esophageal invasion, those without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, those diagnosed with cT≥3, and patients not undergoing combined resection of other organs except for the gallbladder or spleen.

Conclusions

MTG for locally advanced gastric cancer may provide improved short-term outcomes compared to OTG, when performed or supervised by surgeons with high proficiency in laparoscopic techniques.

Effect of Minimally Invasive versus Open Distal Gastrectomy on Long-Term Survival in Patients with Gastric Cancer: Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal gastrectomy (MIDG) has been shown to improve short-term outcomes compared with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in patients with early (EGC) and locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC). The impact of MIDG on patient survival remains debated. This study aimed to compare the effect of MIDG versus ODG on long-term survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Randomized clinical trial (RCTs) individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis with restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD) estimation. Scopus, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. Primary outcomes were 5-year overall (OS), disease free survival (DFS), and cancer specific survival (CSS). RMSTD and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. The certainty of evidence was categorized with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Overall, ten RCTs (5297 patients) were included; 50.4% of patients underwent MIDG. At 60-months follow-up, the OS and DFS estimates for ODG versus MIDG were 0.41 months (95% CI - 0.17, 0.99; high level of certainty) and 0.42 months (95% CI - 0.38, 1.23; high level of certainty). CSS was specified in two RCTs, hence quantitative analysis was not practicable. The 60-month OS and DFS estimates for LAGC (five studies) were 0.32 months (95% CI - 0.80, 1.44; high level of certainty) and 0.31 months (95% CI - 2.02, 1.33; high level of certainty), respectively. The 36-month DFS appraisal for stage III patients (three studies) was - 0.41 months (95% CI - 26.1, 38.2; low level of certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found high-certainty evidence that MIDG and ODG demonstrate similar 5-year OS and DFS in patients with both EGC and LAGC.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal gastrectomy (MIDG) has been shown to be associated with improved short-term outcomes compared to open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC). The impact of MIDG on long-term patient survival remains debated. Aim was to compare the MIDG vs. ODG effect on long-term survival.

METHODS

Systematic review and trial sequential analysis (TSA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Web of Science, Scopus, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were queried. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. Five-year overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were included (2835 patients). Overall, 1421 (50.1%) patients underwent MIDG and 1414 (49.9%) ODG. The ages ranged from 48 to 70 years and 63.4% were males. The pooled 5-year OS (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.70-1.04; I2 = 0.0%) and 5-year DFS (HR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.87-1.23; I2 = 0.0%) were similar for MIDG vs. ODG. The TSA shows a cumulative z-curve without crossing the monitoring boundaries line (Z = 1.96), thus suggesting not conclusive 5-year OS and DFS results because the total information size was not sufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

MIDG and ODG seem to have equivalent 5-year OS and DFS in patients with LAGC. However, the cumulative evidence derived from the TSA showed that the actual information size is not sufficient to provide conclusive data.

Developing a modified textbook outcome for elderly patients with gastric cancer: a multi-center study

OBJECTIVE

Textbook outcome (TO) is widely recognized as a comprehensive prognostic indication for patients with gastric cancer (GC). This study aims to develop a modified TO (mTO) for elderly patients with GC.

METHODS

Data from the elderly patients (aged ≥ 65 years) in two Chinese tertiary referral hospitals were analyzed. 1389 patients from Fujian Medical University Union Hospital were assigned as the training cohort and 185 patients from Affiliated Hospital of Putian University as the validation cohort. Nomogram was developed by the independent prognostic factors of Overall Survival (OS) based on Cox regression.

RESULTS

In the training cohort, laparoscopic surgery was significantly correlated with higher TO rate (P < 0.05). Cox regression analysis revealed that surgical approach was also an independent factor of OS (P < 0.001), distinct from the traditional TO. In light of these findings, TO parameters were enhanced by the inclusion of surgical approach, rendering a modified TO (mTO). Further analysis showed that mTO, tumor size, pTNM staging, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors associated with OS (all P < 0.05). Additionally, the nomogram incorporating these four indicators accurately predicted 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS in the training cohort, with AUC values of 0.793, 0.814, and 0.807, respectively, and exhibited outstanding predictive performance within the validation cohort.

CONCLUSION

mTO holds a robust association with the prognosis of elderly patients with GC, meriting intensified attention in efforts aimed at enhancing surgical quality. Furthermore, the predictive model incorporating mTO demonstrates excellent predictive performance for elderly patients with GC.

The association of perioperative blood transfusion with survival outcomes after major cancer surgery: a population-based cohort study in South Korea

PURPOSE

The correlation between perioperative blood transfusions and the prognosis after major cancer surgery remains controversial. We investigated the association between perioperative blood transfusion and survival outcomes following major cancer surgeries and analyzed trends in perioperative blood transfusions.

METHODS

Data for this population-based cohort study were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service of South Korea. Adult patients who underwent major cancer surgery between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020, were included. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 253,016 patients, of which 55,094 (21.8%) received perioperative blood transfusions. In the multivariable logistic regression model, select factors, including neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy, an increased preoperative Charlson Comorbidity Index, moderate or severe liver disease, liver cancer surgery, and small bowel cancer surgery, were associated with an increased likelihood of blood transfusion. In the multivariable Cox regression model, patients who received blood transfusion had a significantly higher risk of 90-day mortality (hazard ratio: 5.68; 95% confidence interval: 5.37, 6.00; P < 0.001) than those who did not.

CONCLUSION

We identified potential risk factors for perioperative blood transfusions. Blood transfusion is associated with an increased 90-day mortality risk after major cancer surgery.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) is a well-established surgical technique in treating patients with early gastric cancer. However, the efficacy and safety of LAG versus open gastrectomy (OG) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains unclear.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in June 2023 for RCTs comparing LAG versus OG in patients with AGC. We pooled risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary and continuous endpoints, respectively. We performed all statistical analyses using R software version 4.3.1 and a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs comprising 3827 patients were included. There were no differences in terms of intraoperative complications (RR 1.14; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.82), number of retrieved lymph nodes (MD -0.54 lymph nodes; 95% CI -1.18 to 0.09), or mortality (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.30 to 2.83). LAG was associated with a longer operative time (MD 49.28 minutes; 95% CI 30.88 to 67.69), lower intraoperative blood loss (MD -51.24 milliliters; 95% CI -81.41 to -21.06), shorter length of stay (MD -0.83 days; 95% CI -1.60 to -0.06), and higher incidence of pancreatic fistula (RR 2.44; 95% CI 1.08 to 5.50). Postoperatively, LAG was also superior to OG in reducing bleeding rates (RR 0.44; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.86) and time to first flatus (MD -0.27 days; 95% CI -0.47 to -0.07), with comparable results in anastomotic leakage, wound healing issues, major complications, time to ambulation, or time to first liquid intake. In the long-term analyses at 3 and 5 years, there were no significant differences between LAG and OG in terms of overall survival (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.03) or relapse-free survival (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.04).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of RCTs suggests that LAG may be an effective and safe alternative to OG for treating AGC; albeit, it may be associated with an increased risk for pancreatic fistula.

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.

Patient blood management in major digestive surgery: Recommendations from the Italian multisociety (ACOI, SIAARTI, SIdEM, and SIMTI) modified Delphi consensus conference

Patient blood management (PBM) is defined as the timely application of evidence-based medical and surgical concepts designed to maintain a surgical patient’s hemoglobin concentration, optimize hemostasis, and minimize blood loss in an effort to improve the outcomes. PBM is able to reduce mortality up to 68%, reoperation up to 43%, readmission up to 43%, composite morbidity up to 41%, infection rate up to 80%, average length of stay by 16%–33%, transfusion from 10% to 95%, and costs from 10% to 84% after major surgery. It should be noticed, however, that the process of PBM implementation is still in its infancy, and that its potential to improve perioperative outcomes could be strictly linked to the degree of adherence/compliance to the whole program, with decoupling and noncompliance being significant factors for failure. Therefore, the steering committees of four major Italian scientific societies, representing general surgeons, anesthesiologists and transfusion medicine specialists (Associazione Chirurghi Ospedalieri Italiani; Società Italiana di Anestesia, Analgesia, Rianimazione e Terapia Intensiva; Società Italiana di Emaferesi e Manipolazione Cellulare; Società Italiana di Medicina Trasfusionale e Immunoematologia), organized a joint modified Delphi consensus conference on PBM in the field of major digestive surgery (upper and lower gastrointestinal tract, and hepato-biliopancreatic resections), whose results and recommendations are herein presented.

Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Optimal surgical management for gastric cancer remains controversial. We aimed to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing outcomes after open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG), and robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken. An NMA was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-NMA guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed using R and Shiny.

RESULTS

Twenty-two RCTs including 6890 patients were included. Overall, 49.6% of patients underwent LAG (3420/6890), 46.6% underwent OG (3212/6890), and 3.7% underwent RG (258/6890). At NMA, there was a no significant difference in recurrence rates following LAG (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.49) compared with OG. Similarly, overall survival (OS) outcomes were identical following OG and LAG (OS: OG, 87.0% [1652/1898] vs. LAG: OG, 87.0% [1650/1896]), with no differences in OS in meta-analysis (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.77-1.52). Importantly, patients undergoing LAG experienced reduced intraoperative blood loss, surgical incisions, distance from proximal margins, postoperative hospital stays, and morbidity post-resection.

CONCLUSIONS

LAG was associated with non-inferior oncological and surgical outcomes compared with OG. Surgical outcomes following LAG and RG superseded OG, with similar outcomes observed for both LAG and RG. Given these findings, minimally invasive approaches should be considered for the resection of local gastric cancer, once surgeon and institutional expertise allows.

Laparoscopic compared to open approach for distal gastrectomy may reduce pneumonia risk for patients with gastric cancer

Background

Whether laparoscopic approach to gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC) reduces the risk of pneumonia remains unknown. In this study, we compared pneumonia outcomes for patients with GC who underwent either laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) or open gastrectomy (OG).

Methods

The ACS NSQIP database was queried to identify patients with GC who underwent LG or OG between Jan 2012 - Dec 2018. Outcomes were compared using regression models. A post-hoc analysis was performed for elderly patients.

Results

The study cohort included 2661 patients, 23.4 % undergoing LG. Laparoscopic approach lowered pneumonia risk (OR 0.47, p = .028) and reduced hospital length of stay, (5.3 vs 7.1 days, p < .001). Elderly patients undergoing LG demonstrated similar benefits. Risk factors for pneumonia included advanced age, dyspnea and weight-loss, whereas laparoscopic approach reduced this risk.

Conclusions

LG in patients with GC has both statistically and clinically significant advantages over OG with respect to pneumonia. Further studies are needed to validate the relationship between postoperative pneumonia and surgical approach for gastrectomy.

Comparisons of perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: an updated pooled analysis of eighteen studies

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in advanced gastric cancer patients who received neoadjuvant therapy represent a controversial issue. We performed an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus conventional open gastrectomy (OG) in this subset of patients.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were comprehensively searched up to May 2023. The short-term and long-term outcomes of LG versus OG in advanced gastric cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy were evaluated. Effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals were always assessed using random-effects model. The prospective protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022359126).

RESULTS

Eighteen studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 16 cohort studies) involving 2096 patients were included. In total, 933 patients were treated with LG and 1163 patients were treated with OG. In perioperative outcomes, LG was associated with less estimated blood loss (MD = - 65.15; P < 0.0001), faster time to flatus (MD = - 0.56; P < 0.0001) and liquid intake (MD = - 0.42; P = 0.02), reduced hospital stay (MD = - 2.26; P < 0.0001), lower overall complication rate (OR = 0.70; P = 0.002) and lower minor complication rate (OR = 0.69; P = 0.006), while longer operative time (MD = 25.98; P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of proximal margin, distal margin, R1/R2 resection rate, retrieved lymph nodes, time to remove gastric tube and drainage tube, major complications and other specific complications. In survival outcomes, LG and OG were not significantly different in overall survival, disease-free survival and recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSION

LG can be a safe and feasible technique for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to further validate the results of our study.

Reinforcement methods of duodenal stump after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A review

Duodenal stump fistula is a rare but dangerous complication of gastric cancer surgery. Reinforcement of the duodenal stump was suggested as a useful method to prevent the occurrence of duodenal stump fistula. Although laparoscopic surgery has been established as a safe procedure for gastric cancer, it is acknowledged that the application of duodenal stump reinforcement is a demanding process in laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. This review aims to provide a concise description of the proposed reinforcement methods of duodenal stump after laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer by summarizing the relevant literature written in English. The thorough knowledge of these reinforcement techniques may help surgeons to find the most suitable reinforcement method of duodenal stump for patients.

Laparoscopic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic and periampullary tumor: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies

Objective

This meta-analysis compares the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) to those of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors.

Background

LPD has been increasingly applied in the treatment of pancreatic and periampullary tumors. However, the perioperative outcomes of LPD versus OPD are still controversial.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative trials (NRCTs) comparing LPD versus OPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors. The main outcomes were mortality, morbidity, serious complications, and hospital stay. The secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, transfusion, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), bile leak (BL), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), lymph nodes harvested, R0 resection, reoperation, and readmission. RCTs were evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. NRCTs were assessed using a modified tool from the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies. Data were pooled as odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD). This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022338832).

Results

Four RCTs and 35 NRCTs concerning a total of 40,230 patients (4,262 LPD and 35,968 OPD) were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in mortality (OR 0.91, p = 0.35), serious complications (OR 0.97, p = 0.74), POPF (OR 0.93, p = 0.29), PPH (OR 1.10, p = 0.42), BL (OR 1.28, p = 0.22), harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.66, p = 0.09), reoperation (OR 1.10, p = 0.41), and readmission (OR 0.95, p = 0.46) between LPD and OPD. Operative time was significantly longer for LPD (MD 85.59 min, p < 0.00001), whereas overall morbidity (OR 0.80, p < 0.00001), hospital stay (MD -2.32 days, p < 0.00001), blood loss (MD -173.84 ml, p < 0.00001), transfusion (OR 0.62, p = 0.0002), and DGE (OR 0.78, p = 0.002) were reduced for LPD. The R0 rate was higher for LPD (OR 1.25, p = 0.001).

Conclusions

LPD is associated with non-inferior short-term surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy compared to OPD when performed by experienced surgeons at large centers. LPD may result in reduced overall morbidity, blood loss, transfusion, and DGE, but longer operative time. Further RCTs should address the potential advantages of LPD over OPD.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO, identifier CRD42022338832.

Laparoscopic vs. open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with those of open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) who exclusively underwent distal gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Background

Data in published meta-analyses that included different gastrectomy types and mixed tumor stages prevented an accurate comparison between LDG and ODG. Recently, several RCTs that compared LDG with ODG included AGC patients specifically for distal gastrectomy, with D2 lymphadenectomy being reported and updated with the long-term outcomes.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify RCTs for comparing LDG with ODG for advanced distal gastric cancer. Short-term surgical outcomes and mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival were compared. The Cochrane tool and GRADE approach were used for evaluating the quality of evidence (Prospero registration ID: CRD42022301155).

Results

Five RCTs consisting of a total of 2,746 patients were included. Meta-analyses showed no significant differences in terms of intraoperative complications, overall morbidity, severe postoperative complications, R0 resection, D2 lymphadenectomy, recurrence, 3-year disease-free survival, intraoperative blood transfusion, time to first liquid diet, time to first ambulation, distal margin, reoperation, mortality, or readmission between LDG and ODG. Operative times were significantly longer for LDG [weighted mean difference (WMD) 49.2 min, p < 0.05], whereas harvested lymph nodes, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus, and proximal margin were lower for LDG (WMD -1.3, p < 0.05; WMD -33.6 mL, p < 0.05; WMD -0.7 day, p < 0.05; WMD -0.2 day, p < 0.05; WMD -0.4 mm, p < 0.05). Intra-abdominal fluid collection and bleeding were found to be less after LDG. Certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low.

Conclusions

Data from five RCTs suggest that LDG with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC has similar short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival to ODG when performed by experienced surgeons in hospitals contending with high patient volumes. It can be concluded that RCTs should highlight the potential advantages of LDG for AGC.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO, registration number CRD42022301155.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical distal gastrectomy (LDG) has been more frequently performed for locally advanced distal gastric cancer (AGC) than open distal gastrectomy (ODG). However, the benefits of LDG for elderly AGC patients (AGC-lap) remain unclear.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 70 years who underwent D2 distal gastrectomy from July 2014 to July 2021 were enrolled consecutively. Perioperative parameters, pathological features, and oncological outcomes of AGC-lap patients (n = 39) were compared with those of elderly AGC patients receiving ODG (AGC-open; n = 37) and elderly early gastric cancer patients receiving LDG (EGC-lap; n = 41) respectively.

RESULTS

The median age of all AGC patients was 77 years, and 28% of them had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score ≥ 2. Most of the perioperative and pathological features (including the number of lymph nodes harvested) were similar between the AGC-lap and AGC-open groups. AGC-lap patients had longer median operative times (215 min versus 192 min) but significantly less surgical complications (10.3% versus 37.8%) and shorter median hospital stays (11 days versus 13 days) than did AGC-open patients (all p < 0.05). The 3-year recurrence-free and overall survival was 66.2% and 88.8% in the AGC-lap group and 51% and 66.3% in the AGC-open group (both p = 0.1). The perioperative features, including operative time, number of lymph nodes harvested, hospital stay, and complication rates, were similar between the AGC- and EGC-lap groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LDG was safely and effectively performed in elderly AGC patients, resulting in faster recovery and a lower complication rate than ODG, without compromising oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: Short and Long-Term Results

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer is widely accepted and routinely performed. However, it is still debated whether the laparoscopic approach is a valid alternative to open gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study is to compare short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic (LG) and open (OG) total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with AGC.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative study was conducted on patients who underwent LG and OG for ACG between January 2015 and December 2021. Primary endpoints were the following: recurrence rate, 3-year disease-free survival, 3-year and 5-year overall survival. Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to compare variables influencing outcomes and survival.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients included: fifty-three OG and thirty-nine LG. No difference in morbidity and mortality. LG was associated with lower recurrence rates (OG 22.6% versus LG 12.8%, p = 0.048). No differences in 3-year and 5-year overall survival; 3-year disease-free survival was improved in the LG group on the univariate analysis but not after the multivariate one. LG was associated with longer operative time, lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. Lymph node yield was higher in LG.

CONCLUSION

LG for AGC seems to provide satisfactory clinical and oncological outcomes in medium volume centers, improved postoperative results and possibly lower recurrence rates.

Laparoscopic vs Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes of the KLASS-02 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The long-term safety of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains uncertain given the lack of 5-year follow-up results.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the 5-year follow-up results in patients with clinically AGC enrolled in the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS)-02 randomized clinical trial who underwent laparoscopic or open distal gastrectomy.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The KLASS-02, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, showed that laparoscopic surgery was noninferior to open surgery for patients with locally AGC. The present study assessed the 5-year follow-up results, including 5-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates and long-term complications, in patients enrolled in KLASS-02. From November 21, 2011, to April 29, 2015, patients aged 20 to 80 years diagnosed preoperatively with locally AGC were enrolled. Final follow-up was on June 15, 2021. Data were analyzed June 24 to September 9, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were treated with R0 resection either by laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy as the full analysis set of the KLASS-02 trial.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Five-year OS and RFS rates, recurrence patterns, and long-term surgical complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

This study enrolled a total of 1050 patients. A total of 974 patients were treated with R0 resection; 492 (50.5%) in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group (mean [SD] age, 59.8 [11.0] years; 351 men [71.3%]) and 482 (49.5%) in the open gastrectomy group (mean [SD] age, 59.4 [11.5] years; 335 men [69.5%]). In patients who underwent laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy, the 5-year OS (88.9% vs 88.7%) and RFS (79.5% vs 81.1%) rates did not differ significantly. The most common types of recurrence were peritoneal carcinomatosis (73 of 173 [42.1%]), hematogenous metastases (36 of 173 [20.8%]), and locoregional recurrence (23 of 173 [13.2%]), with no between-group differences in types of recurrence at each cancer stage. The correlation between 3-year RFS and 5-year OS at the individual level was highest in patients with stage III gastric cancer (ρ = 0.720). The late complication rate was significantly lower in the laparoscopic than in the open surgery group (32 of 492 [6.5%] vs 53 of 482 [11.0%]). The most common type of complication in both groups was intestinal obstruction (13 of 492 [2.6%] vs 24 of 482 [5.0%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The 5-year outcomes of the KLASS-02 trial support the 3-year results, which is the noninferiority of laparoscopic surgery compared with open gastrectomy for locally AGC. The laparoscopic approach can be recommended in patients with locally AGC to achieve the benefit of low incidence of late complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01456598.

Outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The effectiveness of laparoscopic total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy (LTGD2) remains controversial. This meta-analysis compares surgical and survival outcomes of LTGD2 and open total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy (OTGD2) for gastric cancer.

Methods

Controlled studies comparing LTGD2 and OTGD2 published before November 2021 were retrieved via database searches. We compared intraoperative outcomes, pathological data, postoperative outcomes, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

Results

17 studies were included, containing 4742 patients. Compared with OTGD2, the LTGD2 group had less blood loss (mean difference [MD] = − 122.48; 95% CI: − 187.60, − 57.37; P = 0.0002), fewer analgesic medication (MD = -2.48; 95% CI: − 2.69, − 2.27; P < 0.00001), earlier first flatus (MD = − 1.03; 95% CI: − 1.80, − 0.26; P = 0.009), earlier initial food intake (MD = − 0.89; 95% CI: − 1.09, − 0.68; P < 0.00001) and shorter hospital stay (MD = − 3.24; 95% CI: − 3.75, − 2.73; P < 0.00001). The LTGD2 group had lower postoperative total complication ratio (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.62, 0.92; P = 0.006), incision (OR = 0.50; 95% CI:0.31, 0.79; P = 0.003) and pulmonary (OR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.96; P = 0.03) complication rates, but similar rates of other complications and mortality. Total number of dissected lymph nodes were similar, but the number of No. 10 dissected nodes was less with LTGD2 (MD = − 0.31; 95% CI: − 0.46, − 0.16; P < 0.0001). There was no difference in 5-year OS (P = 0.19) and DFS (P = 0.34) between LTGD2 and OTGD2 groups.

Conclusions

LTGD2 produces small trauma, fast postoperative recovery and small length of hospital stays than OTGD2, and had similar long-term clinical efficacy as OTGD2. However, these results still need further high-quality prospective randomized controlled trials confirmation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40001-022-00748-2.

Comparison between laparoscopic uncut Roux-en-Y and Billroth II with Braun anastomosis after distal gastrectomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Conventional Billroth II (BII) anastomosis after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for gastric cancer (GC) is associated with bile reflux gastritis, and Roux-en-Y anastomosis is associated with Roux-Y stasis syndrome (RSS). The uncut Roux-en-Y (URY) gastrojejunostomy reduces these complications by blocking the entry of bile and pancreatic juice into the residual stomach and preserving the impulse originating from the duodenum, while BII with Braun (BB) anastomosis reduces the postoperative biliary reflux without RSS. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic URY with BB anastomosis in patients with GC who underwent radical distal gastrectomy.

AIM

To evaluate the value of URY in patients with GC.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Database, and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP) were used to search relevant studies published from January 1994 to August 18, 2021. The following databases were also used in our search: Clinicaltrials.gov, Data Archiving and Networked Services, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal (https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform/the-ictrp-search-portal), the reference lists of articles and relevant conference proceedings in August 2021. In addition, we conducted a relevant search by Reference Citation Analysis (RCA) (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com). We cited high-quality references using its results analysis functionality. The methodological quality of the eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and the non-RCTs were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager (Version 5.4).

RESULTS

Eight studies involving 704 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of reflux gastritis [odds ratio = 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-0.19, P < 0.00001] was significantly lower in the URY group than in the BB group. The pH of the postoperative gastric fluid was lower in the URY group than in the BB group at 1 d [mean difference (MD) = -2.03, 95%CI: (-2.73)-(-1.32), P < 0.00001] and 3 d [MD = -2.03, 95%CI: (-2.57)-(-2.03), P < 0.00001] after the operation. However, no significant difference in all the intraoperative outcomes was found between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This work suggests that URY is superior to BB in gastrointestinal reconstruction after LDG when considering postoperative outcomes.

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.

The Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes for Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objectives

The effect of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to contrast the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus conventional open gastrectomy (OG) for patients with AGC.

Methods

Databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched until December 2021 for randomized controlled trial-enrolled patients undergoing LG or OG for the treatment of AGC. Short-term outcomes were overall postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, number of retrieved lymph node, surgical time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, and short-term mortality. Long-term outcomes were survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years.

Results

A total of 12 trials involving 4,101 patients (2,059 in LG group, 2,042 in OG group) were included. No effect on overall postoperative complications (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.05, p = 0.12, I² = 34%) and anastomotic leakage (OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.95, p = 0.30, I² = 0%) was found. Compared with the open approach, patients receiving LG had fewer blood loss (MD -54.38, 95% CI -78.09 to -30.67, p < 0.00001, I² = 90%) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD -1.25, 95% CI -2.08 to -0.42, p = 0.003, I² = 86%). However, the LG was associated with a lower number of retrieved lymph nodes (MD -1.02, 95% CI -1.77 to -0.27, p = 0.008, I² = 0%) and longer surgical time (MD 40.87, 95% CI 20.37 to 54.44, p < 0.00001, I² = 94%). Furthermore, there were no differences between LG and OG groups in short-term mortality and survival rate at 1, 3, and 5 years.

Conclusions

LG offers improved short-term outcomes including shorter hospital stays and fewer blood loss, with comparable postoperative complications, short-term mortality, and survival rate at 1, 3, and 5 years when compared to the open approach. Our results support the implementation of LG in patients with AGC.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO (CRD 42021297141).

Comparison of postoperative pancreatic fistula between open and laparoscopic surgery in patients with gastric cancer: A meta-analysis

Background

Open gastrectomy"OG" compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy"LG" in patients with gastric cancer"GC" has been widely discussed over the past years. However, the lack of comparative analysis in postoperative pancreatic fistula "POPF" hinders its severity as surgical procedures developed rapidly. Therefore, there are still moot on whether one of these surgical options is superior in POPF.

Objective

To compare the incidence of POPF in patients undergoing OG and LG for gastric cancer "GC".

Methods

Articles from January 2011 to August 2021 that compared LG and OG for GC were reviewed. Cohort studies were included in our study. The quality of enrolled studies was evaluated. Outcomes regarding POPF complication and relative operation results were analyzed. Statistical analysis portrayed the Weighted mean difference"WMD"and the odds ratio"OR"with a 95% confidence interval "CI". The curative effect was analyzed using RevMan 5.4.1 software.

Results

Totally 7 articles met the inclusion criteria, including 3194 patients with treatment of gastrectomy surgeries for gastric cancer "GC". There was no significant difference observed in POPF incidence (OR, 95% CI = 1.04 [0.74,1.46], P = 0.81) between OG group and LG group in patients undergoing GC gastrectomy.

Conclusion

We stringently explored the current incidence of POPF after GC gastrectomy, comparing its incidence during LG and OG, there was no significant difference between OG and LG in the incidence of POPF, and surgeons should give more concern for improvement in surgical techniques. Further research is still needed to explore the risk of causes and surgical techniques should be considered cautiously in a clinical procedure.

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.

Minimally invasive surgery in advanced gastric cancer

Since Dr. Kitano introduced laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer in 1994, there have been remarkable advances in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer, including robotic surgery. With the efforts of many clinical researchers and consenting patients, medical knowledge and evidence for laparoscopic surgery in gastric cancer have accumulated. Although many gastric surgeons are comfortable with the clinical application of laparoscopic surgery for early gastric cancer, the adoption of MISs for advanced gastric cancer remains controversial. In this review article, we describe the current status and evidence of MIS from an evidence‐based medicine viewpoint and explore the feasibility and effectiveness of MIS for advanced gastric cancer in the real world.

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.

Short-Term Clinical Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Combined With Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Siewert Type II and III Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Retrospective, Propensity Score-Matched Study

Background

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has been increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced Siewert type II and III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). However, whether LG can achieve the same short-term efficacy in the treatment of patients who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) remains controversial. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of NACT combined with LG for Siewert type II and III AEG.

Methods

This retrospective study identified patients with locally advanced Siewert type II and III AEG diagnosed between May 2011 and October 2020 using the clinical tumor-node-metastasis (cTNM) staging system. The short-term outcomes were compared between the matched groups using a 1:3 propensity score matching (PSM) method, which was performed to reduce bias in patient selection.

Results

After PSM, 164 patients were selected, including 41 in the NACT group and 123 in the LG group. The baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Compared with the LG group, the NACT group exhibit a smaller tumor size and significantly less advanced pathological tumor classification and nodal classification stages. The time to first flatus of the NACT group was significantly shorter, but the hospital stay was significantly longer than that of the LG group. The NACT group showed similar overall (29.3% vs 25.2%, P=0.683), systemic (24.4% vs 21.1%, P=0.663), local (12.2% vs 9.8%, P=0.767), minor (19.5% vs 19.5%, P=1.000) and major (9.8% vs 5.7%, P=0.470) complications as the LG group. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in most stratified parameters. Operation time≥ 300 minutes was identified as an independent risk factor for overall complications. Age≥ 60 years was identified as an independent risk factor for major complications.

Conclusion

NACT combined with LG for AEG does not increase the risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality compared with LG.

Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy in Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Given the expanding clinical applications of laparoscopic surgery and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer treatment, there is an emerging need to summarize the few evidences that evaluated the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).

METHODS

From January 1 to 2, 2021, we searched Ovid Embase, PubMed, Cochrane central register Trials (Ovid), and web of science to find relevant studies published in English, and two authors independently performed literature screening, quality assessment of the included studies, data extraction, and data analysis. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021228845).

RESULTS

The initial search retrieved 1567 articles, and 6 studies were finally included in the meta-analysis review, which comprised 2 randomized control trials and 4 observational studies involving 288 laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and 416 open gastrectomy (OG) AGC patients treated with NAC. For intraoperative conditions, R0 resection rate, blood transfusion, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected, proximal margin, and distal margin were comparable between LG group and open OG group. For postoperative short-term clinical outcomes, LG has significantly less postoperative complications (OR = 0.65, 95%CI: 0.42-1.00, p = 0.05) and shorter postoperative time to first aerofluxus (WMD = -0.57d, 95%CI: -0.89-0.25, p = 0.0004) than OG, and anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion, surgical site infection, thrombosis, intestinal obstruction, peritoneal effusion or abscess formation, postoperative time to first defecation, postoperative time to first liquid diet, and postoperative length of stay were comparable between the two groups. For postoperative survival outcomes, there were no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The available evidences indicated that LG is an effective and feasible technology for the treatment of AGC patients treated with NAC, and LG patients have much less postoperative complications and faster bowel function recovery than OG patients.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO database (identifier, CRD42021228845).

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.

Comparisons of perioperative and survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for serosa-positive (pT4a) gastric cancer patients: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Data about whether laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is applicable in serosa-positive (pT4a) gastric cancer patients remain rare. The purpose of this study is to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes between the laparoscopic and open gastrectomy (OG) in pT4a gastric cancer patients who underwent curative resection.

METHODS

A total of 1086 consecutive pT4a patients (101 patients with LG and 985 with OG) who underwent curative gastrectomy in a high-volume center between 2006 and 2016 were evaluated. Demographics, surgical, and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to balance baseline confounders, and COX regression analysis was performed to identify independent prognostic factors.

RESULTS

After PSM adjustment, a well-balanced cohort comprising 101 patients who underwent LG and 201 who underwent OG was analyzed. Operative time (288.7 vs. 234.2 min; P < 0.001) was significantly longer, while estimated blood loss (172.8 vs. 220.7 ml; P < 0.001) was significantly less in the LG group compared with the OG group. There were no significant differences between groups in total number of harvested lymph nodes, postoperative stays, readmission rate, and postoperative complication rate. The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was not significant different in the LG and OG groups (66.7% vs. 62.8%, P = 0.668), and the subsequent multivariate analysis revealed that the surgical approach was not an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR = 1.123; 95%CI: 0.803-1.570; P = 0.499). In sensitivity analysis including 78 pairs well-matched patients operated by an experienced surgeon, the results were similar to these for the matched entire cohort.

CONCLUSION

LG can be a safe and feasible approach for pT4a gastric cancer treatment. However, well-designed high-quality RCTs are expected to draw a definitive conclusion on this topic.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Total Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter, Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study in China

BACKGROUND

Given the great technical difficulty and procedural complexity of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG), the technical and oncologic safety of LTG versus open total gastrectomy (OTG) in the field of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is yet undetermined.

OBJECTIVE

This multicenter cohort study aimed to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of LTG with those of OTG in AGC patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In total, 588 patients from 3 centers who underwent primary total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy, by well-trained surgeons with adequate experience, for pathologically confirmed locally AGC (T2N0-3, T3N0-3, or T4N0-3) between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, were identified, and their clinical data were collected from three participating centers. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), 450 cases (LTG, n = 225; OTG, n = 225) were eligible and assessed.

RESULTS

No significant difference in the number of retrieved lymph nodes, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates, or 5-year overall survival (OS) rates between both surgical groups were observed. Although LTG had significantly longer surgical time (262 vs. 180 min, p < 0.001), LTG was associated with fewer postoperative complications [relative risk (RR) 0.583, 95% CI 0.353-0.960, p = 0.047), less intraoperative bleeding (120 vs. 200 ml, p < 0.001), longer proximal margin resection (3 vs. 2 cm, p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospitalization (11 vs. 13 days, p < 0.001). The mortality rate was comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LTG was not inferior to OTG in terms of survival outcomes and was associated with shorter surgical and postoperative hospitalization time and fewer postoperative complications, suggesting LTG with D2 lymphadenectomy as an important alternative to OTG for patients with AGC, but to be carried out in highly experienced centers.