Technical feasibility of robot-sewn anastomosis in robotic surgery for gastric cancer

Stapled vs. manually sutured bowel anastomosis in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a single-center retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Radical cystectomy is the primary treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer and certain cases of high-risk non-muscle-invasive disease. Robot-assisted cystectomy techniques (RARC) have emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open surgery, offering enhanced precision and potentially improved recovery. Bowel anastomosis remains a critical step in these procedures, with manually sutured anastomosis offering a cost-effective alternative to the standard stapled technique. However, concerns remain regarding its impact on surgical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 92 patients who underwent RARC in our hospital between March 2021 and November 2023. Bowel anastomosis was performed using either stapled (n = 33) or manually sutured techniques (n = 59). Key outcome parameters included gastro-intestinal (GI) complications, overall complications, operation duration, length of hospital stay, readmissions, and postoperative recovery metrics.

RESULTS

GI complications occurred in 23 patients (25%), with paralytic ileus being the most common (17%). The rates of GI complications were comparable between the manually sutured (27%) and stapled (21%) groups (p = 0.530, odds ratio 1.38). The mean operation duration was 300 min for the sutured group and 313 min for the stapled group (p = 0.124). The median hospital stay was similar at 8 days (p = 0.384) for both groups. Readmission rates were higher in the sutured group (25% vs. 6%, p = 0.022, odds ratio 5.28), but this was predominantly due to non-GI complications.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that outcomes are comparable between stapled and manually sutured bowel anastomosis in RARC, with no significant increase in overall complications, GI complications, operation duration or hospital stay if using a manually sutured anastomosis. Considering the low cost of manual suturing, this technique seems highly cost-effective and could be considered a viable alternative to existing stapling techniques.

Evaluating the Role of Robotic Surgery Gastric Cancer Treatment: A Comprehensive Review by the Robotic Global Surgical Society (TROGSS) and European Federation International Society for Digestive Surgery (EFISDS) Joint Working Group

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) represents a significant advancement in the surgical management of gastric cancer, offering superior dexterity, enhanced visualization, and improved ergonomics compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). This review systematically evaluates the current evidence on perioperative outcomes, oncological efficacy, learning curves, and economic considerations, providing insights into RAMIG's potential role in modern gastric cancer surgery.

METHODS

A thorough analysis of retrospective, prospective, and meta-analytic studies was conducted to compare RAMIG with LG. Key outcomes, including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, lymph node retrieval, postoperative complications, learning curve duration, and cost-effectiveness, were assessed. Emphasis was placed on both short-term and long-term oncological outcomes to determine the clinical value of RAMIG.

RESULTS

Evidence indicates that RAMIG is associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss, lower morbidity rates, and a shorter learning curve, with proficiency achieved after 11-25 cases compared to 40-60 cases for LG. The robotic platform's articulated instruments and enhanced three-dimensional visualization enable more precise lymphadenectomy, particularly in complex anatomical regions. Despite these advantages, operative time remains longer, and costs remain higher due to system acquisition, maintenance, and consumable expenses. However, emerging data suggest a gradual narrowing of cost disparities. While short-term outcomes are favorable, further high-quality, multicenter studies are needed to validate long-term oncological efficacy and survival outcomes.

CONCLUSION

RAMIG offers significant technical and clinical advantages over conventional LG, particularly in terms of precision and learning efficiency. However, the long-term oncological benefits and economic feasibility require further validation. Future research should focus on cost optimization, advanced technological integration such as near-infrared fluorescence and artificial intelligence, and multicenter trials to solidify RAMIG's role as a standard approach for gastric cancer surgery.

Complete laparoscopic and Da Vinci robot esophagogastric anastomosis double muscle flap plasty for radical resection of proximal gastric cancer

Objective

To investigate the application value of complete laparoscopy and Da Vinci robot esophagogastric anastomosis double muscle flap plasty in radical resection of proximal gastric cancer.

Method

A retrospective descriptive study was used. The clinicopathological data of 35 patients undergoing radical operation for proximal gastric cancer admitted to Liaoning Cancer Hospital from January 2020 to December 2023 were collected. Variables evaluated: 1. Transoperative,2. Postoperative, 3. Follow-up. In relation to follow-up, esophageal disease status reflux, anastomosis, nutritional status score, serum hemoglobin, tumor recurrence, and metastasis were investigated. The trans and postoperative variables were obtained from the clinical records and the patients were followed up in outpatient department and by telephone.

Result

Among the 35 patients, 17 underwent robotic surgery and 18 underwent laparoscopic surgery. There were 29 males and 6 females. 1) Transoperative: Robotic surgery: The operation time was (305.59 ± 22.07) min, the esophagogastric anastomosis double muscle flap plasty time was (149.76 ± 14.91) min, the average number of lymph nodes cleared was 30, and the average intraoperative blood loss was 30 ml. Laparoscopic surgery: The mean operation time was 305.17 ± 26.92min, the operation time of esophagogastric anastomosis double muscle flap was (194.06 ± 22.52) min, the average number of lymph nodes cleared was 24, and the average intraoperative blood loss was 52.5 ml. 2) Postoperative: Robotic surgery: the average time for patients to have their first postoperative anal emission was 3 days, the average time to first postoperative feeding was 4 days, and the average length of hospitalization after surgery was 8 days. Laparoscopic surgery: the average time for patients to have their first postoperative anal emission was 5 days, the average time to first postoperative feeding was 6 days, the average length of hospitalization after surgery was 10 days. 3) Follow-up: The follow-up time ranged from 1 to 42 months, with a median follow-up time of 24 months.

Conclusion

Complete Da Vinci robot and laparoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis double muscle flap plasty for radical resection of proximal gastric cancer can minimize surgical incision, reduce abdominal exposure, accelerate postoperative recovery of patients, and effectively prevent reflux esophagitis and maintain good hemoglobin concentration and nutritional status. The advantages of robotic surgery is less intraoperative bleeding and faster post-surgical recovery, but it is relatively more expensive.

Robotic total gastrectomy with thrombectomy and portal vein reconstruction for gastric cancer and portal vein tumor thrombus

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer with portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) is poor prognosis, and the treatment remains challenging. Regarding surgery, there are only reports of highly invasive laparotomy. We report some techniques of the completely robotic total gastrectomy with thrombectomy and portal vein reconstruction for the patient with gastric cancer and PVTT for the first time.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 79-year-old man was diagnosed with a 5-cm gastric cancer on the side of the lesser curvature from the middle of the gastric body to the cardia. Computed tomography revealed a massive PVTT extending from the left gastric vein to the portal trunk (28 x 16 mm). There were no other distant metastases. After 3 cycles of the chemotherapy, the PVTT shrank to 19 x 12 mm. After obtaining informed consent from the patient, robotic total gastrectomy with regional lymphadenectomy and thrombectomy were performed. We used the da Vinci Xi Surgical System. A 3-cm incision was made at the umbilicus, and a wound retractor was placed. Five additional ports were placed. The right side suprapancreatic lymph nodes were performed at the time of the thrombectomy. It was important to identify the precise extent of the PVTT with intraoperative ultrasonography before the thrombectomy. After PVTT identification, the portal trunk was clamped above and below the tumor thrombus with vascular clips. The membrane on the anterior wall of the portal trunk around the PVTT was carefully incised with da Vinci Scissors. The tumor thrombus was completely enucleated without separation. The incised part of the portal trunk was reconstructed with continuous 5-0 synthetic monofilament nonabsorbable polypropylene sutures. After removing the vascular clamps, we made sure there was no leakage from the portal vein and no tumor thrombus remnants with intraoperative ultrasonography. Robotic total gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy and Roux-en-Y reconstruction were performed. The patient was discharged without complications. The patient has remained alive for 30 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic total gastrectomy with thrombectomy and portal vein reconstruction is a safe, minimally invasive, and precise surgery. It may contribute to improved prognosis of gastric cancer with PVTT when combined with chemotherapy.

Minimally Invasive Approach to Gastric GISTs: Analysis of a Multicenter Robotic and Laparoscopic Experience with Literature Review

Background: Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are most frequently located in the stomach. In the setting of a multidisciplinary approach, surgery represents the best therapeutic option, consisting mainly in a wedge gastric resection. (1) Materials and methods: Between January 2010 to September 2020, 105 patients with a primary gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GISTs) located in the stomach, underwent surgery at three surgical units. (2) Results: A multi-institutional analysis of minimally invasive series including 81 cases (36 laparoscopic and 45 robotic) from 3 referral centers was performed. Males were 35 (43.2%), the average age was 66.64 years old. ASA score ≥3 was 6 (13.3%) in the RS and 4 (11.1%) in the LS and the average tumor size was 4.4 cm. Most of the procedures were wedge resections (N = 76; 93.8%) and the main operative time was 151 min in the RS and 97 min in the LS. Conversion was necessary in five cases (6.2%). (3) Conclusions: Minimal invasive approaches for gastric GISTs performed in selected patients and experienced centers are safe. A robotic approach represents a useful option, especially for GISTs that are more than 5 cm, even located in unfavorable places.

Application value of hand-sewn anastomosis in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Background

Digestive tract reconstruction in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy can be divided into two types: instrument anastomosis and hand-sewn anastomosis. This study explored the feasibility and safety of hand-sewn sutures in esophagojejunostomy of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy, compared with instrument anastomosis using an overlap linear cutter.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2017 to January 2020 at one institution. The clinical data of 50 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy, with an average follow-up time of 12 months, were collected. The clinicopathologic data, short-term survival prognosis, and results of patients in the hand-sewn anastomosis (n=20) and the overlap anastomosis (n=30) groups were analyzed.

Results

There were no significant differences between the groups in sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor location, preoperative complications, abdominal operation history, tumor size, pTNM stage, blood loss, first postoperative liquid diet, exhaust time, or postoperative length of hospital stay. The hand-sewn anastomosis group had a significantly prolonged operation time (204±26.72min versus 190±20.90min, p=0.04) and anastomosis time (58±22.0min versus 46±15.97min, p=0.029), and a decreased operation cost (CNY 77,100±1700 versus CNY 71,900±1300, p<0.0001). Postoperative complications (dynamic ileus, abdominal infection, and pancreatic leakage) occurred in three patients (15%) in the hand-sewn anastomosis group and in four patients (13.3%) in the overlap anastomosis group (anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, dynamic ileus, and duodenal stump leakage).

Conclusion

The hand-sewn anastomosis method of esophagojejunostomy under totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy is safe and feasible and is an important supplement to linear and circular stapler anastomosis. It may be more convenient regarding obesity, a relatively high position of the anastomosis, edema of the esophageal wall, and short jejunal mesentery.

A novel method for π-shaped esophagojejunostomy and double-tract reconstruction (DTR) as an alternative in totally laparoscopic or robotic proximal gastrectomy for treating upper third proximal early gastric cancer

This study evaluated the impact of a new intracorporeal π-shaped esophagojejunostomy (EJS) and double-tract reconstruction (DTR) in totally laparoscopic and totally robotic proximal gastrectomy (TLPG or TRPG) for treating upper third early gastric cancer (U-EGC) in terms of intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes. Early proximal gastric cancer patients were identified based on a prospectively established database. From January 2017 to December 2018, these patients underwent intracorporeal π-shaped EJS and DTR after totally laparoscopic (n = 8) or robotic (n = 4) proximal gastrectomy (PG). We recorded and analyzed the baseline characteristics and surgical outcomes, including postoperative complications for these patients. No severe postoperative complications were observed following the operational procedures. Twelve patients (seven male and five female) diagnosed with cardia cancer (Siewert II and III) were enrolled, of which eight underwent the totally laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (TLPG), and four underwent the totally robotic proximal gastrectomy (TRPG). The mean operative time, blood loss, day of the start of the diet, and postoperative hospital stay was 235.54 ± 20.79 min, 50.65 ± 35.44 mL, 3.85 ± 0.65 days, and 12.45 ± 3.24 days, respectively. All patients presented with a diagnosis of stage I gastric cancer. The mean number of lymph node dissections and the maximum tumor diameter was 13.91 ± 4.63 and 2.18 ± 0.73 cm, respectively. After the operational procedure, using the iodoethylene contrast reagent, we observed that a large proportion of iodoethylene contrast agents entered the jejunum directly, and a small proportion entered the jejunum through the duodenum. Surgeons followed up with ten patients for more than 12 months and the remaining two patients for more than 24 months. None of the patients showed any signs of anastomotic stenosis or reflux esophagitis or anemia symptoms. This study presents a novel method for π-shaped EJS and DTR as an alternative in TLPG or TRPG for treating proximal early gastric cancer, and it offers better short-term postoperative and intraoperative surgical outcomes.

Surgical outcomes and learning curve analysis of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Multidimensional analysis compared with three‑dimensional high‑definition laparoscopic gastrectomy

The present ambispective cohort study was performed to compare the short‑term surgical outcomes, including financial cost and surgeons' acceptance, of robotic versus three‑dimensional high‑definition (3D‑HD) laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Between 2011 and 2017, 517 patients with GC were enrolled for treatment with either robotic gastrectomy [408 patients, including 73 treated by one of the authors (LC)] or 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy (109 patients, including 71 treated by LC). The cumulative summation method was developed to analyze the learning curves of robotic and 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by LC. In the analysis of all 517 patients, there were no significant differences in the clinicopathological characteristics between the two treatment groups, with the exception of smoking status (P<0.001). The robotic group had a shorter operative time (OT; 209 vs. 228 min, P=0.004), fewer postoperative days (PODs) to first flatus (3 vs. 4 days, P=0.025), more PODs to removal of the drainage and nasogastric tubes (12 vs. 9 days, P=0.001; 6 vs. 4 days, P=0.001, respectively), and more postoperative complications (21.3 vs. 9.2%, P=0.003). Comparison of these short‑term outcomes of robotic and 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by LC (144 patients) revealed that only the number of retrieved lymph nodes (27 in the robotic group vs. 33 in the 3D‑HD group; P=0.038) and PODs to removal of the nasogastric tube (5 days in the robotic group vs. 3 days in the 3D‑HD group; P<0.001) were significantly different. The OT stabilized after around 21 robotic gastrectomy procedures and 19 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy procedures. The cost‑effectiveness analysis revealed that robotic gastrectomy had a significantly higher total cost than 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy (124,907 vs. 94,395 RMB, P<0.001). With comparable surgical outcomes, lower financial cost and higher surgeons' acceptance, 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy is highly recommended as a minimally invasive surgical method for patients with GC prior to the popularization of robotic surgery.

Robotic total gastrectomy with π-shaped esophagojejunostomy using a linear stapler as a novel technique

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes of a novel robotic intracorporeal π-shaped esophagojejunostomy (EJS) after D2 total gastrectomy (TG) using the Da Vinci robotic surgical system for intracorporeal anastomosis after TG.

BACKGROUND

Intracorporeal π-shaped EJS, using a linear stapler, was recently reported for laparoscopic total gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer. However, robotic intracorporeal π-shaped EJS using a linear stapler has not been reported. This report aimed to describe the use of a novel technique for π-shaped EJS using the Da Vinci robotic system.

METHODS

Robotic intracorporeal π-shaped esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy was performed in 11 consecutive patients diagnosed with early gastric cancer, and their perioperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

All the operations were successful without conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery and postoperative complications. The total number of patients was 11 (7 males and 4 females). The mean age of the patients was 63.36 ± 10.56 years old. Seven patients were diagnosed with cardia cancer, 3 patients were diagnosed with gastric body cancer, and 1 patient was diagnosed with gastric antrum cancer. The patients' mean proximal resection margin was 3.18 ± 1.17 cm, the distal resection margin was 6.18 ± 1.40 cm, the mean length of the incision was 4.55 ± 0.69 cm, the mean operative time was 287.27 ± 30.69 min, the mean day of first flatus was 3.27 ± 0.79 days, the mean day of the start of diet was 2.91 ± 0.94 days, the mean postoperative hospital stay was 11.45 ± 5.13 days, and the mean operative blood loss was 47.27 ± 31.33 ml. No complications were observed during anastomosis, and the median anastomosis time was 19.5 min. The mean number of lymph node dissections was 17.91 ± 4.59, the mean number of positive lymph nodes was 0.45 ± 0.69, all patients were diagnosed with stage I-II gastric cancer, and the mean maximum diameter of the tumor was 2.67 ± 1.30 cm. All the patients had a smooth hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION

A novel robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal π-shaped EJS for esophagojejunal anastomosis described and shows acceptable resulted. This technique has the potential to offer better short-term surgical outcomes and overcomes the drawbacks of laparoscopy with a decreased risk of complications during and after surgery.

Robot-Assisted Versus Laparoscopy-Assisted Proximal Gastrectomy for Early Gastric Cancer in the Upper Location: Comparison of Oncological Outcomes, Surgical Stress, and Nutritional Status

Background:

An increasing amount of attention has been paid to minimally invasive function-preserving gastrectomy, with an increase in incidence of early gastric cancer in the upper stomach. This study aimed to compare oncological outcomes, surgical stress, and nutritional status between robot-assisted proximal gastrectomy (RAPG) and laparoscopy-assisted proximal gastrectomy (LAPG).

Methods:

Eighty-nine patients were enrolled in this retrospective study between November 2011 and December 2013. Among them, 27 patients underwent RAPG and 62 underwent LAPG. Perioperative parameters, surgical stress, nutritional status, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared between the 2 groups.

Results:

Sex, age, and comorbidity were similar in the RAPG and LAPG groups. There were also similar perioperative outcomes regarding operation time, complications, and length of hospital stay between the groups. The reflux esophagitis rates following RAPG and LAPG were 18.5% and 14.5%, respectively (P = .842). However, patients in the RAPG group had less blood loss (P = .024), more harvested lymph nodes (P = .021), and higher costs than those in the LAPG group (P < .001). With regard to surgical stress, no significant differences were observed in C-reactive protein concentrations and white blood cell count on postoperative days 1, 3, and 7 between the groups (Ps > .05). There appeared to be higher hemoglobin levels at 6 months (P = .053) and a higher body mass index at 12 months (P = .056) postoperatively in patients in the RAPG group compared with those in the LAPG group, but this difference was not significant. Similar disease-free survival and overall survival rates were observed between the groups.

Conclusions:

RAPG could be an alternative to LAPG for patients with early gastric cancer in the upper stomach with comparable oncological safety and nutritional status. Further well-designed, prospective, large-scale studies are needed to validate these results.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has progressed rapidly in the last decade, overcoming many obstacles in laparoscopic technology. We compared surgical performance and short-term clinical outcomes between RG and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). In total, 163 patients with gastric cancer were randomly treated with RG (n=102) or LG (n=61). D2 lymphadenectomy was achieved in all patients. Digestive tract reconstruction in the RG group was performed by intracorporeal hand sewing, but extracorporeal anastomosis in the LG group was performed with a 25-mm circular stapler or linear stapler. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had less intraoperative blood loss (P=0.005) and more lymph nodes retrieved (P=0.000). Postoperative complications between the 2 groups were not significantly different during the 11-month follow-up (P=0.063). Compared with LG, RG is a feasible and safe approach with minimally invasive, satisfactory intracorporeal digestive tract reconstruction, and fast recovery. Multicenter randomized controlled studies of larger numbers of patients are needed.

Robotic valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy using double flap technique following proximal gastrectomy: technical aspects and short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Valvuloplastic esophagogastrostomy by double flap technique (VEG-DFT) is a promising procedure to prevent reflux after proximal gastrectomy (PG), and is achieved by the burial of the abdominal esophagus into the gastric submucosa; however, laparoscopic VEG-DFT is technically demanding due to complicated suturing and ligation maneuvers. The present study was designed to determine the feasibility and safety of robotic VEG-DFT.

METHODS

After robotic PG, seromuscular flaps were extracorporeally created at the anterior wall of the remnant stomach through a small umbilical incision. Then, using a robot, the posterior wall of the esophagus was fixed to the cranial end of the mucosal window, and layer-to-layer sutures were placed between the anterior aspects of esophagus and the remnant stomach. Finally, the anastomosis was covered by seromuscular flaps. Short-term outcomes of 12 consecutive patients who underwent VEG-DFT between January 2014 and December 2015 were assessed.

RESULTS

Operations were successfully completed using robotic assistance in all patients. Median operative, surgeon console, and anastomosis times were 406 (324-613 min), 267 (214-483), and 104 (76-186) min, respectively, and median estimated blood loss was 31 (5-130) ml. The first six cases were required to reach a learning plateau. Both mortality and morbidity rates within 30 days after surgery were 0%. Postoperative hospital stay was 10 (9-30) days. No postoperative reflux esophagitis was observed, whereas anastomotic stenosis, which required endoscopic balloon dilation, developed in three patients (25%) in postoperative month 2. There was a significant association between the total number of stitches used for VEG-DFT and anastomotic stenosis (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic assistance may be useful for VEG-DFT with a short learning curve. Attention is required to prevent postoperative anastomotic stenosis possibly caused by an excessive number of stitches for esophagogastrostomy.

The Advances of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is evolving. With the increasing expertise and experience of oncologic surgeons in the minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer, the indication for laparoscopic gastrectomy is expanding to advanced cases. Many studies have demonstrated the benefits of minimally invasive surgery, including reduced risk of surgery-related injury, reduced blood loss, less pain, and earlier recovery. In order to establish concrete evidence for the suitability of minimal invasive surgery for gastric cancer, many multicenter RCTs, comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery, are in progress. Advances in laparoscopic gastrectomy are moving toward increasingly minimally invasive approaches that enable the improvement of the quality of life of patients, without compromising on oncologic safety.

New totally intracorporeal reconstructive approach after robotic total gastrectomy: Technical details and short-term outcomes

AIM

To show outcomes of our series of patients that underwent a total gastrectomy with a robotic approach and highlight the technical details of a proposed solution for the reconstruction phase.

METHODS

Data of gastrectomies performed from May 2014 to October 2016, were extracted and analyzed. Basic characteristics of patients, surgical and clinical outcomes were reported. The technique for reconstruction (Parisi Technique) consists on a loop of bowel shifted up antecolic to directly perform the esophago-enteric anastomosis followed by a second loop, measured up to 40 cm starting from the esojejunostomy, fixed to the biliary limb to create an enteroenteric anastomosis. The continuity between the two anastomoses is interrupted just firing a linear stapler, so obtaining the Roux-en-Y by avoiding to interrupt the mesentery.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were considered in the present analysis. Estimated blood loss was 126.55 ± 73 mL, no conversions to open surgery occurred, R0 resections were obtained in all cases. Hospital stay was 5 (3-17) d, no anastomotic leakage occurred. Overall, a fast functional recovery was shown with a median of 3 (3-6) d in starting a solid diet.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery and the adoption of a tailored reconstruction technique have increased the feasibility and safety of a minimally invasive approach for total gastrectomy. The present series of patients shows its implementation in a western center with satisfying short-term outcomes.

Status and Prospects of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Our Experience and a Review of the Literature

Since the first report of robotic gastrectomy, experienced laparoscopic surgeons have used surgical robots to treat gastric cancer and resolve problems associated with laparoscopic gastrectomy. However, compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy, the superiority of robotic procedures has not been clearly proven. There are several advantages to using robotic surgery for gastric cancer, such as reduced estimated blood loss during the operation, a shorter learning curve, and a larger number of examined lymph nodes than conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy. The increased operation time observed with a robotic system is decreasing because surgeons have accumulated experience using this procedure. While there is limited evidence, long-term oncologic outcomes appear to be similar between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy. Robotic procedures have a significantly greater financial cost than laparoscopic gastrectomy, which is a major drawback. Recent clinical studies tried to demonstrate that the benefits of robotic surgery outweighed the cost, but the overall results were disappointing. Ongoing studies are investigating the benefits of robotic gastrectomy in more complicated and challenging cases. Well-designed randomized control trials with large sample sizes are needed to investigate the benefits of robotic gastrectomy compared with laparoscopic surgery.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Phase III evidence in the shape of a series of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses has shown that laparoscopic gastrectomy is safe and gives better short-term results with respect to the traditional open technique for early-stage gastric cancer. In fact, in the East laparoscopic gastrectomy has become routine for early-stage gastric cancer. In contrast, the treatment of advanced gastric cancer through a minimally invasive way is still a debated issue, mostly due to worries about its oncological efficacy and the difficulty of carrying out an extended lymphadenectomy and intestinal reconstruction after total gastrectomy laparoscopically. Over the last ten years the introduction of robotic surgery has implied overcoming some intrinsic drawbacks found to be present in the conventional laparoscopic procedure. Robot-assisted gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy has been shown to be safe and feasible for the treatment of gastric cancer patients. But unfortunately, most available studies investigating the robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer compared to laparoscopic and open technique are so far retrospective and there have not been phase III trials. In the present review we looked at scientific evidence available today regarding the new high-tech surgical robotic approach, and we attempted to bring to light the real advantages of robot-assisted gastrectomy compared to the traditional laparoscopic and open technique for the treatment of gastric cancer.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer is commonly considered a challenging procedure. The technical drawbacks of laparoscopy have been addressed by robotic technology, which can facilitate demanding reconstructions and fine dissection. These features confer potential advantages in the execution of lymphadenectomy.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we illustrate our technique of robotic gastrectomy and discuss advantages and drawbacks by reviewing the current literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe our technique for robot-assisted distal and total gastrectomy for cancer and assess the current literature dealing with short-term outcomes, immediate oncologic measures, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted gastrectomy, in comparison with conventional laparoscopic and open surgery.

RESULTS

The robotic procedure seems to be as safe and effective as conventional gastrectomy for gastric cancer, with a longer operative time and decreased blood loss in comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

The technical advantages offered by robotics could help to standardize minimally invasive D2 lymphadenectomy and enable surgeons to perform this procedure routinely. Despite the scarcity of long-term data on survival, immediate oncological measures (lymph node yield and margin status) are encouraging. Further studies investigating the long-term oncological outcomes are required.

Comparison of short outcomes between laparoscopic and experienced robotic gastrectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the short-term outcomes between experienced robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We searched the PubMed, Springer Link, Elsevier, and Embase databases for articles published in English before June 2015 using an electronic literature search and including cross-referenced articles. Three studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. The outcomes evaluated were operation time, estimated blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, complication, and postoperative hospital stay.

RESULTS:

Of a total of 562 patients, 165 underwent RG and 397 underwent LG. Operation time was significantly longer in the RG group [weighted mean difference (WMD): 21.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 12.48-30.50, P < 0.00001). Estimated blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, complication, and postoperative hospital stay were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION:

Experienced RG has similar short-term outcomes to LG that is performed by sophisticated laparoscopic surgeons, except for operation time.

[Robot-assisted gastrectomy for cancer. German version]

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer is commonly considered a challenging procedure. The technical drawbacks of laparoscopy have been addressed by robotic technology, which can facilitate demanding reconstructions and fine dissection. These features confer potential advantages in the execution of lymphadenectomy.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we illustrate our technique of robotic gastrectomy and discuss advantages and drawbacks by reviewing the current literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We describe our technique for robot-assisted distal and total gastrectomy for cancer and assess the current literature dealing with short-term outcomes, immediate oncologic measures, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted gastrectomy, in comparison with conventional laparoscopic and open surgery.

RESULTS

The robotic procedure seems to be as safe and effective as conventional gastrectomy for gastric cancer, with a longer operative time and decreased blood loss in comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

The technical advantages offered by robotics could help to standardize minimally invasive D2 lymphadenectomy and enable surgeons to perform this procedure routinely. Despite the scarcity of long-termdata on survival, immediate oncological measures (lymph node yield and margin status) are encouraging. Further studies investigating the long-term oncological outcomes are required.

Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To compare short-term surgical outcomes including financial cost of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND

Despite a lack of supporting evidence, robotic surgery has been increasingly adopted as a minimally invasive modality for the treatment of gastric cancer because of its assumed technical superiority over conventional laparoscopy.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter comparative study was conducted. Patients were matched according to the surgeon, extent of gastric resection, and sex. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis.

RESULTS

A total of 434 patients were enrolled for treatment with either robotic (n = 223) or laparoscopic (n = 211) gastrectomy for intention-to-treat analysis, and a total of 370 patients (n = 185 per treatment) were compared in per-protocol analysis. Results were similar between both analyses. In per-protocol analysis, both groups showed similar overall complication rates (robotic = 11.9% vs laparoscopic = 10.3%) and major complication rates (robotic = 1.1% vs laparoscopic = 1.1%) with no operative mortality in either group. Patients treated with robotic surgery showed significantly longer operative time (robotic = 221 minutes vs laparoscopic = 178 minutes; P < 0.001) and significantly higher total costs (robotic = US$13,432 vs laparoscopic = US$8090; P < 0.001), compared with those who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy. No significant differences between groups were noted in estimated blood loss, rates of open conversion, diet build-up, or length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of robotic systems is assumed to provide a technically superior operative environment for minimally invasive surgery. However, our analysis of perioperative surgical outcomes indicated that robotic gastrectomy is not superior to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Clinical trials identification: NCT01309256.

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: Present and future directions

Laparoscopic surgery is applied today worldwide to most digestive procedures. In some of them, such as cholecystectomy, Nissen's fundoplication or obesity surgery, laparoscopy has become the standard in practice. In others, such as colon or gastric resection, the laparoscopic approach is frequently used and its usefulness is unquestionable. More complex procedures, such as esophageal, liver or pancreatic resections are, however, more infrequently performed, due to the high grade of skill necessary. As a result, there is less clinical evidence to support its implementation. In the recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied, again with little evidence for comparison with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This review will focus on the complex digestive procedures as well as those whose use in standard practice could be more controversial. Also novel robot-assisted procedures will be updated.

Robot-assisted surgery for gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is a relatively new research field, with convincing results mostly stemming from Asian countries. The use of the robotic surgery platform, thus far assessed as a safe procedure, which is also easier to learn, sets the background for a wider spread of minimally invasive technique in the treatment of gastric cancer. This review will cover the literature published so far, analyzing the pros and cons of robotic surgery and highlighting the remaining study questions.

Assessing the safety and efficacy of full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer: A randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy is increasingly used in gastric cancer patients. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Three hundred and eleven patients were randomized into an open gastrectomy group or a robotic gastrectomy group, and digestive restorations were performed under direct vision and with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis, respectively. Length of postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph node dissections, surgical duration, blood loss, and complication rate after surgery were recorded.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the number of lymph node dissections (30.9 ± 10.4 vs. 29.3 ± 9.7 days, P = 0.281) or complication rates (10.3 vs. 9.3%, P = 0.756) between the two groups. Surgical duration was significantly longer in the robotic gastrectomy group than in the open gastrectomy group (242.7 ± 43.8 vs. 192.4 ± 31.5 min, P = 0.002), whereas blood loss was less (94.2 ± 51.5 vs. 152.8 ± 76.9 ml, P < 0.001), length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (5.6 ± 1.9 vs. 6.7 ± 1.9 days, P = 0.021), and postoperative restoration of bowel function was earlier (2.6 ± 1.1 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2 days, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer is safe and does not increase the complication risk during or after surgery. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:397-404. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Robotic Total Gastrectomy With Intracorporeal Robot-Sewn Anastomosis: A Novel Approach Adopting the Double-Loop Reconstruction Method

Gastric cancer constitutes a major health problem. Robotic surgery has been progressively developed in this field. Although the feasibility of robotic procedures has been demonstrated, there are unresolved aspects being debated, including the reproducibility of intracorporeal in place of extracorporeal anastomosis.Difficulties of traditional laparoscopy have been described and there are well-known advantages of robotic systems, but few articles in literature describe a full robotic execution of the reconstructive phase while others do not give a thorough explanation how this phase was run.A new reconstructive approach, not yet described in literature, was recently adopted at our Center.Robotic total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy and a so-called "double-loop" reconstruction method with intracorporeal robot-sewn anastomosis (Parisi's technique) was performed in all reported cases.Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected and a technical note was documented.All tumors were located at the upper third of the stomach, and no conversions or intraoperative complications occurred. Histopathological analysis showed R0 resection obtained in all specimens. Hospital stay was regular in all patients and discharge was recommended starting from the 4th postoperative day. No major postoperative complications or reoperations occurred.Reconstruction of the digestive tract after total gastrectomy is one of the main areas of surgical research in the treatment of gastric cancer and in the field of minimally invasive surgery.The double-loop method is a valid simplification of the traditional technique of construction of the Roux-limb that could increase the feasibility and safety in performing a full hand-sewn intracorporeal reconstruction and it appears to fit the characteristics of the robotic system thus obtaining excellent postoperative clinical outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) is a new minimally invasive surgical technique for gastric cancer. This study was designed to compare RAG with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) in short-term surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Between October 2011 and August 2014, 423 patients underwent robotic or laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: 93 RAG and 330 LAG. We performed a comparative analysis between RAG group and LAG group for clinicopathological characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

RAG was associated with a longer operative time (P < 0.001), lower blood loss (P = 0.001), and more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.047). Only three patients in LAG group had positive margins, and R0 resection rate for RAG and LAG was similar (P = 0.823). The RAG group had postoperative complications of 9.8 %, comparable with those of the LAG group (P = 0.927). Proximal margin, distal margin, hospital stay, days of first flatus, and days of eating liquid diet for RAG and LAG were similar. In the subgroup of serosa-negative patients, RAG had a longer operation time (P = 0.003), less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.005), and more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.04). However, in the subgroup of serosa-positive patients, RAG had a longer operation time (P = 0.001), but no less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.139) and no more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.139). Similarly, in the subgroup of total gastrectomy patients, RAG had a longer operation time (P = 0.018), but no less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.173).

CONCLUSIONS

The comparative study demonstrates that RAG is as acceptable as LAG in terms of surgical and oncologic outcomes. With lower estimated blood loss, acceptable complications, and radical resection, RAG is a promising approach for the treatment of gastric cancer. However, the indication of patients for RAG is critical.

Robotic surgery for gastric cancer

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is a widely used minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer. However, skillful techniques are required to perform lymph node dissection using straight shaped forceps, particularly for D2 dissection. Robotic surgery using the da Vinci surgical system is anticipated to be a powerful tool for performing difficult techniques using high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) images and the EndoWrist equipped with seven degrees of freedom. Attempts are being made to apply robotic surgery in gastrectomy procedures mainly in Japan, South Korea, and Europe. Although definite superiority to laparoscopic gastrectomy is yet to be proven, robotic surgery has been reported to have a shorter learning curve and offer more precise dissection for total gastrectomy. Hence, its oncological efficacy needs to be verified in a clinical trial.

Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Robotic surgery for gastric cancer overcomes technical difficulties with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Its benefits include reduced intraoperative bleeding and shorter hospital stays; it is also easier to learn. Because accuracy increases during lymphadenectomy, a larger number of lymph nodes is likely to be retrieved using robotic gastrectomy. Higher costs and longer operation times have hindered the widespread adaptation and use of robotic surgery. In this review, we summarize the current status and issues regarding robotic gastrectomy.

Current status of randomized controlled trials for laparoscopic gastric surgery for gastric cancer in Korea

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer has rapidly gained popularity as a result of the increased incidence of early gastric cancer in Korea. Although laparoscopic gastrectomy has been considered as an investigational treatment because of the lack of solid evidence of efficacy and safety, it is increasingly regarded as a standard treatment for early gastric cancer. Moreover, solid evidence is anticipated from two studies in Korea, KLASS 01 and KLASS 02, the latter of which examines the suitability of laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer. The use of cutting-edge techniques for laparoscopic gastrectomy enables surgeons to deliver various treatment options that offer the best possible quality of life after gastrectomy. In this review, we summarize the current status of clinical trials on laparoscopic gastrectomy in Korea and examine future perspectives regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: current status and technical considerations

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy has been reported as a safe alternative to the conventional laparoscopy or open approach for treating early gastric carcinoma. To date, however, there are a limited number of published reports available in the literature.

METHODS

We assess the current status of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, focusing on the technical details and oncological considerations.

RESULTS

In gastric surgery, the biggest advantage of robotic surgery is the ease and reproducibility of D2-lymphadenectomy. Reports show that even the intracorporeal digestive restoration is facilitated by use of the robotic approach, particularly following total gastrectomy. Additionally, the accuracy of robotic dissection is confirmed by decreased blood loss, as reported in series comparing robot-assisted with laparoscopic gastrectomy. The learning curve and technical reproducibility also appear to be shorter with robotic surgery and, consequently, robotics can help to standardize and diffuse minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, even in the later stages. This is important because the application of minimally invasive surgery is limited by the complexity of performing a D2-lymphadenectomy. The potential to reproduce D2-lymphadenectomy, enlarged resections, and complex reconstructions provides robotic surgery with an important role in the therapeutic strategy of advanced gastric cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

While published reports have shown no significant differences in surgical morbidity, mortality, or oncological adequacy between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, more studies are needed to assess the indications and oncological effectiveness of robotic use in the treatment of gastric carcinoma. Herein, the authors assess the current status of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, focusing on the technical details and oncological considerations.

Current status of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A literature review to highlight studies limits

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer represents a great challenge for health care providers and requires a multidisciplinary approach in which surgery plays the main role. Minimally invasive surgery has been progressively developed, first with the advent of laparoscopy and more recently with the spread of robotic surgery, but a number of issues are currently being investigate, including the limitations in performing effective extended lymph node dissections and, in this context, the real advantages of using robotic systems, the possible role for advanced Gastric Cancer, the reproducibility of completely intracorporeal techniques and the oncological results achievable during follow-up.

METHOD

Searches of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were performed to identify articles published until April 2014 which reported outcomes of surgical treatment for gastric cancer and that used minimally invasive surgical technology. Articles that deal with endoscopic technology were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 362 articles were evaluated. After the review process, data in 115 articles were analyzed.

CONCLUSION

A multicenter study with a large number of patients is now needed to further investigate the safety and efficacy as well as long-term outcomes of robotic surgery, traditional laparoscopy and the open approach.

European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery

Following an extensive literature search and a consensus conference with subject matter experts the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Robotic surgery is still at its infancy, and there is a great potential in sophisticated electromechanical systems to perform complex surgical tasks when these systems evolve. 2. To date, in the vast majority of clinical settings, there is little or no advantage in using robotic systems in general surgery in terms of clinical outcome. Dedicated parameters should be addressed, and high quality research should focus on quality of care instead of routine parameters, where a clear advantage is not to be expected. 3. Preliminary data demonstrates that robotic system have a clinical benefit in performing complex procedures in confined spaces, especially in those that are located in unfavorable anatomical locations. 4. There is a severe lack of high quality data on robotic surgery, and there is a great need for rigorously controlled, unbiased clinical trials. These trials should be urged to address the cost-effectiveness issues as well. 5. Specific areas of research should include complex hepatobiliary surgery, surgery for gastric and esophageal cancer, revisional surgery in bariatric and upper GI surgery, surgery for large adrenal masses, and rectal surgery. All these fields show some potential for a true benefit of using current robotic systems. 6. Robotic surgery requires a specific set of skills, and needs to be trained using a dedicated, structured training program that addresses the specific knowledge, safety issues and skills essential to perform this type of surgery safely and with good outcomes. It is the responsibility of the corresponding professional organizations, not the industry, to define the training and credentialing of robotic basic skills and specific procedures. 7. Due to the special economic environment in which robotic surgery is currently employed special care should be taken in the decision making process when deciding on the purchase, use and training of robotic systems in general surgery. 8. Professional organizations in the sub-specialties of general surgery should review these statements and issue detailed, specialty-specific guidelines on the use of specific robotic surgery procedures in addition to outlining the advanced robotic surgery training required to safely perform such procedures.

Comparison of Surgical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopy-Assisted Pylorus-Preserving Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

The three-dimensional view and articulating devices in robot system might have a benefit performing the delicate procedure of pylorus-preserving gastrectomy. This study was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (RAPPG) and to compare the perioperative outcomes and oncologic safety between RAPPG and laparoscopy-assisted pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (LAPPG) for middle-third early gastric cancer.

METHODS

Between June 2008 and December 2013, we retrospectively collected data of 68 patients with RAPPG and propensity score matched 68 patients with LAPPG for the treatment of early gastric cancer at Seoul National University Hospital. The covariates for propensity score matching were: age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, and operators. Clinicopathologic characteristics and surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

All RAPPG cases were performed successfully without open or laparoscopic conversion. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes did not differ between the two groups except in operation time (258.3 vs. 193.9 min; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in complication rates between the two groups (19.1 vs. 22.1 %; P = 0.671). The mean number of examined lymph nodes (33.4 vs. 36.5; P = 0.153), and the mean number of lymph nodes at each station was not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RAPPG can be a safe treatment option for middle-third early gastric cancer in terms of surgical complications and oncologic outcomes. However, RAPPG has no benefit over LAPPG in this study.

Minimally invasive surgery in gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer has rapidly gained popularity due to the early detection of early gastric cancer. As advances in instruments and the accumulation of laparoscopic experience increase, laparoscopic techniques are being used for less invasive but highly technical procedures. Recent evidence suggests that the short- and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for early gastric cancer and advanced gastric cancer are comparable to those of conventional open surgery. However, these results should be confirmed by large-scale multicenter prospective randomized controlled clinical trials.

Meta-analysis of outcomes compared between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate and compare the outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for treating gastric cancer. A systematic literature search was carried out using the PubMed database, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Library database to obtain comparative studies assessing the safety and efficiency between RG and LG in May, 2013. Data of interest were analyzed by using of Review Manager version 5.2 software (Cochrane Collaboration). A fixed effects model or random effects model was applied according to heterogeneity. Seven papers reporting results that compared robotic gastrectomy with laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer were selected for this meta-analysis. Our meta- analysis included 2,235 patients with gastric cancer, of which 1,473 had undergone laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 762 had received robotic gastrectomy. Compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy was associated with longer operative time but less blood loss. There were no significant difference in terms of hospital stay, total postoperative complication rate, proximal margin, distal margin, numbers of harvested lymph nodes and mortality rate between robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy. Our meta-analysis showed that robotic gastrectomy is a safe technique for treating gastric cancer that compares favorably with laparoscopic gastrectomy in short term outcomes. However, the long term outcomes between the two techniques need to be further examined.

A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) for gastric cancer is still a controversial surgical technique for adequate tumor resection, lymphadenectomy, and postoperative outcome.

METHODS

A meta-analysis analyzed updated clinical trials that have compared RAG with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) to evaluate whether RAG is equivalent to LAG.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included in the analysis, comprising 1,875 patients. RAG was associated with a longer operative time (p < 0.05), lower estimated blood loss (p < 0.05), and a longer distal margin (p < 0.05). RAG can be performed safely with lower estimated blood loss and a longer distal margin than with LAG. Complications, hospital stay, proximal margin, and harvested lymph nodes for RAG and LAG were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

RAG is as acceptable as LAG for obtaining safe complications and for performing radical gastrectomy.

Robot-assisted gastrectomy and oesophagectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) has been developed in the hope of improving surgical quality and overcoming the limitations of conventional laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy (LAG) and open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of evidence in support of these ideals.

METHODS

A systematic review of the three operation types (RAG, LAG and OG) was carried out to evaluate short-term outcomes including duration of operation, retrieved lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, resection margin status, technical postoperative complications and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Nine non-randomized observational clinical studies involving 7200 patients satisfied the eligibility criteria. RAG was associated with longer operating times than LAG and OG (weighted mean difference 61.99 and 65.73 min respectively; P ≤ 0.001). The number of retrieved lymph nodes and the resection margin length in RAG were comparable with those of LAG and OG. Estimated blood loss as significantly less in RAG than in OG (P = 0.002), but not LAG. Mean hospital stay for RAG was similar to that for LAG (P = 0.14). In contrast, hospital stay was significantly shorter, by a mean of 2.18 days, for RAG compared with OG (P < 0.001). Postoperative complications were similar for all three operative approaches.

CONCLUSION

Short-term oncological outcomes of RAG were comparable with those of the other approaches. LAG was a shorter procedure and less expensive than RAG. Future studies involving RAG should focus on minimizing duration of operation and reducing cost.

Emerging Role of Robot-assisted Gastrectomy: Analysis of Consecutive 200 Cases

Purpose

Robotic surgery for gastric cancer is a promising alternative to laparoscopic surgery, but the data are limited. We aimed to evaluate whether gaining experience in robotic gastrectomy could improve surgical outcomes in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Materials and Methods

Two hundred and seven consecutive cases of patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer who underwent robotic surgery at the National Cancer Center of Korea between February 2009 and February 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Surgical outcomes were analyzed and compared between the initial 100 and later 100 cases.

Results

Seven patients required conversion to open surgery and were excluded from further analysis. The mean operating time for all patients was 248.8 minutes, and mean length of hospitalization was 8.0 days. Twenty patients developed postoperative complications. Thirteen were managed conservatively, while 6 had major complications requiring invasive procedures. One mortality occurred owing to myocardial infarction. Operating time was significantly shorter in the latter 100 cases than in the initial 100 cases (269.9 versus 233.5 minutes, P<0.001). The number of retrieved lymph nodes was significantly greater in the latter cases (35.9 versus 39.9, P=0.032). The hospital stay of patients with complications was significantly longer in the initial cases than in the latter cases (16 versus 7 days, P=0.005).

Conclusions

Increased experience with the robotic procedure for gastric cancer was associated with improved outcomes, especially in operating time, lymph node retrieval, and shortened hospital stay of complicated patients. Further development of surgical techniques and technology might enhance the role of robotic surgery for gastric cancer.

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of 2495 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is being increasingly used to treat gastric cancer. However, there are still several technical disadvantages limiting its use. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is an emerging minimally invasive technique that overcomes some of these limitations. This study compares RG with LG in the treatment of gastric cancer by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Comparative studies published between January 1991 and April 2013 in the major databases were systematically searched. Evaluated end points were operative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes. Pooled odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using either the fixed-effects model or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine nonrandomized comparative studies with 2495 patients were included, of which 736 procedures were robotic and 1759 were laparoscopic. RG was associated with a lower intraoperative blood loss and a shorter time to oral intake compared with LG. However, it was associated with a significantly longer operative time and shorter distal resection margin. In addition, there was no significant difference in the number of retrieved lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, rate of conversion to open surgery, overall morbidity, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, intestinal obstruction, time to first flatus, length of hospital stay, and perioperative mortality rates between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RG is comparable to LG, with respect to safety, technical feasibility, and oncological effectiveness in the treatment of gastric cancer. However, there is a need for well-designed prospective randomized controlled studies comparing the two procedures with long-term follow-up, to inform future practice.

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

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

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

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

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

[Robotic hepatobiliary and gastric surgery]

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

Robotic gastric resection of large gastrointestinal stromal tumors

BACKGROUND

The stomach is the most common site for gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) development. Surgical treatment consists of excision of the entire neoplastic mass, with sufficient surgical margins within healthy tissue. This can be achieved with different techniques ranging from wedge resections, typical gastric resections, right up to total gastrectomy. There aren't clear guidelines for the use of minimally invasive approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2011 to April 2012, 5 patients with presumed preoperative diagnosis of GIST were treated by robotic surgery at the Unit of Surgery and Advanced Oncologic Therapies, Forlì Hospital, Forlì, Italy. We report operative techniques, perioperative outcomes and follow-up.

RESULTS

Lesions were localized at anterior wall of gastric antrum (N = 2) and near pyloric area (N = 3). Mean tumor size was 5 cm (range 4-7 cm). Surgical procedures were 5 distal gastrectomy. None intervention was converted to open surgery and there weren't major intraoperative complications. Median operative time was 240 min (range 210-300 min) and mean intraoperative blood loss was 96 ml (80-120 ml). All lesions had microscopically negative resection margins. Median follow-up was 13.5 months (range 12-15 months) with a disease-free survival rate of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical robotic approach for large GISTs is feasibility and new evidences are needed to clarify the effective role of different surgical strategies.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Laparoscopic and robotic distal gastrectomy for gastrointestinal stromal tumour: case report

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumours of the digestive tract. The most frequent site of occurrence is the stomach. Due to the high potential for malignancy of GIST, resection should be the first-line treatment. Minimally invasive surgery may be used for surgical resection of GISTs.

METHODS

We describe a case of laparoscopic and robotic distal gastrectomy in a patient with diagnosis of GIST in the gastric antrum. Laparoscopy was useful for dissection and a da Vinci robot was used for Roux-en-Y reconstruction.

RESULTS

The postoperative course was uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive surgery offers benefits compared to open surgery, and laparoscopic and robot-assisted gastrectomy for the treatment of GIST could be technically feasible and safe because of the advantageous movements provided by the robotic arms.

Minimally invasive approaches for gastric cancer-Korean experience

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

Robotic gastrectomy: the current state of the art

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