Comparison of Totally Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy and Laparoscopic-Assisted Total Gastrectomy Methods for the Surgical Treatment of Early Gastric Cancer Near the Gastroesophageal Junction

Final results of a randomized controlled trial: comparison of the efficacy and safety between totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy for advanced Siewert III esophagogastric junction cancer and upper and middle third gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of TLTG with the overlap technique to LATG in patients with advanced Siewert III Esophagogastric Junction Cancer and upper and middle third gastric cancer.

METHODS

This single-center RCT enrolled 292 patients with the mentioned cancers, randomly assigned to TLTG overlap ( n =146) or LATG ( n =146) groups. Data on demographics, pathology, intraoperative variables, postoperative complications, recovery parameters, and 3-year survival were collected. Main outcome: postoperative complications within 30 days. Secondary outcomes: 3-year disease-free and overall survival.

RESULTS

TLTG versus LATG: TLTG had shorter incision, faster flatus/defecation, reduced analgesia, less opioid use, and shorter hospital stay. Similar operation time, anastomosis time, blood loss, and lymph node harvest. TLTG had a lower overall post-op complication rate (P=0.047) and no significant difference in serious complications ( P =0.310). Variances in anastomotic stenosis occurrence at 3 months. No rehospitalization or mortality at 30 days. No significant differences in 3-month disease-free survival ( P =0.058) or overall survival ( P =0.236).

CONCLUSION

The overlap method for anastomosis in TLTG is safe and feasible for advanced middle-upper-third gastric cancer, with positive short-term outcomes. This technique has the potential to be the preferred esophagojejunostomy approach in TLTG.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has been registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR1900025667 (registration date: 4 September 2019).

Comparison efficacy and safety of total laparoscopic gastrectomy and laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy in treatment of gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The development of laparoscopic technology has provided a new choice for surgery of gastric cancer (GC), but the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) in treatment effect and safety are still controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of the two methods in the treatment of GC, and to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of totally LTG (TLTG) and LATG in the context of radical gastrectomy for GC. Additionally, we investigated the safety and feasibility of the total laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy technique.

METHODS

Literature on comparative studies of the above two surgical methods for GC (TLTG group and LATG group) published before September 2022 were searched in the PubMed, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, CNKI, and other Chinese and English databases. In addition, the following search keywords were used: Gastric cancer, total gastrectomy, total laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, esophagojejunal anastomosis, gastric/stomach cancer, total gastrectomy, totally/completely laparoscopic, laparoscopic assisted/laparoscopy assisted/laparoscopically assisted, and esophagojejunostomy/esophagojejunal anastomosis. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies.

RESULTS

After layer-by-layer screening, 258 pieces of literature were recovered, and 11 of those pieces were eventually included. This resulted in a sample size of 2421 instances, with 1115 cases falling into the TLTG group and 1306 cases into the LATG group. Age or sex differences between the two groups were not statistically significant, according to the meta-analysis, however the average body mass index of the TLTG group was considerably higher than that of the LATG group (P = 0.01). Compared with those in the LATG group, the incision length in the TLTG group was significantly shorter (P < 0.001), the amount of intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower (P = 0.003), the number of lymph nodes removed was significantly greater (P = 0.04), and the time of first postoperative feeding and postoperative hospitalization were also significantly shorter (P = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). There were no significant differences in tumor size, length of proximal incisal margin, total operation time, anastomotic time, postoperative pain score, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative anastomosis-related complications (including anastomotic fistula, anastomotic stenosis, and anastomotic hemorrhage), or overall postoperative complication rate (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLTG and esophagojejunostomy are safe and feasible. Compared with LATG, TLTG has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, easier access to lymph nodes, and faster postoperative recovery, and TLTG is also suitable for obese patients.

Safety and effectiveness of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy vs laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For gastric cancer with total gastrectomy, the usual laparoscopic surgical approaches are totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG). Due to its difficult anastomotic technique, the adoption of TLTG is limited. Therefore, surgeons prefer using LATG, which also led to TLTG being somewhat overlooked, so there is no clear conclusion today as to which surgical procedure is more favorable to the patient's recovery. This article aimed to compare the safety and short-term outcomes of the two surgical approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studies comparing TLTG and LATG, published up to December 2022, were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases. The study outcomes, including operative time, blood loss, anastomosis time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, proximal and distal resection margins, time to first fluid and soft diet, hospitalization duration, time to first flatus, and postsurgical and anastomotic complications, were compared between these two different surgical procedures. Statistics were analyzed with RevMan 5.4 and Stata 13.1.

RESULTS

Fifteen publications were included in this study. The total sample included 3023 cases. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in overall postoperative complications between the two surgical approaches ( P >0.05). Compared with LATG, TLTG led to reduced intraoperative blood loss ( P <0.0001), an increased number of lymphatic node dissections ( P <0.0001), and decreased hospitalization duration ( P =0.002). However, operative time, anastomosis time, pulmonary infection, resection margins, time to first fluid and soft diet, time to first flatus and anastomosis-related complications were no significant difference between TLTG and LATG groups ( P >0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLTG did not lead to an increase in overall postoperative complications, which is a reliable surgical approach for treatment of gastric cancer. Moreover, it may reduce harm to patients and enable them to obtain better surgical outcomes.

Comparison of short-term and long-term clinical effects of modified overlap anastomosis and conventional incision-assisted anastomosis in laparoscopic total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

To compare short-term and long-term clinical effects of modified overlap anastomosis and conventional incision-assisted anastomosis for laparoscopic total gastrectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients with gastric cancer admitted to the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University from January 2016 to March 2020. Quality of life, intraoperative and postoperative conditions were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional assisted group, the modified overlap group showed a shorter auxiliary incision, milder postoperative pain, shorter time to the first postoperative anal exhaust, shorter time to the first postoperative liquid food intake, and shorter postoperative stay. There were no differences between the two groups regarding operation time, esophagus-jejunum anastomosis time, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected, and length of the upper incision margin. There were no differences between the two groups regarding postoperative early and late complications. There were no differences between the two groups regarding the QLQ-C30 scale three years after the operation. The scores of the QLQ-STO22 scale 3 years after the operation showed significantly lower scores for dysphagia and feeding limit in the modified overlap group than those in the conventional assisted anastomosis group. There was no recurrence in the modified overlap group but one patient in the conventional assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with modified overlap anastomosis have better minimal invasiveness and faster post-operative recovery than conventional incision-assisted anastomosis.

Total laparoscopic versus laparoscopic-assisted transabdominal posterior mediastinal digestive tract reconstruction in the treatment of Siewert II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The method of operation and the range of resection for Siewert II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) remain controversial. This study aims to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and short-term postoperative effect of total laparoscopic versus laparoscopic-assisted transabdominal posterior mediastinal digestive tract reconstruction in the treatment of Siewert II AEG.

METHODS

Total laparoscopic or laparoscopic-assisted gastrointestinal reconstruction through abdominal posterior mediastinum was performed in 108 patients with Siewert II AEG from October 2017 to February 2019. This study evaluated the loss of intraoperative blood, the number of lymph nodes, the marginal of the tumor, short-term postoperative complications (within 30 days), the rate of survival at follow-up, and the economic cost, feasibility, and effect of short-term postoperative recovery for patients who received these two operations.

RESULT

There were no significant differences in general data between the total laparoscopic group and the laparoscopic-assisted group (P > 0.05). However, the total laparoscopic group cost more time on the surgical procedure and digestive tract reconstruction, lost less intraoperative blood, and had more mediastinal lymph nodes compared with the laparoscopic-assisted group (P < 0.05). The total laparoscopic group was significantly better than the laparoscopic-assisted group compared with the short-term postoperative recovery indexes, such as the first exhaust time, the first defecation time, the first fluid time, the first semi-fluid diet time, the postoperative hospital stay, and other postoperative recovery indexes (P < 0.05). In addition, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications, postoperative pathological indexes, the recurrence rate, and mortality between the total laparoscopic group and laparoscopic-assisted group (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The safety, feasibility, and short-term effect of total laparoscopic transabdominal posterior mediastinal digestive tract reconstruction in the treatment of Siewert II AEG were better than those for the laparoscopic-assisted group.

Comparison of reverse puncture device and overlap in laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Intracorporeal oesophagojejunostomy is one of the key steps in laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). At present, there is no widely accepted anastomosis technique in oesophagojejunostomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied 63 patients with gastric cancer who underwent LTG. Two types of anastomosis techniques have been applied during LTG: the reverse puncture device (RPD) (28 patients) and overlap (35 patients).

RESULTS

A total of 63 patients (51 males and 12 females: mean age = 58 years and mean body mass index [BMI] = 26.3 kg/m2) were enrolled in this study. There were no significant difference in age, BMI, duration of surgery, duration of anastomosis, blood loss, post-operative hospital stay, tumour location, tumour size, degree of tumour differentiation, Borrmann type, total number of lymph nodes, number of positive lymph nodes, hospital stay, hospitalisation costs, intra-operative complications, post-operative complications and prognosis between the RPD group and the overlap group. RPD group showed a significant advantage in terms of the distance between the top border of tumours and the top resection margin (P < 0.001). We further found that the oesophageal lateral negative surgical margin distance of the upper gastric cancer in the RPD group was significantly longer than that in the overlap group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the RPD and overlap techniques are safe and applicable in LTG. However, RPD has the advantage of obtaining an adequate safe margin compared with that of overlap technique, especially in patients with gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma.

A Multicenter Retrospective Study Comparing Surgical Outcomes Between the Overlap Method and Functional Method for Esophagojejunostomy in Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy: Analysis Using Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with esophagojejunostomy (EJS) performed using the overlap method or the functional method in a multicenter retrospective study with propensity score matching.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled all patients who underwent curative LTG for gastric cancer at 6 institutions between January 2004 and December 2018. Patients were categorized into the overlap group (OG) or functional group (FG) based on the type of anastomosis used in EJS. Patients in the groups were matched using the following propensity score covariates: age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, extent of lymph node dissection, and Japanese Classification of Gastric Carcinoma stage. The surgical results and postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

We identified 69 propensity score-matched pairs among 440 patients who underwent LTG. There was no significant between-group difference in the median operative time, intraoperative blood, or number of lymph nodes resected. In terms of postoperative outcomes, the rates of all complications [Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification ≥II; OG 13.0 vs. FG 24.6%, respectively; P=0.082], complications more severe than CD grade III (OG 8.7 vs. FG 18.8%, respectively; P=0.084), and the occurrence of EJS leakage and stenosis more severe than CD grade III (OG 7.3% vs. FG 2.9%, P=0.245; OG 1.5 vs. FG 8.7%, P=0.115, respectively) were comparable. The median follow-up period was 830 days (range, 18 to 3376 d), and there were no differences in overall survival between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in surgical outcomes and overall survival based on the type of anastomosis used for EJS after LTG. Therefore, selection of anastomosis in EJS should be based on each surgeon's preference and experience.

Short-Term and Quality of Life Outcomes of Patients Using Linear or Circular Stapling in Esophagojejunostomy after Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing the incidence of reflux esophagitis (RE) and patients' quality of life (QoL) when using circular stapler (CS) and linear stapler (LS) in esophagojejunostomy (EJS) after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) are rare, and certainly there are not enough to make a definitive decision on best practice. Presented herein is a study on the comparison of the short-term outcomes, QoL of the patients with the focus on the incidence of RE after both linear and circular stapling in LTG.

METHODS

From January 2014 to October 2018, 120 patients were analyzed; of these, 42 patients underwent laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) with CS (CS group) and 78 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) with LS (LS group). We examined the results obtained in terms of perioperative outcomes, reflux-related assessments (GerdQ questionnaire and endoscopy findings with all cases; 24-h pH monitoring with limited cases), and EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22. In addition, questionnaires were also supplied to patients and the results were recorded.

RESULTS

The incidence of anastomotic stenosis (7.1% vs. 0; P < 0.05) and the median intraoperative blood loss (180.0 vs. 100.0 mL; P < 0.05) of the CS group were higher than the LS group. The factor aside, no significant differences were observed between the two groups with regard to the incidence of RE assessed by the QLQ-STO22 reflux scale, the GerdQ scores, endoscopy (in all cases), or the percent time of pH > 7 (in limited cases) (P > 0.05). In the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22, it was noted that the score of constipation [0 (0, 0) vs. 0 (0, 33.3); P = 0.028] and postoperative dysphagia [0 (0, 0) vs. 0 (0, 22.2); P = 0.046] of the LS group in a 1-year follow-up were lower than the CS group.

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG with LS generated better results than LATG with CS in terms of the incidence of anastomotic stenosis, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative constipation and dysphagia. Furthermore, when compared with circular stapling, linear stapling in EJS did not increase the incidence of RE assessed by the QLQ-STO22 reflux scale, the GerdQ scores, endoscopy (in all cases), or the percent time of pH > 7 (in limited cases).

Totally Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) has recently been accepted as a treatment strategy for gastric cancer (GC). Aim: In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of TLG compared with laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) in GC. Methods: Feasible studies comparing the TLG and LAG published up to March 2019 were searched online. The data showing short-term and complication outcomes were extracted to be pooled and analyzed. Results: Thirty-four studies, including 7974 patients were eventually eligible. There was no statistically significant difference on operation time between the two groups (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.16 to 9.02, P = .47). The time of anvil insertion time was shorter in the TLG group compared with the LAG group (WMD = -1.87, 95% CI: -2.60 to -1.15, P < .01). The TLG was significantly superior to LAG in the comparison of less trauma. In terms of radical resection, the number of lymph nodes obtained by TLG was significantly more than that obtained by LAG (WMD = 2.65, 95% CI: 1.54-3.76, P < .01). The pooled meta-analysis suggested that the patients undergoing TLG had a quicker recovery and less pain. In the advanced gastric cancer gastrectomy, the TLG could receive a longer proximal margin compared with the LAG (WMD = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.48-0.95, P < .01). Regardless of the reconstruction method, the TLG was superior to the LAG in terms of surgical parameters and postoperative recovery. Like the LAG, the TLG was safe and advantageous. A lower risk trend of conversion to open laparotomy was observed in the TLG (relative risk [RR] = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.12-4.38, P = .72). The body mass index >25 kg/m² patients undergoing totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLGA) had a lower risk of overall complications (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.48-1.63, P = .69). The patients with early gastric cancer or Billroth-I anastomosis were suitable to undergo the TLG (a lower risk of anastomotic leakage [RR = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.23, P < .01] and gastralgia [RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.08-0.88, P = .03], respectively). Conclusions: The TLG was a safe and reliable procedure compared with the LAG with reduced trauma, faster recovery, and not more complications.

Efficacy of totally laparoscopic compared with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic radical gastrectomy is currently the most common surgical approach for gastric cancer. The main difference between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) is the route of digestive tract reconstruction. However, TLTG is currently not widespread as the safety and feasibility of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy is uncertain.

AIM

To compare the short-term efficacy of TLTG and LATG for radical gastrectomy of gastric cancer, and to determine the safety and feasibility of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched for all relevant articles regarding TLTG vs LATG for gastric cancer published up to October 1, 2019. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established. All the basic conditions of patients and important clinical data related to surgery were extracted, and a meta-analysis was performed with RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Eight studies involving a total of 1883 cases (869 cases in the TLTG group and 1014 cases in the LATG group) were included. Compared with the LATG group, reduced intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference = -35.37, 95%CI: -61.69 - -9.06, P = 0.008) and a larger number of retrieved lymph nodes (weighted mean difference = 3.11, 95%CI: -2.60 - 12.00, P = 0.01) were found in the TLTG group. There were no significant differences in operating time, anastomotic time, tumor size, proximal resection margin length, postoperative pain score, time to first flatus, time to first oral intake, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative anastomosis-related complication rate and overall complication rate between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy is safe and feasible. TLTG has the advantages of being minimally invasive, reduced intraoperative blood loss and easier access to lymph nodes compared with LATG. Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy is likely to be the surgical trend for gastric cancer in the future.

Comparison of the short-term outcomes between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) are two common surgical approaches for upper and middle gastric cancer. Which surgical approach offers more advantages is still controversial due to a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the short-term outcomes between the two surgical approaches.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to evaluate short-term outcomes between TLTG and LATG, including overall postoperative complications, anastomosis-related complications, time for anastomosis, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, proximal margin, distal margin, time to first flatus, time to first diet, and postoperative hospital stay. Short-term outcomes were pooled and compared by meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3. Mean differences (MDs) or risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 9 cohort studies fulfilled the selection criteria. The total sample included 1671 cases. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the two surgical approaches in overall postoperative complications (RR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.82 to 1.26, P = .87),anastomosis-related complications (RR = 0.64, 95%CI = 0.39 to 1.03, P = .06),time for anastomosis (MD = -5.13, 95% CI = -10.54 to 0.27, P = .06),operation time (MD = -10.68, 95% CI = -23.62 to 2.26, P = .11), intraoperative blood loss (MD = -25.58, 95% CI = -61.71 to 10.54, P = .17), harvested lymph nodes (MD = 1.61, 95% CI = -2.09 to 5.31, P = .39), proximal margin (MD = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.78 to 0.05, P = .09), distal margin (MD = 0.79, 95% CI = -0.57 to 2.14, P = .25), time to first flatus (MD = 0.01, 95% CI = -0.13 to 0.15, P = .87), time to first diet (MD = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.45 to 0.02, P = .07), and postoperative hospital stay (MD = -0.51, 95% CI = -1.10 to 0.07, P = .09).

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG is a safe and feasible surgical approach for upper and middle gastric cancer, with short-term outcomes that are similar to LATG. Nevertheless, high-quality, large-sample and multicenter RCTs are still required to further verify our conclusions.

Reduced anastomotic complications with intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy using endoscopic linear staplers (overlap method) in laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

With advances in surgical technique and instrumentation, intracorporeal anastomosis is increasingly being performed for laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). However, the benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis in reducing postoperative complications have not been demonstrated, although its technical feasibility has been proven in many studies. In this study, we investigated the impact of intracorporeal anastomosis in reducing postoperative complications after LTG.

METHODS

We analyzed 410 consecutive gastric cancer patients who underwent LTG between 2008 and 2018. Of these, 118 underwent intracorporeal anastomosis using linear staplers (overlap method), while 292 underwent extracorporeal anastomosis using a circular stapler. Short-term surgical outcomes including postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The two groups showed no significant differences in age, sex, comorbidity, and abdominal surgery history. D2 lymph node dissection was more frequently performed in the intracorporeal group because of the presence of more advanced cancer stages. The overall morbidity in the intracorporeal and extracorporeal group was 23.7% and 27.7%, respectively (p = 0.405). However, the intracorporeal group showed a significantly lower incidence of late complications (0.8% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.008). Concerning complications, the incidence of anastomotic bleeding (0% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.008) and anastomotic stenosis (0% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.024) was significantly lower in the intracorporeal group. In univariate and multivariate analyses, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and operative bleeding were independent predictive factors for postoperative complications in patients who underwent intracorporeal anastomosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Intracorporeal anastomosis using linear staplers reduced anastomotic bleeding and stenosis compared to extracorporeal anastomosis after LTG. Future research will be required to determine the ideal method for intracorporeal anastomosis in LTG.

Overlap method versus functional method for esophagojejunal reconstruction using totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EJ) is a useful method in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) for treating upper-third gastric cancer. The two methods of laparoscopic intracorporeal EJ-functional and overlap-have not been compared side-by-side in terms of safety and feasibility.

METHODS

Retrospective review and analysis of the data of 490 consecutive patients who underwent TLTG by either functional method (n = 365) or overlap (n = 125) method for upper- or middle-third gastric cancer was conducted between January, 2011 and May, 2018 at Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea). One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, the presence of comorbidity, number of comorbidities, clinical T stage, clinical nodal stage, clinical TNM stage, history of previous abdominal surgery, and combined surgery. After PSM, 244 patients were divided into functional method group and overlap method group (n = 122, each). The surgical outcomes and EJ-related complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of early surgical outcomes such as operative time, time to first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, transfusion during surgery, transfusion after surgery, and administration of analgesics. However, the pain score was significantly lower in overlap method group (6.21 ± 1.83) than functional method group (6.97 ± 2.09, p < 0.05). The overlap method was also associated with significantly fewer late complications (3.28% vs. 12.30%; p < 0.05), lower Clavien-Dindo classification grade (p < 0.05), and fewer EJ-related complications (0.82% vs. 6.56%; p < 0.05), as compared with the functional method.

CONCLUSION

The overlap method was safer and more feasible than the functional method for TLTG in gastric cancer patients, based on the finding of significantly lower incidence of EJ-related complications.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. A systematic review with meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analyses of studies comparing the totally laparoscopic procedures with intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) to laparoscopic-assisted surgery with extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in gastric resections.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search in the electronic databases. Outcomes analysed were: intraoperative (operative time and intraoperative blood loss), oncologic (harvested nodes, distance of the tumour from proximal and distal margin), postoperative complications (gastric stasis, intraluminal and extraluminal bleeding, leakage and wound infection) recovery (time to first flatus, time to first oral intake and hospital stay). We performed meta-regression analyses after implementing a regression model with the analysed outcomes as dependent variables (y) and the demographic and pathologic covariates as independent variables (x).

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies (20 on distal gastrectomy and 6 on total gastrectomy) were included in the final analysis. Regarding distal gastrectomy, there was no statistical difference between the two groups in the above-mentioned outcomes, except for intraoperative blood loss (less in IA group, P=0.003), number of harvested nodes (better in the IA group, P=0.022) and length of hospital stay (shorter in the IA group, P=0.037). Regarding total gastrectomy, there was no statistical difference for all outcomes, except for the distal margin (further in the EA group, P=0.040). Meta-regression analysis showed that a lot of variables influenced results in distal gastric resections, but not in total gastric resections.

CONCLUSION

We can state laparoscopic gastric resections with IA are safe and feasible when performed by expert surgeons. However, new well-designed studies comparing the two techniques are needed to confirm the benefits of laparoscopic IA.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) has been extensively employed for the removal of gastric tumors, although it has several limitations. Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) is a new technique that has rapidly been gaining popularity, and may help overcome the limitations of LATG; however, its safety and therapeutic effect remain controversial. In the present study, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of TLTG, and compare the short-term outcomes of TLTG and LATG.

METHODS

We searched for studies comparing TLTG and LATG published up to April 2018 from databases such as PubMed and Embase. The study results, including time of surgery, blood loss, anastomosis time, retrieved lymphatic nodes, proximal and distal resection edges, incision length, time to first fluid and soft diet, hospitalization duration, time to first flatus, and postsurgical and anastomotic complications, were compared between the procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included. TLTG led to reduced intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.01), greater number of retrieved lymphatic nodes (P < 0.01), decreased hospitalization duration (P < 0.01), reduced incision length (P = 0.05), and shorter time to first fluid diet (P < 0.05), as compared to LATG. The surgery and anastomosis times, time to first soft diet, resection edge, time to first flatus, overall postsurgical complications, and anastomosis-related complications were similar between TLTG and LATG (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG is a safe procedure that yields better cosmesis lower invasiveness, and faster recovery as compared to LATG.

Comparison of Intracorporeal and Extracorporeal Esophagojejunostomy after Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis Based on Short-Term Outcomes

Background:

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is increasingly performed in patients with gastric cancer. However, the usage of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (IEJ) following LTG is limited, as the safety and efficacy remain unclear. The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of IEJ following LTG.

Methods:

Studies published from January 1994 to January 2017 comparing the outcomes of IEJ and extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy (EEJ) following LTG were reviewed and collected from the PubMed, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Embase, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI). Operative results, postoperative recovery, and postoperative complications were compared and analyzed. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the Review Manager 5.3.

Results:

Seven nonrandomized studies with 785 patients were included. Compared with EEJ, IEJ has less blood loss (WMD: −13.52 ml; 95% CI: −24.82–−2.22; P = 0.02), earlier time to first oral intake (WMD: −0.49 day; 95% CI: −0.83–−0.14; P < 0.01), and shorter length of hospitalization (WMD: −0.62 day; 95% CI: −1.08–−0.16; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between IEJ and EEJ regarding the operation time, anastomotic time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, time to first flatus, anastomosis leakage rate, anastomosis stenosis rate, and proximal resections (all P > 0.05).

Conclusions:

Compared with EEJ, IEJ has better cosmesis, milder surgical trauma, and a faster postoperative recovery. IEJ can be performed as safely as EEJ. IEJ should be encouraged to surgeons with sufficient expertise.

Esophagojejunostomy Using the Purse-String Suturing Device After Laparoscopic Total or Proximal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Performing a safe esophagojejunostomy is important for the standardization of laparoscopic total gastrectomy. We have performed intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy by a circular stapler using the purse-string suturing device that we co-developed. The advantage of this device is that it makes use of the same surgical procedure as open surgery, but it does not depend on the surgeon's technical skills since this device does not require the laparoscopic hand-sewn technique. Furthermore, we have also adapted this device for double-tract reconstruction after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy. In this study, we present the surgical procedures and postoperative short-term outcomes that were obtained using this novel technique.

METHODS

We enrolled 94 patients that underwent intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy by circular stapler using our device after laparoscopic total or proximal gastrectomy for gastric cancer between November 2009 and October 2016.

RESULTS

Postoperative complications related to esophagojejunostomy were due to anastomotic stenosis in two cases (2.1%) and leakage of the jejunum stump in one case (1.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy by circular stapler using the purse-string suturing device is safe and feasible. This method can be one of the standard procedures for performing intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler in patients with gastric cancer: A single-center experience

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) with esophagojejunostomy using a linear stapler compared with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) using a circular stapler in gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 687 patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer at a single institution from August 2008 to August 2014. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of operation: 421 patients underwent TLTG and 266 underwent LATG. Clinicopathologic characteristics and surgical outcomes in the two groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

The TLTG group had higher mean ages at the time of operation (57.78 ± 11.20 years and 55.69 ± 11.96 years, P = 0.020) and more histories of abdominal surgery (20.2% and 12.4%, P = 0.008) compared with the LATG group. Surgical outcomes such as intraoperative and postoperative transfusions, combined operations, pain scores and administration of analgesics, and complications were similar between the two groups. However, compared with the LATG group, the TLTG group required a shorter operation time (149 min vs 170 min, P < 0.001), had lower postoperative hematocrit change (3.49% vs 4.04%, P = 0.002), less intraoperative events (3.1% vs 10.2%, P < 0.001), less intraoperative anastomosis events (2.4% vs 7.1%, P = 0.003), faster postoperative recovery such as median time to first flatus (3.30 d vs 3.60 d, P < 0.001), faster median commencement of soft diet (4.30 d vs 4.60 d, P < 0.001) and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (6.75 d vs 7.02 d, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The intracorporeal method for reconstruction of esophagojejunostomy using a linear stapler may be considered a feasible procedure comparing with extracorporeal anastomosis using circular stapler because TLTG is simpler and more straightforward than LATG. Therefore, TLTG can be recommended as an appropriate procedure for gastric cancer.

Digestive tract reconstruction using isoperistaltic jejunum-later-cut overlap method after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Short-term outcomes and impact on quality of life

AIM

To evaluate the short-term outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in gastric cancer patients undergoing digestive tract construction using the isoperistaltic jejunum-later-cut overlap method (IJOM) after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG).

METHODS

A total of 507 patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy (D2) from January 2014 to March 2016 were originally included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups to undergo digestive tract construction using either IJOM after TLTG (group T, n = 51) or Roux-en-Y anastomosis after laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) (group A, n = 456). The short-term outcomes and QoL were compared between the two groups after 1:2 propensity-score matching (PSM). We used a questionnaire to assess QoL.

RESULTS

Before matching, age, sex, tumor size, tumor location, preoperative albumin and blood loss were significantly different between the two groups (P < 0.05). After PSM, the patients were well balanced in terms of their clinicopathological characteristics, although both blood loss and in-hospital postoperative days in group T were significantly lower than those in group A (P < 0.05). After matching, group T reported better QoL in the domains of pain and dysphagia. Among the items evaluating pain and dysphagia, group T tended to report better QoL ("Have you felt pain" and "Have you had difficulty eating solid food") (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The IJOM for digestive tract reconstruction after TLTG is associated with reduced blood loss and less pain and dysphagia, thus improving QoL after laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Comparison of long-term survival and immediate postoperative liver function after laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Several studies have suggested no difference in the liver function of early gastric cancer (EGC) patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) between laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy. However, the number of patients and comparison of long-term survival rates between the two groups are limited. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term survival and immediate postoperative liver function of EGC patients with LC after laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical data of EGC patients with LC who had no other malignancy and underwent distal gastrectomy at Asan Medical Center between January 2005 and April 2013 were investigated retrospectively. All patients were divided into two groups: the open group (OG) and laparoscopic group (LG). The clinicopathologic data of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The number of patients in each group was 48 and 27 in the OG and LG, respectively. There were no significant differences in the age, sex ratio, ASA score, cause of liver cirrhosis, preoperative Child-Pugh classification, tumor location, TNM stage, total postoperative drain amount, albumin, total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, alanine aminotransferase, prothrombin time, morbidity and recurrence rate. Shorter hospital stay, longer operative time and more retrieved lymph nodes were observed in LG. The long-term overall survival rate was not different between the two groups (P = 0.356).

CONCLUSIONS

For EGC patients with liver cirrhosis, especially Child A cirrhosis, laparoscopic or laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy can be a safe surgical procedure in comparison to open distal gastrectomy in terms of the long-term survival rate and immediate postoperative liver function.

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for locally advanced middle-upper-third gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) for locally advanced middle-upper-third gastric cancer is becoming increasingly popular. The difficulty of TLTG for locally advanced middle-upper-third gastric cancer is laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy and the intracorporeal digestive tract reconstruction. We summed up a set of unique experience through clinical practice to simplify operation procedures.

METHODS

We performed TLTG with Huang's three-step maneuver in laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy and a later-cut overlap Roux-en-Y anastomosis in the intracorporeal digestive tract reconstruction for patients with locally advanced middle-upper-third gastric cancer. The Huang's three-step maneuver divided the complicated procedure of laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy into three steps, including the dissection of the lymph nodes (LNs) in the inferior pole region of the spleen (1st step), the region of the splenic artery trunk (2nd step), and the superior pole region of the spleen (3rd step). The later-cut overlap Roux-en-Y anastomosis used only endoscopic linear staplers intracorporeally and the small intestine was cut off after the esophagojejunostomy was completed, so that we could grasp the small intestine more easily and determine the direction of anastomosis more conveniently.

RESULTS

One patient experienced later anastomotic leakage and was successfully treated by conservative in 16 consecutive patients. No patient experienced any operation-related complications. At a median follow-up of 15 months, no patients had died or experienced recurrent or metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG with Huang's three-step maneuver in laparoscopic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy and a later-cut overlap Roux-en-Y anastomosis in the intracorporeal digestive tract reconstruction for locally advanced middle-upper-third gastric cancer was technically safe and feasible, with acceptable short-term outcomes.

An Isoperistaltic Jejunum-Later-Cut Overlap Method for Esophagojejunostomy Anastomosis After Totally Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy: A Safe and Feasible Technique

BACKGROUND

Intracorporeal anastomosis after totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) has been increasingly applied. 1-7 We assessed the intracorporeal isoperistaltic jejunum-later-cut overlap method (IJOM) for esophagojejunostomy anastomosis (EA).

METHODS

From January to June 2014, a total of 19 patients with resectable gastric cancer (cT1-T4aNOM0) underwent TLTG. IJOM was performed by creating side-to-side stapled anastomosis through enterotomies proximal to the left esophageal resection margin and on the antimesenteric jejunal border, 30 cm distal to the Trietz ligament. Conjoined enterotomies were sutured closed. The IJOM reduces jejunal motion and controls the EA direction. The biliary jejunal limb was transected ≤5 cm proximal to anastomosis, and a gastrografin esophagram was performed 5-7 days after the operation to diagnose anastomotic leakage. Follow-ups were performed every 3 months from the date of surgery to last follow-up by esophagram or computed tomography.

RESULTS

For the 19 patients, the esophagojejunostomy time was 26 min, and blood loss was 50 ml (interquartile ranges [IQRs] 22-31 and 50-60, respectively). There were no conversions to open surgery. Liquid intake and soft diet were initiated on days 4 and 7, respectively, for 37 and 53% of patients (n = 7 and 10; IQRs 4-5 and 7-8, respectively). One patient with abdominal infection had delayed oral intake (day 11). Hospitalization duration was 12 days (IQR 11-16), and no patients experienced anastomosis-related complications (i.e. anastomotic leakage, stricture, hemorrhage, dysphagia, or dilation) or recurrence at anastomosis during follow-up (19 months; IQR 18-20).

CONCLUSIONS

IJOM for EA after TLTG is feasible. These early results do not reveal a high complication rate but additional outcome monitoring is needed.

Totally laparoscopic versus laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy for upper and middle gastric cancer: a single-unit experience of 253 cases with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) is the most commonly used methods of laparoscopic gastrectomy for upper and middle gastric cancer. However, totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) is unpopular because reconstruction is difficult, especially for the intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy. We adopted TLTG with various types of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy. In this study, we compared LATG and TLTG to evaluate their outcomes.

METHODS

From March 2006 to September 2015, 253 patients with upper and middle gastric cancer underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG), 145 patients underwent LATG, and 108 patients underwent TLTG. The clinicopathological characteristics and postoperative outcomes were retrospectively compared between the two groups. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted.

RESULTS

The operation time and estimated blood loss were similar between the groups. There were no significant differences in first flatus, diet initiation, and postoperative hospital stay. The surgical complication rates were 17.2% (25/145) and 13.9% (15/108) in the LATG and TLTG groups, respectively. The meta-analysis also revealed no significant differences in the operation time, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus, length of hospital stay, overall, and anastomosis-related complications among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG is a feasible choice for gastric cancer patients, with comparable results to the LATG approach.

Laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery: Current evidence and future perspectives

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely accepted as a standard alternative for the treatment of early-stage gastric adenocarcinoma because of its favorable short-term outcomes. Although controversies exist, such as establishing clear indications, proper preoperative staging, and oncologic safety, experienced surgeons and institutions have applied this approach, along with various types of function-preserving surgery, for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. With technical advancement and the advent of state-of-the-art instruments, indications for laparoscopic gastrectomy are expected to expand as far as locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic gastrectomy appears to be promising; however, scientific evidence necessary to generalize this approach to a standard treatment for all relevant patients and care providers remains to be gathered. Several multicenter, prospective randomized trials in high-incidence countries are ongoing, and results from these trials will highlight the short- and long-term outcomes of the approach. In this review, we describe up-to-date findings and critical issues regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Use of a clinical pathway in laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM: To evaluate the implementation of a clinical pathway and identify clinical factors affecting the clinical pathway for laparoscopic gastrectomy.

METHODS: A standardized clinical pathway for gastric cancer (GC) patients was developed in 2001 by the GC surgery team at the Asan Medical Center. We reviewed the collected data of 4800 consecutive patients treated using the clinical pathway following laparoscopic gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for GC involving intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis. The patients were treated between August 2004 and October 2013 in a single institution. To evaluate the rate of completion and risk factors affecting dropout from the clinical pathway, we used a multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS: The overall completion rate of the clinical pathway for laparoscopic gastrectomy was 84.1% (n = 4038). In the comparison between groups of intracorporeal anastomosis and extracorporeal anastomosis patients, the completion rates were 83.88% (n = 1740) and 84.36% (n = 2071), respectively, showing no statistically significant difference. The main reasons for dropping out were postoperative complications (n = 463, 9.7%) and the need for patient observation (n = 299, 6.2%). Among the discharged patients treated using the clinical pathway, the number of patients who were readmitted within 30 d due to postoperative complications was 54 (1.1%). In a multivariate analysis, the intraoperative events (OR = 2.558) were the most predictable risk factors for dropping out of the clinical pathway. Additionally, being male (OR = 1.459), advanced age (OR = 1.727), total gastrectomy (OR = 2.444), combined operation (OR = 1.731), and ASA score (OR = 1.889) were significant risk factors affecting the dropout rate from the clinical pathway.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic gastrectomy appears to be a good indication for the application of a clinical pathway. For successful application, patients with risk factors should be managed carefully.

Comparison of outcomes after laparoscopy-assisted and open total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the results of laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy with those of open total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with gastric cancer who underwent total gastrectomy with curative intent in three Korean tertiary hospitals between January 2003 and December 2010 were included in this multicentre, retrospective, propensity score-matched cohort study. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to evaluate the association between operation method and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 753 patients with early gastric cancer were included in the study. There were no significant differences in the matched cohort for overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) for laparoscopy-assisted versus open total gastrectomy 0.96, 95 per cent c.i. 0.57 to 1.65) or recurrence-free survival (HR 2.20, 0.51 to 9.52). The patterns of recurrence were no different between the two groups. The severity of complications, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, was similar in both groups. The most common complications were anastomosis-related in the laparoscopy-assisted group (8.0 per cent versus 4.2 per cent in the open group; P = 0.015) and wound-related in the open group (1.6 versus 5.6 per cent respectively; P = 0.003). Postoperative death was more common in the laparoscopy-assisted group (1.6 versus 0.2 per cent; P = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer is feasible in terms of long-term results, including survival and recurrence. However, a higher postoperative mortality rate and an increased risk of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy are of concern.

Systematic review of anastomotic complications of esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy

AIM: To investigate the anastomotic complications of esophagojejunostomy (EJS) after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG), we reviewed retrospective studies.

METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed for studies published from January 1, 1994 through January 31, 2015. The search terms included “laparoscopic,”“total gastrectomy,” and “gastric cancer.” First, we selected 16 non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LTG with open total gastrectomy (OTG) and conducted an updated meta-analysis of anastomotic complications after total gastrectomy. The Newcastle-Ottawa scoring system (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the non-RCTs included in this study. Next, we reviewed anastomotic complications in 46 case studies of LTG to compare the various procedures for EJS.

RESULTS: The overall incidence of anastomotic leakage associated with EJS was 3.0% (30 of 984 patients) among LTG procedures and 2.1% (31 of 1500 patients) among OTG procedures in the 16 non-RCTs. The incidence of anastomotic leakage did not differ significantly between LTG and OTG (odds OR = 1.42, 95%CI: 0.86-2.33, P = 0.17, I² = 0%). Anastomotic stenosis related to EJS was reported in 72 (2.9%) of 2484 patients, and the incidence was 3.2% among LTG procedures and 2.7% among OTG procedures. The incidence of anastomotic stenosis related to EJS was slightly, but not significantly, higher in LTG than in OTG (OR = 1.55, 95%CI: 0.94-2.54, P = 0.08, I² = 0%). The various procedures for LTG were classified into six categories in the review of case studies of LTG. The incidence of EJS leakage was similar (1.1% to 3.2%), although the incidence of EJS stenosis was relatively high when the OrVil^TM device was used (8.8%) compared with other procedures (1.0% to 3.6%).

CONCLUSION: The incidence of anastomotic complications associated with EJS was not different between LTG and OTG. Anastomotic stenosis was relatively common when the OrVil^TM device was used.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of totally laparoscopic versus laparoscopic assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) has been developed in the hope of improving surgical quality and overcoming the limitations of conventional laparoscopic assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) 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 two operation types (LADG and TLDG) 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

Twelve non-randomized observational clinical studies involving 2,255 patients satisfied the eligibility criteria. Operative time was not statistically different between groups (P > 0.05). The number of retrieved lymph nodes and the resection margin length in TLDG were comparable with those in LADG. Estimated blood loss was significantly less in TLDG than that in LAG (P < 0.01). Compared to LADG, TLDG also involved lesser postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.01) and earlier time to soft diet intake (P < 0.05). Time to flatus and postoperative complications were similar for those two operative approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

TLDG may be a technically safe, feasible, and favorable approach in terms of better cosmesis, less blood loss, and faster recovery compared with LADG.

How much progress has been made in minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Korea?: a viewpoint from Korean prospective clinical trials

Gastric cancer is the most common cancer in Korea. Because the incidence of gastric cancer is still high even with early detection and because of developments in surgical instruments and technological advances, minimally invasive surgery has rapidly become an accepted treatment for gastric cancer in Korea. Many Korean gastric surgeons have contributed to the rapid adaptation of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: not only the Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group, but also other expert surgeons after the 2000s. Thanks to their vigorous efforts involving active learning, education, workshops, academic communications, and international communications with active laparoscopic gastric surgeons in Korea, numerous results and well-designed large-scale clinical studies have been published or are actively ongoing, thus increasing its wide acceptance as an option for gastric cancer. Now, Korea has become one of the leading countries using minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer. This review article will summarize the current status and issues, as well as the clinical trials that have finished or are ongoing, regarding minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Korea.

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: literature review and comparison of the procedure of esophagojejunostomy

There has been a recent increase in the use of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) for gastric cancer. However, there is no scientific evidence to determine which esophagojejunostomy (EJS) technique is the best. In addition, both short- and long-term oncological results of TLTG are inconsistent. We reviewed 25 articles about TLTG for gastric cancer in which at least 10 cases were included. We analyzed the short-term results, relationships between EJS techniques and complications, long-term oncological results, and comparative study results of TLTG. TLTG was performed in a total of 1170 patients. The mortality rate was 0.7%, and the short-term results were satisfactory. Regarding EJS techniques and complications, circular staplers (CSs) methods were significantly associated with leakage (4.7% vs. 1.1%, p < 0.001) and stenosis (8.3% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001) of the EJS as compared with the linear stapler method. The long-term oncological prognosis was acceptable in patients with early gastric cancers and without metastases to lymph nodes. Although TLTG tended to increase surgical time compared with open total gastrectomy and laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy, it reduced intraoperative blood loss and was expected to shorten postoperative hospital stay. TLTG is found to be safer and more feasible than open total gastrectomy and laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy. At present, there is no evidence to encourage performing TLTG for patients with advanced gastric cancer from the viewpoint of long-term oncological prognosis. Although the current major EJS techniques are CS and linear stapler methods, in this review, CS methods are significantly associated with leakage and stenosis of the EJS.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopy-assisted and open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) and open total gastrectomy (OTG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews was performed to identify studies that compared LATG and OTG. The following factors were checked: operating time, blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, flatus time, hospital stay, mortality and morbidity. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.1 software.

RESULTS: Nine studies with 1221 participants were included (436 LATG and 785 OTG). Compared to OTG, LATG involved a longer operating time [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 57.68 min, 95%CI: 30.48-84.88; P < 0.001]; less blood loss [standard mean difference (SMD) = -1.71; 95%CI: -2.48 - -0.49; P < 0.001]; earlier time to flatus (WMD= -0.76 d; 95%CI: -1.22 - -0.30; P < 0.001); shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.67 d; 95%CI: -3.96 - -1.38, P < 0.001); and a decrease in medical complications (RR = 0.41, 95%CI: 0.19-0.90, P = 0.03). The number of harvested lymph nodes, mortality, surgical complications, cancer recurrence rate and long-term survival rate of patients undergoing LATG were similar to those in patients undergoing OTG.

CONCLUSION: Despite a longer operation, LATG can be performed safely in experienced surgical centers with a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications than open surgery.

The short-term outcome in esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma patients receiving total gastrectomy: laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy--a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the quality of life in Siewert type II esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma patients receiving either laparoscopic total gastrectomy or open total gastrectomy.

METHODS

From Sep 1, 2008 to May 1, 2012, totally 204 consecutive patients with Siewert type II esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma were involved in this retrospective study. Patients were assigned to receive either laparoscopic total gastrectomy or open total gastrectomy. Details concerning the postoperative outcomes and the quality of life questionnaire were collected and compared.

RESULTS

Totally 104 patients were involved in the open gastrectomy group and 100 in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group. No differences were noted between the groups in demographics, blood loss, anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, hospital stay, reoperation and in-hospital mortality. Totally 188 cases of patients (92.16%) responded to the questionnaire measures during the entire follow-up period, including 93 (93%) in the laparoscopic group and 95 (91.35%) in the open group. The score of every scale and item in laparoscopic group improved much more quickly comparing with the open group, suggesting that patients in laparoscopic group recovered much more quickly than those in open group.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy could lead to a significant improvement of the short-term benefits for patients with esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma as compared with open group.