Robotic Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Cohort Study of 5402 Patients in China

Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a high-volume center retrospective study with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Although neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) can benefit patient survival, few studies have compared the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for AGC after NAT.

METHODS

The clinical data of 321 AGC patients who received NATs and who underwent robotic gastrectomy (RG, n = 109) or laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG, n = 212) between May 2017 and September 2022 were collected and analyzed retrospectively at our center. After propensity score matching (PSM) for 1:1 matching to eliminate bias, both groups had 106 cases. Short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival-related indicators were compared between the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 212 patients were included in the groups after matching. There were fewer overall complications (13.2% vs. 28.3%, P = 0.007) and surgical complications (8.5% vs. 17.9%, P = 0.043) in the RG group than in the LG group. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had more harvested overall lymph nodes (35.25 ± 4.99 vs. 31.45 ± 6.31, P < 0.001) and more suprapancreatic lymph nodes (13.12 ± 4.38 vs. 10.05 ± 4.13, P < 0.001). Patients in the RG group had significantly shorter surgery times (217.62 ± 47.49 vs. 267.25 ± 70.68, P < 0.001) and less blood loss (46.51 ± 27.02 vs. 70.75 ± 37.25, P < 0.001) than patients in the LG group. The RG group had significantly faster bowel function recovery, earlier liquid diet, and shorter hospital stay. Compared with LG, RG had a better 3-year RFS (75.5% vs. 62.3%, P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery significantly increased the number of lymph node dissected, reduced intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative surgical complications rate. Although RG did not statistically improve 3-year overall survival, there was a significant improvement in RFS and could be an alternative surgical method for GC patients after NAC.

Association of low skeletal muscle mass and radiodensity with clinical outcomes in patients undergoing robotic radical gastric cancer surgery: a population-based retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia (defined as low skeletal muscle index - SMI) and myosteatosis (defined as low skeletal muscle radiodensity - SMD) associate with poor outcomes in gastric cancer, but their impact after robotic surgery is unknown.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed 381 gastric cancer patients undergoing robotic surgery from December 2019 to October 2022. Sarcopenia and myosteatosis were assessed on preoperative CT scans. Outcomes were postoperative complications, mortality, survival, and recurrence. Multivariable regression and propensity score matching examined associations.

RESULTS

The mean age at diagnosis was 58.5 ± 10.8 years, and 69.3% (262/381) were male. Low SMI or Low SMD independently associated with more complications (odds ratio[OR] = 3.36, 95%CI: 2.08-5.43; OR = 2.49,95%CI: 1.48-4.19, respectively), unplanned ICU admission (OR = 1.51, 95%CI: 1.22-8.44; OR = 2.00; 95%CI: 1.23-8.89, respectively) or 30-day mortality (OR = 5.89, 95%CI: 1.80-14.23; OR = 7.34; 95%CI: 2.43-18.67, respectively). Concurrent sarcopenia and myosteatosis heightened risks of complications (OR = 7.29, 95%CI: 1.62-42.30), severe complications (OR = 6.67, 95%CI: 2.22-12.68), 30-day mortality (OR = 9.55, 95%CI: 2.67-33.89), and reduced survival (hazard ratio[HR] = 3.09, 95%CI: 1.77-8.60).

CONCLUSIONS

Sarcopenia and myosteatosis independently and additively associate with increased postoperative complications, mortality, and worse prognosis after robotic gastric cancer surgery. Identifying sarcopenia and myosteatosis preoperatively could inform risk assessments and guide management to improve surgical outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy using propensity score matching method: Data of 5-year period in a Korean high-volume gastric cancer center

INTRODUCTION

Despite the theoretical advantages of Robotic gastrectomy (RG) over laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), the benefit of RG compared to LG remains controversial. To address this controversy, we evaluated the outcomes of RG compared to LG in the high-volume gastric cancer center.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study enrolled patients of RG and LG from January 2013 to December 2017 using propensity score matching. Results of operation, and overall survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

For RG, 268 patients were enrolled, and 733 patients with LG were matched. The four gastric methods were matched at the following ratios; Distal gastrectomy (RG: 35.8 % vs LG: 38.7 %), Total gastrectomy (RG: 16.0 % vs LG: 13.9 %), Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy (RG: 46.3 % vs LG: 44.7 %), Proximal gastrectomy (RG: 1.9 % vs LG: 2.6 %) The median number of retrieved lymph nodes (RG: 36.0 vs LG: 37.0, p = 0.247) and supra-pancreatic lymph nodes (RG: 8.0 vs LG: 7.0, p = 0.647), showed no difference. No difference was observed in complications (RG: 21.3 % vs LG: 21.4 %, p = 1.000), and severe complications (RG: 13.1 % vs LG: 12.7 %, p = 0.961) The 5-year overall survival was not significantly different (RG: 94.8 % vs LG: 93.1 %, hazard ratio: 0.76, 95 % confidence interval: 0.41-1.40, p = 0.379).

CONCLUSION

Our study observed no advantage in RG compared to LG regarding short-term and oncologic outcomes. To take advantage of RG, developing new articulating efficient devices would be necessary.

The artificial intelligence revolution in gastric cancer management: clinical applications

Nowadays, gastric cancer has become a significant issue in the global cancer burden, and its impact cannot be ignored. The rapid development of artificial intelligence technology is attempting to address this situation, aiming to change the clinical management landscape of gastric cancer fundamentally. In this transformative change, machine learning and deep learning, as two core technologies, play a pivotal role, bringing unprecedented innovations and breakthroughs in the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis evaluation of gastric cancer. This article comprehensively reviews the latest research status and application of artificial intelligence algorithms in gastric cancer, covering multiple dimensions such as image recognition, pathological analysis, personalized treatment, and prognosis risk assessment. These applications not only significantly improve the sensitivity of gastric cancer risk monitoring, the accuracy of diagnosis, and the precision of survival prognosis but also provide robust data support and a scientific basis for clinical decision-making. The integration of artificial intelligence, from optimizing the diagnosis process and enhancing diagnostic efficiency to promoting the practice of precision medicine, demonstrates its promising prospects for reshaping the treatment model of gastric cancer. Although most of the current AI-based models have not been widely used in clinical practice, with the continuous deepening and expansion of precision medicine, we have reason to believe that a new era of AI-driven gastric cancer care is approaching.

Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted early-onset gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Early-onset gastric cancer (EOGC) is a distinct subtype of gastric cancer with increasing incidence, characterized by unique clinical and pathological features. This propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study aims to compare the perioperative safety and outcomes of EOGC patients who underwent laparoscopic versus robotic radical gastrectomy, providing a scientific basis for surgical treatment of EOGC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included 252 patients diagnosed with EOGC at or before the age of 45, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic radical gastrectomy between January 2015 and April 2021. After propensity score matching, 47 patients in the robotic surgery group and 94 in the laparoscopic surgery group were compared. The study evaluated intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, pathological results, and long-term survival.

RESULTS

The robotic surgery group showed less intraoperative bleeding (50 ml vs. 100 ml, p = 0.042) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (6 days vs. 7 days, p = 0.008) compared to the laparoscopic group. The number of positive lymph nodes was higher in the robotic group (median 2 vs. 1, p = 0.016), but the number of lymph nodes harvested did not significantly differ. No significant differences were found in overall survival (3-year OS: 65.9% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.596) and disease-free survival (3-year DFS: 61.4% vs. 61.7%, p = 0.765) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic resection for EOGC is non-inferior to laparoscopic surgery in terms of perioperative outcomes and long-term prognosis. This study suggests that robotic surgery may be a viable option for the treatment of EOGC.

Minimally Invasive Distal Gastrectomy: Evolving Surgical Techniques

Surgical management of gastric cancer has evolved over the years. Incorporation of minimally invasive techniques has led to shorter hospital stays, reduced wound complications, and earlier return to functional activity. Nevertheless, the development of minimally invasive total gastrectomy as a repertoire in the management of proximal or diffuse gastric cancer requires significant commitment and support owing to the complexity of the procedure. Here the authors describe the evolution of total gastrectomy with particular focus on laparoscopic and robotic approaches. In addition, they outline the data comparing minimally invasive total gastrectomy with traditional open surgical approaches.

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.

Construction and validation of a nomogram prediction model for the occurrence of complications in patients following robotic radical surgery for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

In the last two decades, robotic-assisted gastrectomy has become a widely adopted surgical option for gastric cancer (GC) treatment. Despite its popularity, postoperative complications can significantly deteriorate patient quality of life and prognosis. Therefore, identifying risk factors for these complications is crucial for early detection and intervention.

OBJECTIVE

This research is designed to construct and validate a predictive model for assessing the risk of postoperative complications in patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 500 GC patients from Gansu Provincial People's Hospital between December 2016 and October 2023. These patients formed the training cohort. An additional 136 patients from the 940th Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force, the Chinese People's Liberation Army as the external validation cohort. Patients were categorized into groups with and without complications. Data collected included demographic details, laboratory results, CT quantitative body composition analysis, and clinical information. Variable selection was conducted through Lasso regression, succeeded by multivariable logistic regression to pinpoint independent risk factors. These elements facilitated the construction of a nomogram for prediction. The model's performance underwent internal validation via bootstrap techniques and external validation through a validation cohort. The efficacy of the model was quantified by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), evaluated for calibration using calibration curves and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test, and assessed for clinical utility through decision curve analysis (DCA).

RESULTS

Of the 500 patients in the training cohort, 65 experienced complications, a rate of 13%. The validation cohort had a similar complication rate of 13.24% (18 out of 136 patients). Independent risk factors identified included tumor diameter (OR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.07-3.73), TNM stage III (OR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.03-4.36), ASA class I (OR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.13-0.53), ASA class III (OR = 4.75, 95% CI = 2.12-10.62), and visceral fat area (VFA) (OR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.10-5.79). The nomogram demonstrated good discrimination (AUC = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.76-0.87) in internal validation and (AUC = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.67-0.90) in external validation. Both validations confirmed the model's accurate calibration and significant clinical utility, with net benefits observed at probability thresholds ranging from 2 to 79% and 2-71%.

CONCLUSION

The developed nomogram, based on five independent risk factors-tumor diameter, TNM stage III, ASA class I, ASA class III, and VFA-effectively predicts the risk of complications in patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical gastrectomy, offering a valuable tool for clinical decision-making.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A Comprehensive and Comparative Review of Global Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines: 2024 Update

Differences in demographics, medical expertise, and patient healthcare resources across countries have led to significant variations in guidelines. In light of these differences, in this review, we aimed to explore and compare the most recent updates to gastric cancer treatment from five guidelines that are available in English. These English-version guidelines, which have been recently published and updated for journal publication, include those published in South Korea in 2024, Japan in 2021, China in 2023, the United States in 2024, and Europe in 2024. The South Korean and Japanese guidelines provide a higher proportion of content to endoscopic and surgical treatments, reflecting their focus on minimally invasive techniques, function-preserving surgeries, and systemic therapy. The Chinese guidelines provide recommendations addressing not only surgical approaches but also perioperative chemotherapy and palliative systemic therapy. Meanwhile, in the United States and European guidelines, a higher proportion of the content is dedicated to perioperative and palliative systemic therapy, aligning with their approaches to advanced-stage disease management. All guidelines address surgical and systemic chemotherapy treatments; however, the proportion and emphasis of content vary based on the patient distribution and treatment approaches specific to each country. With emerging research findings on gastric cancer treatment worldwide, the national guidelines are being progressively revised and updated. Understanding the commonalities and differences among national guidelines, along with the underlying evidence, can provide valuable insights into the treatment of gastric cancer.

Comparison of short‑term outcomes and 3-year overall survival between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing use of robotic gastrectomy (RG) as an alternative to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer, controversy remains over the advantages of RG compared to LG and there is a paucity of studies comparing the two techniques regarding patient survival.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, 675 patients undergoing minimally invasive gastrectomy were recruited from January 2016 to January 2018 (LG: n = 567; RG: n = 108). A one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was applied to minimize the selection bias due to confounding factors, yielding 104 patients in each of the RG and LG groups. After matching, the short-term outcomes and 3-year overall survival were compared in the two groups.

RESULTS

The PSM cohort analysis showed a similar 3-year overall survival between RG and LG groups (p = .249). Concerning the short-term outcomes, the RG compared to LG resulted in lower blood loss (p = .01), lower postoperative complications (p = .001), lower postoperative pain (p = .016), earlier initiation of soft diet (p = .011), shorter hospital stay ‌(p = .012), but higher hospitalization expenses (p = .001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that RG may offer advantages in terms of blood loss, surgical complications, recovery time, and pain management compared to LG while maintaining similar overall survival rates. However, RG is associated with higher hospital costs, potentially limiting its wider adoption. Further research, including large, multi-center randomized controlled trials with longer patient follow-up, particularly for advanced gastric cancer, is needed to confirm these findings.

Current clinical trials on gastric cancer surgery in China

Gastric cancer (GC) is the leading diagnosed malignancy worldwide, especially in China. Radical surgery is the cornerstone of GC treatment. We reviewed previous clinical trials and aimed to provide an update on the factors related to the surgical treatment of GC. The number of registered clinical trials in the field of GC surgery is rapidly increasing. With the development and popularization of endoscopic, laparoscopic, and robotic techniques, GC surgery has gradually entered a new era of precise minimally invasive surgery. Postoperative quality of life has become a major issue in addition to surgical oncological safety. Although great progress has been made in clinical research on GC in China, there are still deficiencies. Many studies enrolled large numbers of patients, but the research data were not of high quality. The characteristics of GC in China include a high incidence, large population, and large proportion of patients with advanced GC, which provides sufficient reason for studying this disease. There is still a need for well-designed, large, randomized clinical trials to improve our knowledge of the surgical treatment of GC.

Body image and quality of life undergoing totally robotic versus robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy: a retrospective propensity score matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

With the improvement of anastomotic techniques and the iteration of anastomotic instruments, robotic intracorporeal suturing has become increasingly proficient. The era of fully intracorporeal anastomosis in robotic gastric cancer resection is emerging. This study aims to explore the impact of totally robotic distal gastrectomy (TRDG) and robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) on patients' quality of life.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study is a comparative retrospective study of propensity score matching. This study included 306 patients who underwent robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer between June 2016 and December 2023 at our center. Covariates used in the propensity score included sex, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumour diameter, degree of histological differentiation, Pathological TNM stage, Pathological T stage, Pathological N stage, and Lauren classification. Outcome measures included operative time, intraoperative bleeding, time to first venting, time to first fluid intake, postoperative hospital stay, total hospitalization cost, total length of abdominal incision, postoperative complications, inflammatory response, body image, and quality of life.

RESULTS

According to the results of the study, compared with the RADG group, the TRDG group had a faster recovery time for gastrointestinal function (P = 0.025), shorter length of abdominal incision (P < 0.001), fewer days in the hospital (P = 0.006) less pain (P < 0.001), less need for additional analgesia (P = 0.013), and a postoperative white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content indexes were lower (P<0.001). In addition, the TRDG group had significantly better body imagery and cosmetic scores (P = 0.015), physical function (P = 0.039), role function (P = 0.046), and global function (P = 0.021) than the RARS group. Meanwhile, the TRDG group had milder symptoms of fatigue (P = 0.037) and pain (P < 0.001). The PASQ Total Subscale Score (P < 0.001) and Global Subscale Score (P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the TRDG group than in the RADG group at postoperative 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Totally robotic distal gastrectomy has a smaller incision, faster gastrointestinal recovery time, fewer days of postoperative hospitalization, and lower inflammatory markers than robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy. At the same time, postoperative cosmetic and quality of life outcomes were satisfactory. Clinically, these benefits translate to enhanced patient recovery, reduced surgical trauma, and better postoperative outcomes. These findings could guide surgeons in selecting more effective surgical approaches for patients undergoing gastrectomy, leading to better overall patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Impact of robotic gastrectomy in patients with primary T3 or more advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic surgery (RS) for gastric cancer (GC) has been rapidly increasing. However, the utility of RS for advanced GC (AGC), especially T3 or more AGC, is unclear.

METHODS

Ninety patients who underwent curative upfront minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (D2 lymph node dissection) for fStage II or III GC were enrolled in this study. Among these patients, 68 underwent MIS for T3 or more AGC. Thirty-six patients underwent RS, and 32 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery (LS). The short-term and long-term surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In the T3 or more AGC cohort, there were no significant intergroup differences in the operative time or blood loss volume. The number of retrieved lymph nodes tended to be higher in the RS than LS group (38.5 vs. 33.0, p = .11). The drain amylase content on postoperative day 1 was significantly lower in the RS than LS group (243.5 vs. 521.0 IU/L, p < .01). The morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2) was similar between the groups. There were no significant differences between the LS and RS groups in the 3-year overall survival rate (80.7% vs. 74.5%, respectively; p = .95) or 3-year disease-free survival rate (75.0% vs. 69.7%, respectively; p = .95).

CONCLUSIONS

RS for primary T3 or more AGC was safe and contributed to similar short-term and long-term outcomes compared with LS.

Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score matching studies

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of robot distal gastrectomy (RDG) versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for gastric cancer. Studies included only those that utilized propensity score matching (PSM). A systematic literature search was conducted in several major global databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar, up to June 2024. Articles were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Baseline data and primary and secondary outcome measures (e.g., operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph-node yield dissection, length of hospital stay, and time to first flatus) were extracted. The quality of PSM studies was assessed using the ROBINS-I, and data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.4.1 software. A total of 12 propensity score-matched studies involving 3688 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Robot-assisted surgery resulted in a longer operative time (WMD 30.64 min, 95% CI 15.63 - 45.66; p < 0.0001), less estimated blood loss (WMD 29.54 mL, 95% CI - 47.14 - 11.94; p = 0.001), more lymph-node yield (WMD 5.14, 95% CI 2.39 - 7.88; p = 0.0002), and a shorter hospital stay (WMD - 0.36, 95% CI - 0.60 - 0.12; p = 0.004) compared with laparoscopic surgery. There were no significant differences between the two surgical methods in terms of time to first flatus, overall complications, and major complications. Robot distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer reduces intraoperative blood loss, increases lymph-node yield, and shortens hospital stay compared with laparoscopic surgery, despite a longer operative time. There are no significant differences in time to first flatus and complication rates between the two groups.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) is increasingly used as a surgical approach for gastric cancer. This study assessed the effectiveness of RAMIG and studied which stages of the IDEAL-framework (1 = Idea, 2A = Development, 2B = Exploration, 3 = Assessment, 4 = Long-term follow-up) were followed.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, Embase, Pubmed, and Web of Science were searched for studies on RAMIG up to January 2023. Data collection included the IDEAL-stage, demographics, number of participants, and study design. For randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and long-term studies, data on intra-, postoperative, and oncologic outcomes, survival, and costs of RAMIG were collected and summarized.

RESULTS

Of the 114 included studies, none reported the IDEAL-stage. After full-text reading, 18 (16%) studies were considered IDEAL-2A, 75 (66%) IDEAL-2B, 4 (4%) IDEAL-3, and 17 (15%) IDEAL-4. The IDEAL-stages were followed sequentially (2A-4), with IDEAL-2A studies still ongoing. IDEAL-3 RCTs showed lower overall complications (8.5-9.2% RAMIG versus 17.6-19.3% laparoscopic total/subtotal gastrectomy), equal 30-day mortality (0%), and equal length of hospital stay for RAMIG (mean 5.7-8.5 days RAMIG versus 6.4-8.2 days open/laparoscopic total/subtotal gastrectomy). Lymph node yield was similar across techniques, but RAMIG incurred significantly higher costs than laparoscopic total/subtotal gastrectomy ($13,423-15,262 versus $10,165-10,945). IDEAL-4 studies showed similar or improved overall/disease-free survival for RAMIG.

CONCLUSION

During worldwide RAMIG implementation, the IDEAL-framework was followed in sequential order. IDEAL-3 and 4 long-term studies showed that RAMIG is similar or even better to conventional surgery in terms of hospital stay, lymph node yield, and overall/disease-free survival. In addition, RAMIG showed reduced postoperative complication rates, despite higher costs.

Long-term survival outcomes of robotic total gastrectomy for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy is a safe and feasible approach for gastric cancer (GC); however, its long-term oncological efficacy remains unclear. The authors evaluated the long-term survival outcomes and recurrence patterns of patients with locally advanced proximal GC who underwent robotic total gastrectomy (RTG).

METHODS

This prospective study (FUGES-014 study) enrolled 48 patients with locally advanced proximal GC who underwent RTG between March 2018 and February 2020 at a tertiary referral teaching hospital. Patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) in the FUGES-002 study were enrolled in a 2:1 ratio to compare the survival outcomes between RTG and LTG. The primary endpoint of the FUGES-014 study was postoperative 30-day morbidity and has been previously reported. Here, the authors reported the results of 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 3-year overall survival (OS), and recurrence patterns.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 48 patients in the RTG and 96 patients in the LTG groups were included. The 3-year DFS rates were 77.1% (95% CI: 66.1-89.9%) for the RTG and 68.8% (95% CI: 60.1-78.7%) for the LTG groups ( P =0.261). The 3-year OS rates were not significantly different between the groups (85.4 vs. 74.0%, P =0.122). Recurrence occurred in nine patients (18.8%) in the RTG and 27 (28.1%) patients in the LTG groups ( P =0.234). Recurrence patterns and causes of death were similar between the groups ( P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The oncological outcome of RTG was noninferior to that of LTG. Thus, RTG might be an alternative surgical treatment for locally advanced proximal GC.

Impact of preoperative sarcopenia on postoperative complications and prognosis in patients undergoing robotic gastric cancer surgery: A propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia, defined as decreased muscle mass and function, correlates with postoperative morbidity and mortality in cancer surgery. However, sarcopenia's impact specifically following robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer has not been clearly defined. This study aimed to determine the influence of sarcopenia on short- and long-term clinical outcomes after robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 381 gastric cancer patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. Sarcopenia was diagnosed by preoperative computed tomography (CT) body composition analysis. Propensity score matching created 147 pairs of sarcopenia and nonsarcopenia patients for comparison. Outcomes included postoperative complications, survival, inflammatory markers, length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Sarcopenia patients exhibited significantly higher rates of overall (53.7% versus 21.1%, P < 0.001), serious (12.9% versus 4.1%, P = 0.007), and grade III-IV complications compared to nonsarcopenia pairs after matching. Sarcopenia independently predicted reduced 3-years overall (HR = 2.53, 95% CI: 1.19-5.40, P = 0.016) and disease-free survival (HR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.09-3.66, P = 0.026). Sarcopenia patients also showed heightened postoperative leukocyte, neutrophil, platelet, platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), and monocyte to lymphocyte ratio (MLR) levels alongside suppressed lymphocytes, monocytes, and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative sarcopenia is correlated with increased postoperative complications and poorer long-term survival in gastric cancer patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. Sarcopenia assessment can optimize preoperative risk stratification and perioperative management in this population.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Distal gastrectomy (DG) with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer is routinely performed. In this meta-analysis, we present an updated overview of the perioperative and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic DG (LDG) and robotic DG (RDG) to compare their safety and overall outcomes in patients undergoing DG. An extensive search was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from the establishment of the database to June 2023 for randomized clinical trials comparing RDG and LDG. The primary outcome was operative results, postoperative recovery, complications, adequacy of resection, and long-term survival. We identified twenty studies, evaluating 5,447 patients (1,968 and 3,479 patients treated with RDG and LDG, respectively). We observed no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the proximal resection margin, number of dissected lymph nodes, major complications, anastomosis site leakage, time to first flatus, and length of hospital stay. The RDG group had a longer operative time (P < 0.00001), lesser bleeding (P = 0.0001), longer distal resection margin (P = 0.02), earlier time to oral intake (P = 0.02), fewer overall complications (P = 0.004), and higher costs (P < 0.0001) than the LDG group. RDG is a promising approach for improving LDG owing to acceptable complications and the possibility of radical resection. Longer operative times and higher costs should not prevent researchers from exploring new applications of robotic surgery.

Comparison of totally robotic and totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

With the improvements in laparoscopic or robotic surgical techniques and instruments, a growing number of surgeons have attempted to complete all digestive tract reconstruction intracorporeally; these procedures include totally robotic gastrectomy (TRG) and totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the TRG and compare the short-term outcomes of the TRG and TLG in patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2018 and June 2023, 346 consecutive patients who underwent TRG or TLG at a high-volume academic gastric cancer specialty center were included. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce confounding bias. The surgical outcomes, postoperative morbidity, and surgical burden were compared in PSM cohort.

RESULTS

After PSM, a well-balanced cohort of 194 patients (97 in each group) was included in the analysis. The total operation time of the TRG group was significantly longer than that of the TLG group (244.9 vs. 213.0 min, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the effective operation time between the 2 groups (217.8 vs. 207.2 min, P = 0.059). The digestive tract reconstruction time of the TRG group was significantly shorter than that of the TLG group (39.4 vs. 46.7 min, P < 0.001). The mean blood loss in the TRG group was less than that in the TLG group (101.1 vs. 126.8 mL, P = 0.014). The TRG group had more retrieved lymph nodes in the suprapancreatic area than that in the TLG group (16.6 vs 14.2, P = 0.002). The TRG group had a lower surgery task load index (38.9 vs. 43.1, P < 0.001) than the TLG group. No significant difference was found in terms of postoperative morbidity between the 2 groups (14.4% vs. 16.5%, P = 0.691).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that TRG is a safe and feasible procedure, and is preferable to TLG in terms of invasion and ergonomics. The TRG may maximize the superiority of robotic surgical systems and embodies the theory of minimally invasive surgery.

Robotic gastrectomy was reliable option for overweight patients with gastric cancer: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive surgery using robotics versus laparoscopy in resectable gastric cancer patients with a high body mass index (BMI) remains controversial.

METHODS

A total of 482 gastric adenocarcinoma patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 who underwent minimally invasive radical gastrectomy between August 2016 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, including 109 cases in the robotic gastrectomy (RG) group and 321 cases in the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) group. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1:1 ratio was performed, and the perioperative outcomes, lymph node dissection, and 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were compared.

RESULTS

After PSM, 109 patients were included in each of the RG and LG groups, with balanced baseline characteristics. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had similar intraoperative estimated blood loss [median (IQR) 30 (20-50) vs. 35 (30-59) mL, median difference (95%CI) - 5 (- 10 to 0)], postoperative complications [13.8% vs. 18.3%, OR (95%CI) 0.71 (0.342 to 1.473)], postoperative recovery, total harvested lymph nodes [(34.25 ± 13.43 vs. 35.44 ± 14.12, mean difference (95%CI) - 1.19 (- 4.871 to 2.485)] and textbook outcomes [(81.7% vs. 76.1%, OR (95%CI) 1.39 (0.724 to 2.684)]. Among pathological stage II-III patients receiving chemotherapy, the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy in the RG group was similar to that in the LG group [median (IQR): 28 (25.5-32.5) vs. 32 (27-38.5) days, median difference (95%CI) - 3 (- 6 to 0)]. The 3-year OS (RG vs. LG: 80.7% vs. 81.7%, HR = 1.048, 95%CI 0.591 to 1.857) and DFS (78% vs. 76.1%, HR = 0.996, 95%CI 0.584 to 1.698) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RG conferred comparable lymph node dissection, postoperative recovery, and oncologic outcomes in a selected cohort of patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: a randomized phase 2 trial

Robotic surgery may be an alternative to laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer (GC). However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the differences in survival between these two approaches are currently lacking. From September 2017 to January 2020, 300 patients with cT1-4a and N0/+ were enrolled and randomized to either the robotic (RDG) or laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) group (NCT03313700). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS); secondary endpoints reported here are the 3-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence patterns. The remaining secondary outcomes include intraoperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, quality of lymphadenectomy, and cost differences, which have previously been reported. There were 283 patients in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (RDG group: n = 141; LDG group: n = 142). The trial has met pre-specified endpoints. The 3-year DFS rates were 85.8% and 73.2% in the RDG and LDG groups, respectively (p = 0.011). Multivariable Cox regression model including age, tumor size, sex, ECOG PS, lymphovascular invasion, histology, pT stage, and pN stage showed that RDG was associated with better 3-year DFS (HR: 0.541; 95% CI: 0.314-0.932). The RDG also improved the 3-year cumulative recurrence rate (RDG vs. LDG: 12.1% vs. 21.1%; HR: 0.546, 95% CI: 0.302-0.990). Compared to LDG, RDG demonstrated non-inferiority in 3-year DFS rate.

Comparison of Short-term and Three-year Oncological Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes of RG over LG have not yet been effectively demonstrated.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 3599 patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy at eight high-volume hospitals in China from January 2015 to June 2019. Propensity score matching was performed between patients who received RG and LG. The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity score matching, 1034 pairs of patients were enrolled in a balanced cohort for further analysis. The 3-year DFS in the RG and LG was 83.7% and 83.1% ( P =0.745), respectively, and the 3-year overall survival was 85.2% and 84.4%, respectively ( P =0.647). During 3 years of follow-up, 154 patients in the RG and LG groups relapsed (cumulative incidence of recurrence: 15.0% vs 15.0%, P =0.988). There was no significant difference in the recurrence sites between the 2 groups (all P >0.05). Sensitivity analysis showed that RG had comparable 3-year DFS (77.4% vs 76.7%, P =0.745) and overall survival (79.7% vs 78.4%, P =0.577) to LG in patients with advanced (pathologic T2-4a) disease, and the recurrence pattern within 3 years was also similar between the 2 groups (all P >0.05). RG had less intraoperative blood loss, lower conversion rate, and shorter hospital stays than LG (all P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For resectable gastric cancer, including advanced cases, RG is a safe approach with comparable 3-year oncological outcomes to LG when performed by experienced surgeons.

Gastric Cancer Surgery: Balancing Oncological Efficacy against Postoperative Morbidity and Function Detriment

Significant progress has been made in the surgical management of gastric cancer over the years, and previous discrepancies in surgical practice between different parts of the world have gradually lessened. A transition from the earlier period of progressively more extensive surgery to the current trend of a more tailored and evidence-based approach is clear. Prophylactic resection of adjacent anatomical structures or neighboring organs and extensive lymph node dissections that were once assumed to increase the chances of long-term survival are now performed selectively. Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely adopted and its indications have steadily expanded, from early cancers located in the distal part of the stomach, to locally advanced tumors where total gastrectomy is required. In parallel, function-preserving surgery has also evolved and now constitutes a valid option for early gastric cancer. Pylorus-preserving and proximal gastrectomy have improved the postoperative quality of life of patients, and sentinel node navigation surgery is being explored as the next step in the process of further refining the minimally invasive concept. Moreover, innovative techniques such as indocyanine green fluorescence imaging and robot-assisted gastrectomy are being introduced in clinical practice. These technologies hold promise for enhancing surgical precision, ultimately improving the oncological and functional outcomes.

Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes After Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Radical Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer in Elderly Individuals: A Propensity Score-Matching Study

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been widely used to treat gastric cancer. However, whether the short-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy are superior to those of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer has not been reported.

METHODS

The study enrolled of 594 elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer who underwent robotic or laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. The RG cohort was matched 1:3 with the LG cohort using propensity score-matching (PSM).

RESULTS

After PSM, 121 patients were included in the robot group and 363 patients in the laparoscopic group. Excluding the docking and undocking times, the operation time of the two groups was similar (P = 0.617). The RG group had less intraoperative blood loss than the LG group (P < 0.001). The time to ambulation and first liquid food intake was significantly shorter in the RG group than in the LG group (P < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications did not differ significantly between the two groups (P = 0.14). Significantly more lymph nodes were dissected in the RG group than in the LG group (P = 0.001). Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy was started earlier in the RG group than in the LG group (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

For elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer, RG is safe and feasible. Compared with LG, RG is associated with less intraoperative blood loss; a faster postoperative recovery time, allowing a greater number of lymph nodes to be dissected; and earlier adjuvant chemotherapy.

The incidence of surgical site infections in China

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common type of healthcare-associated infection. We performed a literature review to demonstrate the incidence of SSIs in mainland China based on studies since 2010. We included 231 eligible studies with ≥30 postoperative patients, comprising 14 providing overall SSI data regardless of surgical sites and 217 reporting SSIs for a specific site. We found that the overall SSI incidence was 2.91% (median; interquartile range: 1.05%, 4.57%) or 3.18% (pooled; 95% confidence interval: 1.85%, 4.51%) and the SSI incidence varied remarkably according to the surgical site between the lowest (median, 1.00%; pooled, 1.69%) in thyroid surgeries and the highest (median, 14.89%; pooled, 12.54%) in colorectal procedures. We uncovered that Enterobacterales and staphylococci were the most common types of micro-organisms associated with SSIs after various abdominal surgeries and cardiac or neurological procedures, respectively. We identified two, nine, and five studies addressing the impact of SSIs on mortality, the length of stay (LOS) in hospital, and additional healthcare-related economic burden, respectively, all of which demonstrated increased mortality, prolonged LOS, and elevated medical costs associated with SSIs among affected patients. Our findings illustrate that SSIs remain a relatively common, serious threat to patient safety in China, requiring more action. To tackle SSIs, we propose to establish a nationwide network for SSI surveillance using unified criteria with the aid of informatic techniques and to tailor and implement countermeasures based on local data and observation. We highlight that the impact of SSIs in China warrants further study.

Clinical Impact of Polyglycolic Acid Mesh to Reduce Pancreas-Related Complications After Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

PURPOSE

Prevention of pancreas-related complications after gastric cancer surgery is critical. Polyglycolic acid (PGA) mesh reduces postoperative pancreatic fistula formation following pancreatic resection. However, the clinical efficacy of PGA mesh in gastric cancer surgery has not been adequately investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study compared the short-term outcomes between two groups: patients who underwent minimally invasive R0 gastrectomy for gastric cancer with the use of a PGA mesh (PGA group) and those without the use of a PGA mesh (non-PGA group) at the Cancer Institute Hospital, Tokyo, between January 2019 and May 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to adjust for the possible confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 834 patients were initially included, of whom 614 (307 in each group) remained after PSM. The amylase levels in the drained abdominal fluid on postoperative days 1 and 3 were similar between the PGA and non-PGA groups. The PGA group had a significantly lower incidence of pancreas-related complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2 than that in the non-PGA group (6.8% vs. 2.9%, P=0.025). In subgroup analyses, the odds ratio for pancreas-related complications appeared to be better in the PGA group than in the non-PGA group in patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification score of 2 or 3, those operated via a laparoscopic approach, and those undergoing procedures other than proximal gastrectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PGA mesh significantly reduced pancreas-related complications after minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and might thus benefit patients at risk of such complications.

Emerging multi-port soft tissue robotic systems: a systematic review of clinical outcomes

Multiple novel multi-port robotic surgical systems have been introduced into clinical practice. This systematic review aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of these novel robotic systems to conventional laparoscopic technique and established da Vinci robotic surgical platforms. A literature search of Embase, Medline, Pubmed, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines from 2012 to May 2023. Studies comparing clinical outcomes of novel multi-port robotic surgical systems with laparoscopic or the da Vinci platforms were included. Case series with no comparison groups were excluded. Descriptive statistics were used to report patient and outcome data. A systematic narrative review was provided for each outcome. Twelve studies comprised of 1142 patients were included. A total of 6 novel multi-port robotic systems: Micro Hand S, Senhance, Revo-i MSR-5000, KangDuo, Versius, and Hugo™ RAS were compared against the laparoscopic or the da Vinci robotic platforms. Clinical outcomes of these novel robotic platforms were comparable to the established da Vinci platforms. When compared against conventional laparoscopic approaches, the robotic platforms demonstrated lower volume of blood loss, shorter length of stay but longer operative time. This systematic review highlighted the safe implementation and efficacy of 6 new robotic systems. The clinical outcomes achieved by these new robotic systems are comparable to the established da Vinci robotic system in simple to moderate case complexities. There is emerging evidence that these new robotic systems provide a viable alternative to currently available robotic platforms.

First clinical experiences of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using the hinotori™ surgical robot system

BACKGROUND

Although the da Vinci™ Surgical System is the most predominantly used surgical robot worldwide, other surgical robots are being developed. The Japanese surgical robot hinotori™ Surgical Robot System was launched and approved for clinical use in Japan in November 2022. We performed the first robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using hinotori in the world. Here, we report our initial experience and evaluation of the feasibility and safety of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using hinotori.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective study was conducted. Between November 2022 and October 2023, 24 patients with gastric cancer underwent robotic gastrectomy with hinotori. Five ports, including one for an assistant, were placed in the upper abdomen, and gastric resection with standard lymphadenectomy and intracorporeal reconstruction were performed. The primary endpoint was the postoperative complication rate within 30 days after surgery. The secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes, including intraoperative adverse events, operative time, blood loss, and the number of dissected nodes.

RESULTS

Of the 24 patients, 16 (66.7%) were male. The median age and body mass index were 73.5 years and 22.9 kg/m2, respectively. Twenty-three patients (95.8%) had tumors in the middle to lower stomach. Sixteen (66.7%) and seven (29.2%) patients had clinical stage I and II diseases, respectively. Twenty-three (95.8%) patients underwent distal gastrectomy. No patient had postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo classification IIIa or higher, whereas two (8.3%) had the grade II complications (enteritis and pneumonia). No intraoperative adverse events, including conversion to other approaches, were observed. All patients received R0 resection. The median operative and console times were 400 and 305 min, respectively. The median blood loss was 14.5 mL, and the number of lymph nodes dissected was 51.5.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that robotic gastrectomy with standard lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer using hinotori can be safely performed.

Long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this multicentre cohort study was to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy by robotic or laparoscopic approaches from 1 March 2010 to 31 December 2018 at 10 high-volume centres in China were selected from institutional databases. Patients receiving RG were matched 1 : 1 by propensity score with patients undergoing LG. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes were overall survival and disease recurrence.

RESULTS

Some 2055 patients who underwent RG and 4309 patients who had LG were included. The propensity score-matched cohort comprised 2026 RGs and 2026 LGs. Median follow-up was 41 (i.q.r. 39-58) months for the RG group and 39 (38-56) months for the LG group. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 80.8% in the RG group and 79.5% in the LG group (log rank P = 0.240; HR 0.92, 95% c.i. 0.80 to 1.06; P = 0.242). Three-year OS rates were 83.9 and 81.8% respectively (log rank P = 0.068; HR 0.87, 0.75 to 1.01; P = 0.068) and the cumulative incidence of recurrence over 3 years was 19.3% versus 20.8% (HR 0.95, 0.88 to 1.03; P = 0.219), with no difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

RG and LG in patients with gastric cancer are associated with comparable disease-free and overall survival.

Short- and long-term comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients with BMI≥30 kg/m2: A propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric patients has gained popularity in recent decades, reports on the comparison of short and long clinical outcomes between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer patients with BMI≥30 kg/m2 are still limited.

METHODS

A total of 226 obese gastric cancer patients who underwent either RG (n = 81) or LG (n = 145) were enrolled in this study between October 2014 and September 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) was performed to reduce confounding bias. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between the RG and LG groups.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics of 156 patients in the RG group (n = 79) and LG group (n = 79) were well balanced after PSM. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had a significantly shorter operation time, less estimated blood loss, more harvested lymph nodes, a faster postoperative recovery course, reduced surgical morbidity, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. The long-term outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RG is a safe and feasible approach for gastric cancer with a BMI≥30 kg/m2 and has better short-term clinical outcomes than LG. However, RG is similar to LG in terms of long-term prognosis.

The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): Clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer, 2023

The 2023 update of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) Clinical Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on standardizing cancer diagnosis and treatment in China, reflecting the latest advancements in evidence-based medicine, healthcare resource availability, and precision medicine. These updates address the differences in epidemiological characteristics, clinicopathological features, tumor biology, treatment patterns, and drug selections between Eastern and Western gastric cancer patients. Key revisions include a structured template for imaging diagnosis reports, updated standards for molecular marker testing in pathological diagnosis, and an elevated recommendation for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III gastric cancer. For advanced metastatic gastric cancer, the guidelines introduce new recommendations for immunotherapy, anti-angiogenic therapy and targeted drugs, along with updated management strategies for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive and deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) patients. Additionally, the guidelines offer detailed screening recommendations for hereditary gastric cancer and an appendix listing drug treatment regimens for various stages of gastric cancer. The 2023 CSCO Clinical Guidelines for Gastric Cancer updates are based on both Chinese and international clinical research and expert consensus to enhance their applicability and relevance in clinical practice, particularly in the heterogeneous healthcare landscape of China, while maintaining a commitment to scientific rigor, impartiality, and timely revisions.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma in the US: a propensity score-matching analysis of 11,173 patients on oncological adequacy

INTRODUCTION

Surgery remains the cornerstone treatment for gastric cancer. Previous studies have reported better lymphadenectomy with minimally invasive approaches. There is a paucity of data comparing robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy in the US. Herein, we examined whether oncological adequacy differs between laparoscopic and robotic approaches.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was utilized to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019. A propensity score-matching analysis between robotic gastrectomy (RG) versus laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) was performed. The primary outcomes were lymphadenectomy ≥ 16 nodes and surgical margins.

RESULTS

A total of 11,173 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019. Of those 8320 underwent LG and 2853 RG. Comparing the unmatched cohorts, RG was associated with a higher rate of adequate lymphadenectomy (63.5% vs 57.1%, p < .0.0001), higher rate of negative margins (93.8% vs 91.9%, p < 0.001), lower rate of prolonged length of stay (26.0% vs 29.6%, p < .0.001), lower 90-day mortality (3.7% vs 5.0%, p < 0.0001), and a better 5-year overall survival (OS) (56% vs 54%, p = 0.03). A propensity score-matching cohort with a 1:1 ratio was created utilizing the variables associated with lymphadenectomy ≥ 16 nodes. The matched analysis revealed that the rate of adequate lymphadenectomy was significantly higher for RG compared to LG, 63.5% vs 60.4% (p = 0.01), respectively. There was no longer a significant difference between RG and LG regarding the rate of negative margins, prolonged length of stay, 90-day mortality, rate of receipt of postoperative chemotherapy, and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

This propensity score-matching analysis with a large US cohort shows that RG was associated with a higher rate of adequate lymphadenectomy compared to LR. RG and LG had a similar rate of negative margins, prolonged length of stay, receipt of postoperative chemotherapy, 90-day mortality, and OS, suggesting that RG is a comparable surgical approach, if not superior to LG.

Oncological Adequacy of Laparoscopic Surgery for Bulky Gastric Cancer: Results of a Western Single-Center Series

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is increasing worldwide and one million new cases were estimated globally in 2020. Use of the laparoscopic approach is increasing especially for subtotal gastrectomy. However, to date, solid data on locally advanced bulky tumors are lacking. The aim of this study is to assess the role of laparoscopic surgery in bulky gastric tumors.

METHODS

We performed an observational retrospective single-center analysis. The following data were collected and analyzed for each patient: demographics, tumor-related data, intra-operative data, peri-operative data, and pathological data. Statistical analysis was conducted, including descriptive statistics and chi-squared test, to analyze the differences between categorical variables.

RESULTS

O the 116 patients who underwent gastric surgery, 49 patients were included in the study protocol. All patients had bulky gastric tumors. Eighteen patients underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy and 31 open gastrectomy. The median number of lymph nodes removed was 28.5 (15-46) in the laparoscopic group and 23.05 (6-62) in the open group (p = 0.04). In total, 5.6% of patients of the laparoscopic group had <16 lymph nodes harvested and 35.5% in the open group (p = 0.035). No statistical differences were found between the open and laparoscopic groups in terms of surgical margins (p = 0.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is still a subject of debate in locally advanced bulky gastric cancer. Limited data are available concerning Western patients. This study showed superiority in terms of the quality of lymphadenectomy and non-inferiority in terms of radical resection margins.

Feasibility of articulating laparoscopic instruments in laparoscopic gastrectomy using propensity score matching

Advancements in minimally invasive surgery has led to the development of several surgical instruments, including the ArtiSential®. This new instrument provides a greater range of motion and improved dexterity to laparoscopic procedures, making it an alternative option to traditional straight instruments, and the Da Vinci robot system. The purpose of this study is to compare the postoperative outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy using articulating instruments with those of a historical cohort of patients who underwent the same procedure using straight instruments. The study was designed as a prospective observational cohort study matched to a retrospective historical cohort using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the rate of early complications within 90 days of surgery. Other outcomes included the operation time, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus, time to first soft fluid diet, hospital stay, and mortality. After propensity score matching, 41 patients were enrolled in both groups. The mean age was 62.4 ± 12.3 years in the conventional group and 63.5 ± 9.6 years in the artisential group (p = 0.647). Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the artisential group compared to the conventional group (136.1 min vs. 163.9 min, p = 0.032). The time to first soft fluid diet was also significantly shorter in the artisential group (2.2 days vs. 2.8 days, p = 0.030), but there was no significant difference in the time to first flatus and overall hospital stay. The incidence of early complications was lower in the artisential group, but the difference was not significant (24.4% vs 7.3%, p = 0.070). There was no mortality in either group. The use of articulating instruments for laparoscopic gastrectomy did not increase postoperative morbidity compared to straight laparoscopic instruments. The use of articulating instruments may be associated with faster bowel recovery and less early complications.

Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic approaches to gastrectomy: a National Cancer Database study

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is associated with significant mortality worldwide. Radical gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy is considered the only curative option. Traditionally, these operations are associated with significant morbidity. Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and more recently robotic gastrectomy (RG) techniques have been developed to potentially decrease the perioperative morbidity. We sought to compare oncologic outcomes with laparoscopic and robotic techniques for gastrectomy.

METHODS

Utilizing the National Cancer Database we identified patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma. Patients were stratified by open, robotic or laparoscopic surgical technique. Open gastrectomy patients were excluded.

RESULTS

We identified 1,301 patients who underwent RG and 4,892 LG with median ages of 65 (20-90) and 66 (18-90) respectively, p = 0.02. The mean number of positive lymph nodes were higher in the LG 2.2 ± 4.4 vs RG 1.9 ± 3.8, p = 0.01. The R0 resections were higher in the RG at 94.5% vs 91.9% in LG, p = 0.001. Conversions to open were 7.1% in the RG and 16% in the LG group, p < 0.001. The median length of hospitalization was 8 (6-11) in both groups. There was no difference in the 30-day readmission (p = 0.65), 30-day mortality (p = 0.85) and 90-day mortality (p = 0.34) between groups. The median and overall 5-year survival was 71.3 mo and 56% in the RG and 66.1 mo and 52% in the LG, p = 0.03. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, location of gastric cancer, histology grade, pathologic T-stage, pathologic N-stage, surgical margins, and facility volume were all predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are both acceptable approaches to gastrectomy. However, conversions to open are higher and R0 resections rates are lower in the laparoscopic group. Additionally, a survival benefit is demonstrated in those undergoing robotic gastrectomy.

Trends of Oncological Quality of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in the United States

Background

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been increasingly used for treatment of gastric cancer in the United States. However, it is unknown if there has been a nationwide improvement of short-term safety outcomes and oncological quality metrics over time.

Methods

We used the National Cancer Database to identify patients who underwent major gastrectomy from 2010 through 2018. The short-term safety outcomes and oncological metrics were compared between cases of open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), and RG. We also compared the indications and outcomes of RG between the three periods (2010 - 2012, 2013 - 2015, and 2016 - 2018).

Results

Of the 22,445 patients included, 1,867 (8%) underwent RG. Number of RG continued to increase from only 37 cases performed in 2010 to 412 cases performed in 2018. The number of lymph nodes (LNs) examined (OG, 16; LG, 17; and RG, 19) and the R0 rate (OG, 88%; LG, 92%; and RG 94%) were better for RG than for OG or LG (P < 0.001). In the RG group, the number of LNs examined (first period, 15; third period, 18; P < 0.001), R0 rate (first period, 88.6%; third period, 91.1%; P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (first period, 9 days; third period, 8 days; P < 0.001), 30-day readmission rate (first period, 10.1%; third period, 7.9%; P < 0.001), and 90-day mortality (first period, 7.3%; third period, 6.0%; P = 0.003) continued to improve cohort over time. The ratio of the robotic cases performed in academic institutions gradually increased (first period, 48.6%; third period, 54.3%; P < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, RG was associated with more than 15 LNs being examined (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34 - 1.65; P < 0.001). The indications for RG appeared expanding to include more advanced stage, high comorbidity, and patients who underwent preoperative therapy.

Conclusions

RG has been increasingly performed in the past decade. Although its indication was expanded to include more advanced tumors, we found that the oncological quality metrics and safety outcomes of RG have improved over time and were better than those of OG or LG.

Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a prospective trial-based economic evaluation

IMPORTANCE

It is largely unclear whether robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) is cost-effective for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG), and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with LAGC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, LDG, and ODG.

EXPOSURES

RDG, LDG, and ODG.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

This pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials included 449 patients: 117, 254, and 78 patients in the RDG, LDG, and ODG groups, respectively. After IPTW, RDG demonstrated its priority in terms of less blood loss, postoperative length, and complication rate (all P < 0.05). RDG also showed higher QOL with more cost, representing an ICER of $85,739.73 per QALY and $42,189.53 per QALY compared to LDG and ODG, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RDG achieved the best cost-effectiveness for patients with LAGC only when the willingness-to-pay threshold was > $85,739.73 per QALY, which significantly exceeded 3 times Chinese per capita GDP. Furthermore, one of the most important factors was the indirect costs of robotic surgery in terms of the cost-effectiveness of RDG compared to that of LDG or ODG.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although improved short-term outcomes and QOL were seen in patients underwent RDG, the economic burden should be considered in the clinical decision-making regarding robotic surgery use for patients with LAGC. Our findings may vary in different health care settings and affordability. Trial registration CLASS-01 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, CT01609309) and FUGES-011 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03313700).

Long-term oncologic and surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for Siewert II/III esophagogastric junction carcinoma: A propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the short-term surgical and long-term survival outcomes after robotic gastrectomy (RG) or laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for patients with Siewert type II and III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 84 and 312 patients with Siewert type II/III AEG who underwent RG or LG between January 2005 and September 2016 in our center. We performed a 1:2 matched propensity score matching (PSM) analysis between the RG and LG group for clinical features to reduce confounding bias. Additionally, the long- and short-term outcomes between the RG and LG group were compared.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics of 246 patients (RG group: n = 82; LG group: n = 164) were well balanced after PSM. Patients in the RG group showed less estimated blood loss, less time to first flatus, less time to first ambulation, less drainage tube removed time, and retrieved more lymph nodes than the LG group. The overall complication rate was comparable between the RG and LG groups. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 44.4% in the RG group and 43.7% in the LG group (p = 0.898). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 43.2% in the RG group and 43.2% in the LG group (p = 0.990). The RG and LG groups exhibited a similar recurrence rate and pattern within 5 years after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic gastrectomy could be a feasible and safe option for patients with Siewert II/III AEG in terms of surgical and oncologic outcomes.

Safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) has been used in the minimally invasive surgical treatment of gastric cancer, but the research on advanced gastric cancer (AGC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has not been reported. This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of RADG versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) after NAC for AGC.

METHODS

This was a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis from February 2020 and March 2022. Patients who underwent RADG or LDG for AGC (cT3-4a/N +) following NAC were enrolled and a propensity score-matched analysis was performed in a 1:1 manner. The patients were divided into RADG group and LDG group. The clinicopathological characteristics and short-term outcomes were observed.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 67 patients each in the RADG and LDG groups. RADG was associated with a lower intraoperative blood loss (35.6 vs. 118.8 ml, P = 0.014) and more retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) (50.7 vs. 39.5, P < 0.001), more extraperigastric (18.3 vs. 10.4, P < 0.001), and suprapancreatic LNs (16.33 vs. 13.70, P = 0.042). The RADG group showed lower VAS scores at postoperative 24 h (2.2 vs 3.3, P = 0.034), earlier ambulation (1.3 vs. 2.6, P = 0.011), aerofluxus time (2.2 vs. 3.6, P = 0.025), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (8.3 vs. 9.8, P = 0.004). There were no significant differences in the operative time (216.7 vs.194.7 min, P = 0.204) and postoperative complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RADG may be a potential therapeutic option for patients with AGC after NAC considering its advantages in perioperative period compared with LDG.

Indocyanine Green Tracer-Guided Radical Robotic Distal Gastrectomy Using the Firefly™ System Improves the Quality of Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study investigated indocyanine green (ICG) as an intraoperative tool for improving lymph node dissection quality in radical robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) for gastric cancer by comparing the rate of lymph node (LN) noncompliance with or without use of the Firefly™ system.

METHODS

Patients with potentially resectable gastric cancer including cT1-T4a, N0/ + , M0 were registered in a prospective nonrandomized cohort study at our institution between March 2019 and December 2022. Patients were assigned to the da Vinci surgical system with Firefly system (F group) or that without Firefly system (non-F group). F group patients received endoscopic peritumoral injection of ICG to the submucosa one day before surgery. Rate of LN noncompliance, number of harvested LNs, and short-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 94 patients in this study, 55 underwent Firefly system-guided RDG and 39 underwent conventional RDG. The mean [SD] total number of harvested lymph nodes in F group, 31.2 [10.2], was significantly higher than that harvested in non-F group (25.6 [12.6]; p = 0.026). The LN noncompliance rate in F group was lower than that in non-F group (32.7% vs. 61.5%, p = 0.006). The mean number of LNs harvested in F group was significantly higher than that harvested in non-F group (31.2 [10.2] vs. 25.7 [12.6], p = 0.02). Significant differences were found between the F vs. non-F groups in blood loss and postoperative hospital stay (83.9 [75.1] vs. 301.9 [766.7] mL; p = 0.003 and 13.4 vs. 17.4 days, p = 0.049).

CONCLUSION

The Firefly system-assisted ICG tracer improved LN dissection quality without compromising safety.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic distal gastrectomy performed by the same surgical team during the same period

Objective

To evaluate the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and robotic distal gastrectomy performed during the same period.

Methods

This study enrolled 46 cases of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and 67 cases of robotic distal gastrectomy that were performed by a single surgeon between April 2020 to October 2021. Baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes of these two groups were then compared. Moreover, the robotic distal gastrectomy group was further divided into two subgroups according to the learning curve. Finally, the baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes of both subgroups were compared with the laparoscopic group, respectively.

Results

The baseline characteristics and short-term outcomes of the LDG group and RDG group were comparable. In contrast, the operation time in the laparoscopic group was significantly shorter than that in the early experience robotic group (191.3 ± 37.6 VS 225.1 ± 49, P=0.001). However, the operation time (191.3 ± 37.6 VS 185.3 ± 25.3, P=0.434) was comparable between the laparoscopic group and the late experience robotic group. Likewise, the bleeding volume was comparable between the laparoscopic and early experience robotic groups. However, bleeding volume was significantly lower in the late experience robotic group compared to that in the laparoscopic group (37.5 ± 18.8 VS 49.2 ± 29.0, P=0.049).

Conclusions

With surgeons stepping into the stable stage of the robotic learning curve, RDG showed a comparable operation time and lower volume of blood loss compared with LDG. Collectively, our study supports the application of robotic distal gastrectomy in patients diagnosed with gastric cancer.

Five-year long-term comparison of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large single-center cohort study

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been reported to be technically feasible and safe for patients with gastric cancer. However, 5-year long-term survival and recurrence outcomes for advanced gastric cancer have rarely been reported. This study aimed to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes between RG and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS

The general clinicopathological data of 1905 consecutive patients who underwent RG and LG were retrospectively collected at the Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital between November 2011 and October 2017. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match groups. The primary endpoints were 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

After PSM, a well-balanced cohort of 283 patients in the RG group and 701 patients in the LG group were included in the analysis. The 5-year cumulative DFS rates were 67.28% in the robotic group and 70.41% in the laparoscopic group. The 5-year OS rate was 69.01% in the robotic group and 69.58% in the laparoscopic group. No significant differences in Kaplan-Meier survival curves for DFS (HR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.83-1.39, Log-rank P = 0.557) and OS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.78-1.34, Log-rank P = 0.850) were observed between the 2 groups. In the subgroup analyses for potential confounding variables, there were no significant differences in 5-year DFS and 5-year OS survival between the 2 groups (P > 0.05), except for patients with pathological stage III and pathological stage N3 (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

For patients with early gastric cancer, robotic and laparoscopic approaches have similar long-term survival. For patients with advanced gastric cancer, further studies need to be conducted to assess the long-term survival outcomes of RG.

The Learning Curve Study of Robotic Distal Gastrectomy: an Analysis of Outcomes of the First 67 Consecutive Cases at a High-Volume Gastric Center

BACKGROUND

Robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) is performed increasingly; a sound understanding of the learning curve in robotic distal gastrectomy has taken on great importance METHODS: Data on the 67 RDG cases were collected from one surgeon with rich experience in laparoscopic gastrectomy. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis based on operative time was used to identify inflexion points.

RESULTS

Thirty-five cases, on average, were needed to complete operation time-learning curve sufficiently. A reduction in surgical time was observed in the last 32 cases compared with the first 35 cases (185.3 ± 25.3 min vs. 225.1 ± 49 min, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience can master robotic distal gastrectomy techniques after some training.

The Role of Surgery in the Management of Gastric Cancer: State of the Art

Surgery still represents the mainstay of treatment of all stages of gastric cancer (GC). Surgical resections represent potentially curative options in the case of early GC with a low risk of node metastasis. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and indocyanine green fluorescence are novel techniques which may improve the employment of stomach-sparing procedures, ameliorating quality of life without compromising oncological radicality. Nonetheless, the diffusion of these techniques is limited in Western countries. Conversely, radical gastrectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodal treatment represents a valid option in the case of advanced GC. Differences between Eastern and Western recommendations still exist, and the optimal multimodal strategy is still a matter of investigation. Recent chemotherapy protocols have made surgery available for patients with oligometastatic disease. In this context, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy via HIPEC or PIPAC has emerged as an alternative weapon for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In conclusion, the surgical management of GC is still evolving together with the multimodal strategy. It is mandatory for surgeons to be conscious of the current evolution of the surgical management of GC in the era of multidisciplinary and tailored medicine.

Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients

BACKGROUND

Studies on surgical outcomes after robotic surgery are increasing; however, long-term oncological results of studies comparing robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are still limited. This study aimed to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes of RADG and LADG for the treatment of AGC.

METHODS

A total of 1164 consecutive AGC patients undergoing RADG or LADG were enrolled between January 2015 and October 2021. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize selection bias. The perioperative and oncological outcomes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Patient's characteristics were comparable between the two groups after PSM. RADG group represented a longer operative time (205.2 ± 43.1 vs 185.3 ± 42.8 min, P < 0.001), less operative blood loss (139.3 ± 97.8 vs 167.3 ± 134.2 ml, P < 0.001), greater retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) number (31.4 ± 12.1 vs 29.4 ± 12.3, P = 0.015), more retrieved LNs in the supra-pancreatic areas (13.4 ± 5.0 vs 11.4 ± 5.1, P < 0.001), and higher medical costs (13,608 ± 4326 vs 10,925 ± US $3925, P < 0.001) than LADG group. The overall complication rate was 13.7% in the RADG group and 16.6% in the LADG group, respectively; the difference was not significantly different (P = 0.242). In the subgroup analysis, the benefits of RADG were more evident in high BMI patients. Moreover, the 3-year overall survival (75.5% vs 73.1%, P = 0.471) and 3-year disease-free survival (72.9% vs 71.4%, P = 0.763) were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RADG appears to be a safe and feasible procedure and could serve as an alternative treatment for AGC in experienced centers.

Benefits of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer

We read with great interest the article that retrospectively analyzed 814 patients with primary gastric cancer, who underwent minimally invasive R0 gastrectomy between 2009 and 2014 by grouping them in laparoscopic vs robotic procedures. The results of the study highlighted that age, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, gastrectomy type and pathological T and N status were the main prognostic factors of minimally invasive gastrectomy and showed how the robotic approach may improve long-term outcomes of advanced gastric cancer. According to most of the current literature, robotic surgery is associated with a statistically longer operating time when compared to open and laparoscopic surgery; however, looking at the adequacy of resection, defined by negative surgical margins and number of lymph nodes removed, it seems that robotic surgery gives better results in terms of the 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival. The robotic approach to gastric cancer surgery aims to overcome the difficulties and technical limitations of laparoscopy in major surgery. The three-dimensional vision, articulation of the instruments and good ergonomics for the surgeon allow for accurate and precise movements which facilitate the complex steps of surgery such as lymph node dissection, esophagus-jejunal anastomosis packaging and reproducing the technical accuracy of open surgery. If the literature, as well as the analyzed study, offers us countless data regarding the short-term oncological results of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, satisfactory data on long-term follow-up are lacking, so future studies are necessary.

Robot-assisted tumorectomy for an unusual pelvic retroperitoneal leiomyoma: A case report

RATIONALE

Extrauterine leiomyoma occasionally occurs in rare locations with unusual growth patterns, especially pelvic retroperitoneal leiomyoma, which brings great challenges for surgeons to make a diagnosis. It is essential to distinguish benign from malignant retroperitoneal neoplasms according to the imaging manifestations. Laparotomy and laparoscopy are the common options for pelvic retroperitoneal neoplasms, while they may cause side effects during operation such as secondary damage. Appropriate surgical techniques should be adopted to ensure the complete excision of neoplasms meanwhile preserve the urination, defecation, and sexual function.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 30-year-old woman was referred to our hospital because of dull pain in the perianal region for 1 month. Laboratory results including tumor markers were all within normal limits. The digital rectal examination revealed a huge and tough mass with smooth mucosa protruding into the rectal cavity from the rear area of rectum.

DIAGNOSIS

Imaging examinations were performed. Contrasted computed tomography (CT) of pelvis showed an enhanced retroperitoneal solid mass in the space between sacrum and rectum, and very close to the levator ani muscle. The mass was about 11.0*8.0 cm in size. Computerized tomography angiography (CTA) showed the distal branches of bilateral internal iliac artery went into the mass. Endoscopic ultrasonography (US) showed the mass compressed the rectum, as well as a clear boundary to the rectal wall. A histopathologic examination confirmed the mass was a pelvic retroperitoneal leiomyoma.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient underwent an operative resection with da Vinci Si surgical system after routine preoperative preparation. Anorectal motility was weekly monitored postoperation. No additional adjuvant therapy was performed.

OUTCOMES

The patient could walk after 1 day and defecate normally on the third day after operation. She was discharged on the seventh postoperative day. No adverse events including pelvic floor hernia or defecation dysfunction occurred in the follow-up period. At 4 weeks follow-up, the patient was pain-free and recovered well.

LESSONS

Although imaging examinations were crucial for retroperitoneal neoplasms, histopathological examination remains the "gold standard" for making a definite diagnosis. This case highlights the possibility of retroperitoneal leiomyoma occurring in a woman of reproductive age and the advantages of robotic surgical system in pelvic retroperitoneal surgeries.

A comparative study on perioperative outcomes between robotic versus laparoscopic D2 total gastrectomy

OBJECTIVE

Robotic surgery has been increasingly used worldwide owing to its advanced features. However, the significant benefits of robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) over laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) have yet to be demonstrated. We conducted a prospective cohort study to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC.

METHODS

Between March 26, 2018 and July 30, 2021, 155 patients between 18 and 80 years of age with locally advanced gastric cancer (cT2-4a, N0/+, M0) were enrolled. The perioperative outcomes within 30 days after surgery were compared between the RTG (n = 69) and LTG (n = 73) groups on a per-protocol (PP) basis. Postoperative complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 21.74% in the RTG group and 28.77% in the LTG group with no significant difference (P = 0.44), RTG was associated with a lower incidence of pneumonia (4.35% vs. 15.07%, P = 0.047). No mortality was observed in either group. There was no significant difference in the total operative time (284.48 vs. 271.73 min, P = 0.171), but RTG was associated with a lower estimated volume of blood loss (110 vs. 150 ml, P < 0.001) and more total retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) (41.36 vs 35.1, P = 0.019), more extraperigastric LNs (14.91 vs. 12.19, P = 0.024) and more LNs in the suprapancreatic areas (14.68 vs. 11.82, P = 0.017). The laboratory data (amylase, inflammatory, Albumin and T lymphocyte levels) of the RTG group were better than those of the LTG group.

CONCLUSION

According to the results of this prospective cohort study, for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, Robotic surgery has advantages over laparoscopic surgery for radical total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy performed by well-trained doctors.

Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer: A Review

Importance

Surgery plays a critical role in the management of all stages of gastric cancer.

Observations

For patients with early gastric cancer and low risk of lymph node metastasis, endoscopic therapy or surgery alone is potentially curative. Novel techniques, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy, may allow for greater use of stomach-sparing procedures that could improve quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes; however, experience with these techniques is rare outside of East Asia, and studies of long-term outcomes are still ongoing. Patients with later-stage localized gastric cancer benefit from more extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodality therapy, as they are at risk for nodal and distant metastases. There have been recent advances in chemotherapy that have led to improved survival, but the optimal sequencing of multimodality therapy is still being investigated. Better systemic therapy may also increase the role of surgery for patients with oligometastatic disease. There are ongoing studies examining the efficacy of peritoneal-directed therapies in both patients with low-volume peritoneal disease and patients at high risk of peritoneal recurrence.

Conclusions and Relevance

The management of gastric cancer continues to evolve. Surgeons should be aware of novel surgical approaches currently under investigation as well as how surgery fits into the contemporary multidisciplinary approach to this disease.