Laparoscopic vs. Open Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Case-Control Study

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries, the use of minimally invasive techniques has not attained the same widespread acceptance for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its feasibility and oncological adequacy. We aimed to examine the safety and oncological effectiveness of laparoscopic technique with radical intent for the treatment of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer by comparing short-term surgical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy at two Western regional institutions. Methods: The trial was designed as a retrospective comparative matched case-control study for postoperative pathological diagnoses of locally advanced gastric carcinoma. Between January 2015 and September 2021, 120 consecutive patients who underwent curative-intent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection were retrospectively recruited and compared with 120 patients who received open gastrectomy. In order to obtain a comparison that was as homogeneous as possible, the equal control group of pairing (1:1) patients submitted to open gastrectomy who matched those of the laparoscopic group was statistically generated by using a propensity matched score method. The following potential confounder factors were aligned: age, gender, Body Mass Index (BMI), comorbidity, ASA, adjuvant therapy, tumour location, type of gastrectomy, and pT stage. Patient demographics, operative findings, pathologic characteristics, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Results: In the case-control study, the two groups were clearly comparable with respect to matched variables, as was expected given the intentional primary selective criteria. No statistically significant differences were revealed in overall complications (16.7% vs. 20.8%, p = 0.489), rate of reoperation (3.3% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.714), and mortality (4.2% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.987) within 30 days. Pulmonary infection and wound complications were observed more frequently in the OG group (0.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.01, for each of these two categories). Anastomotic and duodenal stump leakage occurred in 5.8% of the patients after laparoscopic gastrectomy and in 3.3% after open procedure (p = 0.072). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly longer operative time (212 vs. 192 min, p < 0.05) but shorter postoperative length of stay (9.1 vs. 11.6 days, p < 0.001). The mean number of resected lymph nodes after D2 dissection (31.4 vs. 33.3, p = 0.134) and clearance of surgical margins (97.5% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.432) were equivalent between the groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 nodal dissection appears to be safe and feasible in terms of perioperative morbidity for locally advanced gastric cancer, with comparable oncological equivalency with respect to traditional open surgery.

Outcomes of Distal Gastrectomy for Elderly Patients With Advanced Gastric Cancer: Comparison With Non-Elderly Patients and the Utility of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Elderly Patients

Background

As the elderly population increases, cases of elderly advanced gastric cancer (AGC) also increase. This study aims to investigate the safety and utility of curative gastrectomy, as well as the efficacy of laparoscopic gastrectomy, for these elderly patients.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the surgical outcomes of patients with cStage IB-III AGC who underwent distal gastrectomy (DG) with D2 lymph node dissection in our institution. We compared the results between elderly patients (&gt;75 years) and non-elderly patients (&lt;75 years). We further divided the elderly patients into 2 groups: those who underwent laparoscopic DG (LDG) and those who underwent open DG (ODG). Further, we compared the results of the 2 groups.

Results

From January 2014 to March 2019, 84 patients underwent DG with D2 lymph node dissection for cStage IB-III AGC (52 elderly patients and 32 non-elderly patients). ASA was significantly higher in elderly patients; however, there was no significant difference in surgical outcomes nor in overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the 2 groups. Among 52 elderly patients, 19 had LDG, whereas 33 had ODG. The LDG group had a significantly shorter length of hospital stay and a significantly less amount of blood loss. There was no significant difference in RFS and OS between these 2 groups.

Conclusions

Safety and oncologic curability may be achieved in elderly patients with AGC. LDG may be safely performed as ODG in elderly patients with AGC and it is expected to benefit them by achieving minimally invasive surgery.

Short-term Outcomes of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy With D2 Lymphadenectomy to Open Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer (KLASS-02-RCT)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of KLASS-02-RCT, a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 lymphadenectomy with open distal gastrectomy (ODG).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Although several benefits of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery have been reported, strong evidence is still limited, especially in locally advanced gastric cancer which requires extensive lymph node dissection.

METHODS

Enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4a and N0-1 gastric adenocarcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, 90-day mortality, postoperative pain, and recovery were compared between LDG and ODG groups.

RESULTS

A total of 1050 patients were randomly assigned to LDG (n = 526) or ODG group (n = 524) between November 2011 and April 2015. After excluding patients who received bypass or no surgery, 1011 patients were analyzed as actual treatment group. Mean number of totally retrieved lymph nodes was similar in both groups (LDG = 46.6 vs ODG = 47.4, P = 0.451). Early morbidity rate was significantly lower after LDG (16.6%) than after ODG (24.1%; P = 0.003). Postoperative analgesics use and patients' reported pain score were significantly lower after LDG. First day of flatus was earlier after LDG (3.5 vs 3.7 d, P = 0.025) and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in LDG group (8.1 vs 9.3 d, P = 0.005). Ninety days' mortality rate was similar in both groups (LDG = 0.4% vs ODG = 0.6%, P = 0.682).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer shows benefits in terms of lower complication rate, faster recovery, and less pain compared with open surgery.

Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Clinical Stage II/III Gastric Cancer: A Multicenter Cohort Study in Japan (LOC-A Study)

OBJECTIVE

A large-scale multicenter historical cohort study was conducted to investigate the efficacy of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in comparison to open gastrectomy (OG) for locally advanced gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND

LG is now practiced widely, but its applicability for advanced gastric cancer is still controversial. As oncologic outcomes of randomized trials are still pending, there is an urgent need for information that would be relevant to current practice.

METHODS

Through a consensus meeting involving surgeons and biostatisticians, 30 preoperative variables possibly influencing the choice of surgical approach and associated with outcome were identified to enable rigorous estimation of propensity scores. A total of 1948 consecutive patients who underwent gastrectomy for clinical stage II/III gastric adenocarcinoma between 2008 and 2014 were identified, and their clinical data were collected from 8 participating hospitals. After propensity score matching, 610 cases (OG = 305, LG = 305) were finally selected for comparison of long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

In the propensity-matched OG and LG populations, the mean observation period was 3.5 and 3.4 years, and the 5-year overall survival was 53.0% and 54.2%, respectively. The hazard ratio (LG/OG) for overall survival was 1.01 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.29), and noninferiority of LG was demonstrated statistically as the upper 95% confidence limit was less than the prespecified margin (1.33). The recurrence rate was 30.8% and 29.8% for OG and LG, respectively, and the hazard ratio for recurrence was 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.31). The patterns of recurrence in the 2 groups were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study strictly adjusted for confounding factors has provided evidence to suggest that LG is oncologically comparable to OG for locally advanced gastric cancer. The validity of this result will be examined in ongoing randomized trials.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy versus open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a 10-year single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for gastric cancer has been widely applied; however, its oncologic efficacy has yet been well established. The study aimed to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of LADG versus open distal gastrectomy (ODG) on gastric cancer.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic data of gastric cancer patients who underwent distal gastrectomy with curative intent from October 2004 through September 2014 were included and analyzed in a retrospective cohort. The last follow-up was September 2016.

RESULTS

769 eligible patients (LADG 414 vs. ODG 355) were included in the study. No significant difference was observed between the groups in 5-year DFS (LADG 61.2% vs. ODG 59.1%; p = 0.384) and OS rates (LADG 65.8% vs. ODG 66.3%; p = 0.750). During surgery, though LADG group had longer operating time, the blood loss was less than ODG group. LADG group had faster postoperative recovery course including shorter time to oral intake, ambulation, and discharge time. Postoperative complication rate within 30 days showed no significant difference between the groups (LADG 15.7% vs. ODG 13.0%; p = 0.281). Age over 65 years old, blood loss > 200 ml, postoperative complication, and advanced T and N stage were identified as independent risk factors for DFS and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

LADG could yield similar oncologic outcomes compared with ODG in treating distal gastric cancer. However, the findings need to be further confirmed through ongoing prospective randomized controlled trials.

Minimal-invasive gastrectomy: what the west can learn from the east?

Minimal-invasive gastrectomy has been established as commonly used method for the early gastric cancer in Korea and Japan. From the first laparoscopic cancer gastrectomy in 1992 in Japan, numerous prospective randomized trials from these two countries have gained the evidence for non-inferiority or even specific benefits compared to open surgery. In Korea, the "Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgical Study Group" (KLASS group) founded, in 2004, successfully gained evidence not only in regards of oncological safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy, but also for the impact of different reconstruction methods and alternative extents of luminal resection on postoperative outcome and quality of life. Awaited results of latest studies from Korea, Japan, and China may suggest laparoscopic approaches as an option even in advanced gastric cancers. These studies could potentially be the starting point to find the role of laparoscopic gastrectomy in the west, where the incidence of gastric cancer is rather lower; the cancers are mostly diagnosed in advanced stages, and often, a perioperative chemotherapy is applied. Robotic (-assisted) gastrectomy was not shown to be superior to laparoscopic resection in Korea, but new technological developments should continuously be evaluated in clinical trials regarding a potentially favorable learning curve, which might play a key role in regards of the limited case load per center of gastric cancer in the west. This review summarizes the history of laparoscopic cancer gastrectomy in Asia and points out the important steps of establishing a nation-wide scientific network to support the surgical routine by the necessary evidence with a focus on Korea.