Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery

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.

Exploring the online landscape of interventional radiology: a global analysis of search trends

PURPOSE

This study aimed to analyze the online presence of interventional radiology (IR), and its popularity over time and location, given the reported under-awareness of the specialty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study analyzed search volumes, searcher demographics, and query type related to IR and its four most searched procedures using Google Trends, Demographics.io, and Also Asked. Search strategies were stratified by volume and region ("Worldwide" and "United States"), and the quality of current patient materials in the first 10 Google search results was analyzed using the DISCERN instrument and Flesch Kincaid levels.

RESULTS

The analyzed search trends demonstrated a slow uptrend in search volume over the past 15 years since 2013, with a CAGR rate of 0.6%. Demographics revealed that 80.9% of searchers were female and over half (51.8%) fell into the age range of 35-54 years old. Geographically, the US had the highest search volume (100) for the term "interventional radiology" and website search results mainly related to patient education about the specialty. The quality of online resources was poor with overall college-level readability, and "What is Interventional Radiology?" was the most popular query.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a growing interest in IR procedures in recent years, particularly in the US, with middle-aged females being the most active demographic online. However, online resources containing information on specific IR procedures remain of poor quality. Actions should be taken to improve the quality, accessibility, and awareness of IR-related webpages to increase public knowledge of IR care in the US and abroad.

Impact of minimally invasive surgery on immune function and stress response in gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally. Traditional open surgery for gastric cancer is often associated with significant morbidity and prolonged recovery.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery as an alternative to traditional open surgery for gastric cancer, focusing on its potential to reduce trauma, accelerate recovery, and achieve comparable oncological outcomes.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed 203 patients with gastric cancer who underwent surgery at the Shanghai Health Medical College Affiliated Chongming Hospital from January 2020 to December 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: Minimally invasive surgery group (n = 102), who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy, and open surgery group (n = 101), who underwent traditional open gastrectomy. We compared surgical indicators (surgical incision size, intraoperative blood loss, surgical duration, and number of lymph nodes dissected), recovery parameters (time to first flatus, time to start eating, time to ambulation, and length of hospital stay), immune function (levels of IgA, IgG, and IgM), intestinal barrier function (levels of D-lactic acid and diamine oxidase), and stress response (levels of C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and procalcitonin).

RESULTS

The minimally invasive surgery group demonstrated significantly better outcomes in terms of surgical indicators, including smaller incisions, less blood loss, shorter surgery time, and more lymph nodes dissected (P < 0.05 for all). Recovery was also faster in the minimally invasive surgery group, with earlier return of bowel function, earlier initiation of diet, quicker mobilization, and shorter hospital stays (P < 0.05 for all). Furthermore, patients in the minimally invasive surgery group had better preserved immune function, superior intestinal barrier function, and a less pronounced stress response postoperatively (P < 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer not only provides superior surgical indicators and faster recovery but also offers advantages in preserving immune function, protecting intestinal barrier function, and mitigating the stress response compared to traditional open surgery. These findings support the broader adoption of laparoscopic techniques in the management of gastric cancer.

Surgical Techniques and Related Perioperative Outcomes After Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy (RAMIG): Results From the Prospective Multicenter International Ugira Gastric Registry

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight into the global practice of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) and evaluate perioperative outcomes using an international registry.

BACKGROUND

The techniques and perioperative outcomes of RAMIG for gastric cancer vary substantially in the literature.

METHODS

Prospectively registered RAMIG cases for gastric cancer (≥10 per center) were extracted from 25 centers in Europe, Asia, and South-America. Techniques for resection, reconstruction, anastomosis, and lymphadenectomy were analyzed and related to perioperative surgical and oncological outcomes. Complications were uniformly defined by the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group.

RESULTS

Between 2020 and 2023, 759 patients underwent total (n=272), distal (n=465), or proximal (n=22) gastrectomy (RAMIG). After total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y-reconstruction, anastomotic leakage rates were 8% with hand-sewn (n=9/111) and 6% with linear stapled anastomoses (n=6/100). After distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (67%) or Billroth-II-reconstruction (31%), anastomotic leakage rates were 3% with linear stapled (n=11/433) and 0% with hand-sewn anastomoses (n=0/26). Extent of lymphadenectomy consisted of D1+ (28%), D2 (59%), or D2+ (12%). Median nodal harvest yielded 31 nodes (interquartile range: 21-47) after total and 34 nodes (interquartile range: 24-47) after distal gastrectomy. R0 resection rates were 93% after total and 96% distal gastrectomy. The hospital stay was 9 days after total and distal gastrectomy, and was median 3 days shorter without perianastomotic drains versus routine drain placement. Postoperative 30-day mortality was 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

This large multicenter study provided a worldwide overview of current RAMIG techniques and their respective perioperative outcomes. These outcomes demonstrated high surgical quality, set a quality standard for RAMIG, and can be considered an international reference for surgical standardization.

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.

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.

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.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted approach in gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a retrospective comparative study

Purpose

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is strongly recommended for advanced gastric cancer due to good local control and a high rate of R0 dissection with this strategy. Minimally invasive techniques such as laparoscopy-assisted or total laparoscopic approaches is becoming more and more acceptable in the treatment for gastric cancer. However, the safety and efficiency of total laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy (TLG) for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy have not been well evaluated.

Methods

A retrospective study in a single center from 2014 to 2016 was conducted. A total of 65 locally advanced gastric cancers were treated by laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) or TLG. Parameters which include operation time, blood loss, complications, hospital stay, 3-year overall survival, and 3-year disease-free survival were used for comparison.

Results

The time of operation in the TLG group was shorter than in the LAG group (P = 0.013), blood loss was less (P = 0.002) and time to first flatus was shorter (P = 0.039) in the TLG group than that in the LLG group. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were comparable in both groups. No significant difference was found in 3-year overall and disease-free survival.

Conclusion

For patients with locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy can be considered as a safe and efficient alternative. A further multicenter prospective randomized controlled study is needed to elucidate the applicability of this technique for advanced gastric cancer.

Contemporaneous Perioperative Inflammatory and Angiogenic Cytokine Profiles of Surgical Breast, Colorectal, and Prostate Cancer Patients: Clinical Implications

Surgery-induced tumor growth acceleration and synchronous metastatic growth promotion have been observed for decades. Surgery-induced wound healing, orchestrated through growth factors, chemokines, and cytokines, can negatively impact patients harboring residual or metastatic disease. We provide detailed clinical evidence of this process in surgical breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer patients. Plasma samples were analyzed from 68 cancer patients who had not received treatment before surgery or adjuvant therapy until at least four weeks post-surgery. The levels of plasma cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors were simultaneously quantified and profiled using multiplexed immunoassays for eight time points sampled per patient. The immunologic processes are induced immediately after surgery in patients, characterized by a drastic short-term shift in the expression levels of pro-inflammatory and angiogenic molecules and cytokines. A rapid and significant spike in circulating plasma levels of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), interleukin-6 (IL-6), placental growth factor (PLGF), and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) after surgery was noted. The rise in these molecules was concomitant with a significant drop in transforming growth factor-β1 (TGF-β1), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF-AB/BB), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), and monocyte chemoattractant protein-2 (MCP-2). If not earlier, each plasma analyte was normalized to baseline levels within 1-2 weeks after surgery, suggesting that surgical intervention alone was responsible for these effects. The effects of surgical tumor removal on disrupting the pro-inflammatory and angiogenic plasma profiles of cancer patients provide evidence for potentiating malignant progression. Our findings indicate a narrow therapeutic window of opportunity after surgery to prevent disease recurrence.

Impact of robotic and open surgery on patient wound complications in gastric cancer surgery: A meta-analysis

This meta-analysis is intended to evaluate the effect of both robotic and open-cut operations on postoperative complications of stomach carcinoma. From the earliest date until June 2023, a full and systemic search has been carried out on four main databases with keywords extracted from 'Robot', 'Gastr' and 'Opene'. The ROBINS-I instrument has been applied to evaluate the risk of bias in nonrandomized controlled trials. In these 11 trials, a total of 16 095 patients had received surgical treatment for stomach cancer and all 11 trials were nonrandomized, controlled trials. Abdominal abscesses were reported in 5 trials, wound infections in 8 trials, haemorrhage in 7 trials, wound dehiscence in 2 trials and total postoperative complications in 4 trials. Meta-analyses revealed no statistically significantly different rates of postoperative abdominal abscesses among patients who had received robotic operations than in those who had received open surgical procedures (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.25, 3.36; p = 0.89). The incidence of bleeding after surgery was not significantly different from that in both groups (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.69, 2.75; p = 0.37). Similarly, there was no significant difference between the two groups (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.52, 1.18; p = 0.24). No significant difference was found between the two groups (OR, 1. 28; 95% CI, 0.75, 2.21; p = 0.36). No significant difference was found between the two groups of patients who had received the robotic operation and those who had received the surgery after the operation (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.78, 1.66; p = 0.49). Generally speaking, this meta-analysis suggests that the use of robotics does not result in a reduction in certain postsurgical complications, including wound infections and abdominal abscesses. Thus, the use of a microinvasive robot for stomach carcinoma operation might not be better than that performed on the surgical site after the operation. This is a valuable guide for the surgeon to select the operative method.

Robotic Function-Preserving Resection of Gastric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor

INTRODUCTION

Gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) located at the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ), lesser curvature, posterior gastric wall, or antrum present challenges for gastric function preservation. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted resection of gastric GIST in challenging anatomic locations.

METHODS

This was a single-center case series of robotic gastric GIST resections in challenging anatomic locations performed from 2019 to 2021. GEJ GISTs are defined as tumors within 5 cm of the GEJ. Location of the tumor and distance from the GEJ were determined from the endoscopy report and/or cross-sectional imaging and operative findings.

RESULTS

There were 25 consecutive patients who underwent a robot-assisted partial gastrectomy for a gastric GIST in challenging anatomic locations. Tumors were located at the GEJ (n = 12), lesser curvature (n = 7), posterior gastric wall (n = 4), fundus (n = 3), greater curvature (n = 3), and antrum (n = 2). Median distance of tumor from GEJ was 2.5 cm. Both GEJ and pylorus were successfully preserved in all patients regardless of tumor location. Median operative time was 190 min with a median estimated blood loss of 20 mL and no conversion to open approach. Median hospital stay was 3 d with solid diet intake starting 2 d after surgery. Two (8 %) patients had Grade III or higher postoperative complications. Median tumor size upon resection was 3.9 cm. Negative margins were obtained in 96.3%. There was no evidence of recurrent disease with a median follow-up of 11.3 mo.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate the safety and feasibility of using the robotic approach to facilitate function preservation gastrectomy in challenging anatomic locations without compromising oncologic resection.

Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Gastric Cancer Surgery: Short-Term Outcomes-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 25,521 Patients

Background: Gastric cancer has the third highest cancer-related mortality worldwide. There is no consensus regarding the optimal surgical technique to perform curative resection surgery. Objective: Compare laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and robotic gastrectomy (RG) regarding short-term outcomes in patients with gastric cancer. Materials and Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched the following topics: "Gastrectomy," "Laparoscopic," and "Robotic Surgical Procedures." The included studies compared short-term outcomes between LG and RG. Individual risk of bias was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) scale. Results: There was no significant difference between RG and LG regarding conversion rate, reoperation rate, mortality, overall complications, anastomotic leakage, distal and proximal resection margin distances, and recurrence rate. However, mean blood loss (mean difference [MD] -19.43 mL, P < .00001), length of hospital stay (MD -0.50 days, P = .0007), time to first flatus (MD -0.52 days, P < .00001), time to oral intake (MD -0.17 days, P = .0001), surgical complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III (risk ratio [RR] 0.68, P < .0001), and pancreatic complications (RR 0.51, P = .007) were significantly lower in the RG group. Furthermore, the number of retrieved lymph nodes was significantly higher in the RG group. Nevertheless, the RG group showed a significantly higher operation time (MD 41.19 minutes, P < .00001) and cost (MD 3684.27 U.S. Dollars, P < .00001). Conclusion: This meta-analysis supports the choice of robotic surgery over laparoscopy concerning relevant surgical complications. However, longer operation time and higher cost remain crucial limitations. Randomized clinical trials are required to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of RG.

Same-session double EUS-guided bypass versus surgical gastroenterostomy and hepaticojejunostomy: an international multicenter comparison

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Gastric outlet and biliary obstruction are common manifestations of GI malignancies and some benign diseases for which standard treatment would be surgical gastroenterostomy and hepaticojejunostomy (ie, "double bypass"). Therapeutic EUS has allowed for the creation of an EUS-guided double bypass. However, same-session double EUS-guided bypass has only been described in small proof-of-concept series and lacks a comparison with surgical double bypass.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter analysis was performed of all consecutive same-session double EUS-guided bypass procedures performed in 5 academic centers. Surgical comparators were extracted from these centers' databases from the same time interval. Efficacy, safety, hospital stay, nutrition and chemotherapy resumption, long-term patency, and survival were compared.

RESULTS

Of 154 identified patients, 53 (34.4%) received treatment with EUS and 101 (65.6%) with surgery. At baseline, patients undergoing EUS exhibited higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores and a higher median Charlson Comorbidity Index (9.0 [interquartile range {IQR}, 7.0-10.0] vs 7.0 [IQR, 5.0-9.0], P < .001). Technical success (96.2% vs 100%, P = .117) and clinical success rates (90.6% vs 82.2%, P = .234) were similar when comparing EUS and surgery. Overall (11.3% vs 34.7%, P = .002) and severe adverse events (3.8% vs 19.8%, P = .007) occurred more frequently in the surgical group. In the EUS group, median time to oral intake (0 days [IQR, 0-1] vs 6 days [IQR, 3-7], P < .001) and hospital stay (4.0 days [IQR, 3-9] vs 13 days [IQR, 9-22], P < .001) were significantly shorter.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being used in a patient population with more comorbidities, same-session double EUS-guided bypass achieved similar technical and clinical success and was associated with fewer overall and severe adverse events when compared with surgical gastroenterostomy and hepaticojejunostomy.

Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: systematic review and future directions

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) using the da Vinci Surgical System for gastric cancer was approved for national medical insurance coverage in Japan in April 2018, and its number has been rapidly increasing since then.

AIM

We reviewed and compared current evidence on RG and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) to identify the differences in surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Three independent reviewers systematically reviewed the data collected from a comprehensive literature search by an independent organization, focusing on the following nine endpoints: mortality, morbidity, operative time, estimated blood loss volume, length of postoperative hospital stay, long-term oncologic outcome, quality of life, learning curve, and cost.

RESULTS

Compared to LG, RG has lower intraoperative blood loss volume, shorter length of hospital stay, and shorter learning curve, but both procedures have similar mortality. Contrarily, its disadvantages include longer procedural time and higher costs. Although the morbidity rate and long-term outcomes are almost comparable, RG showed superior potentials. Currently, the outcomes of RG are considered comparable to or better than LG.

CONCLUSION

RG might be applicable to all gastric cancer patients who fulfill the indication of LG at institutions that meet specific criteria and are approved to claim the National Health Insurance costs for the use of the surgical robot in Japan.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Individuals with Gastric Cancer Undergoing Totally Laparoscopic Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Total Gastrectomy: A Real-World, Propensity Score-Matching Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) are two types of minimally invasive radical gastrectomy procedures to treat gastric cancer (GC). This study compared the long-term prognosis and postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between TLTG and LATG.

METHODS

A total of 106 patients who underwent TLTG and 1,076 patients who underwent LATG at the Union Hospital of Fujian Medical University (Fuzhou, China) between January 2014 and April 2018 were included in the propensity score matching (PSM, 1:2). Patient-reported outcomes at 3, 6, and 12 months after gastrectomy were analyzed. The questionnaire referred to the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 30-item core QoL (QLQ-C30)and the GC module (QLQ-STO22) questionnaire.

RESULTS

After PSM, there were no significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics between the TLTG (n = 104) and the LATG groups (n = 208). Operative time and volume of blood loss were significantly lower in the TLTG group than in the LATG group. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed similar 3-year survival rates between the TLTG and LATG groups (83.7 vs. 80.3%, respectively; P = 0.462). Tolerance to nonliquid diet, decrease in body weight, and albumin levels were also significantly lower in the TLTG group than in the LATG group (all P < 0.05). The HRQoL scale demonstrated that the overall score in the TLTG group was better than that in the LATG group at 3, 6, and 12 months after gastrectomy (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with GC undergoing TLTG reported better HRQoL and experienced faster recovery of social function than those undergoing LATG, although the two groups demonstrated similar short-term outcomes and long-term prognosis.

Comparison of long-term outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: a propensity score-matching study

OBJECTIVE

There is insufficient evidence to evaluate the long-term outcomes of robotic radical gastrectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the radical results and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy.

METHODS

We prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed the general clinicopathological data of gastric cancer patients treated with robotic radical gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy (LG) from July 2016 to July 2018 at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. The RG cohort was matched 1:3 with the LG cohort by using propensity score matching (PSM). The primary endpoints of the study were 3-year overall survival (OS) and 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

The study included 221 patients treated with RG and 1106 patients treated with LG for gastric cancer. After PSM, 211 patients were included in the RG cohort, and 663 patients were included in the LG cohort. The 3-year OS rate was 81.0% in the robotic cohort and 79.3% in the laparoscopic cohort (log-rank test, P = 0.516). The 3-year RFS rate was 78.7% in the robotic cohort and 75.6% in the laparoscopic cohort (log-rank test, P = 0.600). In the subgroup analyses, no significant differences were noted between the RG and LG cohorts in terms of 3-year OS and 3-year RFS (all P > 0.05). The therapeutic value index of each lymph node station dissection in the robotic cohort was comparable to that in the laparoscopic cohort.

CONCLUSION

Robotic radical gastrectomy can achieve radical results and long-term outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery, and further multicenter prospective studies can be conducted to assess the clinical efficacy of robotic radical gastrectomy.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic gastrectomy guided by carbon nanoparticle suspension injection in gastric cancer

Background

The clinical application of robotic-assisted gastrectomy remains controversial, especially as clinical studies of this operation navigated by carbon nanoparticle suspension injection (CNSI) have not been conducted. This study aims to assess the perioperative safety and efficacy of CNSI-guided robotic-assisted gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer by focusing on short-term outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent CNSI-guided laparoscopic or robotic-assisted gastrectomy with a pathological diagnosis of gastric cancer was conducted. Data on demographics, surgical management, clinical-pathological results and short-term outcomes were compared among the groups.

Results

A total of 126 eligible patients were separated into the robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) group (n = 16) and the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) group (n = 110) in total. The operation time of the RAG group is longer than the LG group (p = 0.0000). When it comes to perioperative and short-term complications, there exists no statistical difference between the two groups.

Conclusion

The time required for CNSI-guided robotic-assisted gastrectomy is longer than that for CNSI-guided laparoscopic gastrectomy. CNSI-guided robotic-assisted gastrectomy is safe and effective.

Postoperative outcomes in robotic gastric resection compared with laparoscopic gastric resection in gastric cancer: A meta-analysis and systemic review

Background

Robotic gastrectomy is a commonly used procedure for early gastric cancer and it also overcomes the limitation of laparoscopic. However, the complications of robotic gastrectomy (RG) still need to be assessed. Our study was designed to compare postoperative complications of RG with laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG).

Materials and Methods

A meta-analysis and systemic review were prospectively collected using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE database of published studies by comparing the RG and LG with gastric cancer up to December 2021. To evaluate the postoperative outcomes, odds ratios were calculated for Dichotomous data and the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for continuous data, and measured by the random-effect model.

Results

Thirty-two retrospective studies describing 13,585 patients (4484 RG and 9101 LG) satisfied the inclusion criteria. A statistically significant result was in blood loss (MD = -17.97, 95% Cl: -25.61 to 10.32, p < 0.001), Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅲ (odds ratio (OR) = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76, p < 0.01), and harvested lymph node (MD = 2.62, 95% CI: 2.14-3.11, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between robotic gastrectomy surgery (RGS) and laparoscopic gastrectomy surgery (LGS) regarding distal resection margin (DRM), proximal resection margin (PRM), conversion rate, anastomotic leakage, and overall complications.

Conclusion

Having significant outcomes in Clavien-Dindo grade III, and blood loss, harvested lymph nodes are more common in RGS, and they also help in increasing the quality of life.

Surgical invasiveness and lymphadenectomy in robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy: A retrospective study with propensity-score matching

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus amongst comparative studies about the advantages of robotic over laparoscopic surgeries for gastric cancer (GC). We compared invasiveness and lymph node dissection between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomies (RG and LG).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 215 consecutive patients with GC who underwent RG or LG with lymphadenectomy from January 2011-December 2020. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to control selection bias.

RESULTS

The RG group had less operative blood loss (P = 0.0005) and higher C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 1 (P = 0.0006) than the LG group. When analyzing the specific sites of dissected lymph nodes, station groups of supra-pancreatic and lesser curvature areas accounted for this difference (P = 0.0073 and 0.0362, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

RG demonstrated lesser intraoperative bleeding, less of a postoperative inflammatory response, and a higher proportion of lymph node removal than LG, suggesting that it is a better surgical and oncological procedure.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Mega Meta-Analysis

Background

Laparoscopic gastrectomy and robotic gastrectomy are the most widely adopted treatment of choice for gastric cancer. To systematically assess the safety and effectiveness of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis on short-term and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy.

Methods

In order to find relevant studies on the efficacy and safety of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in the treatment of gastric cancer, numerous medical databases including PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, and China Journal Full-text Database (CNKI) were consulted, and Chinese and English studies on the efficacy and safety of RG and LG in the treatment of gastric cancer published from 2012 to 2022 were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 software.

Results

The meta-analysis inlcuded 48 literatures, with 20,151 gastric cancer patients, including 6,175 in the RG group and 13,976 in the LG group, respectively. Results of our meta-analysis showed that RG group had prololonged operative time (WMD = 35.72, 95% CI = 28.59–42.86, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 258.69 min ± 32.98; LG: mean ± SD = 221.85 min ± 31.18), reduced blood loss (WMD = −21.93, 95% CI = −28.94 to −14.91, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 105.22 ml ± 62.79; LG: mean ± SD = 127.34 ml ± 79.62), higher number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.99–3.63, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 35.88 ± 4.14; LG: mean ± SD = 32.73 ± 4.67), time to first postoperative food intake shortened (WMD = −0.20, 95% CI = −0.29 to −0.10, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 4.5 d ± 1.94; LG: mean ± SD = 4.7 d ± 1.54), and lower length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = −0.54, 95% CI = −0.83 to −0.24, P < 0.05) (RG: mean ± SD = 8.91 d ± 6.13; LG: mean ± SD = 9.61 d ± 7.74) in comparison to the LG group. While the other variables, for example, time to first postoperative flatus, postoperative complications, proximal and distal mar gin, R₀ resection rate, mortality rate, conversion rate, and 3-year overall survival rate were all found to be statistically similar at P > 0.05.

Conclusions

In the treatment of gastric cancer, robotic gastrectomy is a safe and effective procedure that has both short- and long-term effects. To properly evaluate the advantages of robotic surgery in gastric cancer, more randomised controlled studies with rigorous research methodologies are needed.

A Novel Manual Training Platform for Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery

Single-port minimally invasive surgery requires only a single incision, which further reduced intraoperative bleeding, reduced postoperative pain, and improved cosmetic benefits. However, the cooperative operation of multiple surgical instruments and forming an effective workspace under a single micro-incision remain a great challenge. This paper proposes a new type of manual training platform for single-port minimally invasive surgery. The designed surgical instrument imitates the structure of a human arm. The proximal end of the instrument is deployable structures (such as shoulder joint and elbow joint); they form an operating space and provide stable support for the instrument after deployed. In addition, the distal end of the instrument is a flexible instrument (such as a human hand), to realize posture adjustment and perform surgical operations. The surgical instrument implements a series of synergistic movements from placement, deployment, adjustment, and recovery. In addition, the platform includes a retightening force adjusting mechanism for the tendon-driven method and a quick-change mechanism for surgical instruments. A series of experiments on a functional prototype have validated the effectiveness and reliability of the designed platform. It can be convenient for doctors to practice master–slave single-port surgical instruments in a variety of environments.

Prognostic Value of Intraoperative Blood Transfusion in Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction

Background and objectives: Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) has a complicated surgical anatomy, due to which it sometimes induces excessive intraoperative blood loss that necessitates intraoperative blood transfusion (BTF). However, few reports have focused on the impact of BTF on the survival outcomes of patients with AEG. We aimed to evaluate the impact of BTF on AEG prognosis. Materials andMethods: We included 63 patients who underwent surgical resection for AEG at our hospital between January 2010 and September 2020. Clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes were compared between patients with (n = 12) and without (n = 51) BTF. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify the independent prognostic factors for overall survival. Results: None of the patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery received BTF. Patients who received BTF had a significantly worse 5-year survival rate than those who did not (67.8% vs. 28.3%, p = 0.001). BTF was an independent risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio: 3.90, 95% confidence interval 1.30–11.7), even after patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery were excluded. Conclusions: BTF adversely affected the survival outcomes of patients with AEG who underwent curative surgery. To avoid BTF, surgeons should strive to minimize intraoperative bleeding.

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.

Anaesthesia for Major Urological Surgery

This article focuses on the anesthetic considerations for major cancer urology surgeries such as cystectomies, nephrectomies, and radical prostatectomies. It aims to explore the anesthetic considerations for both open and minimally invasive techniques.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) versus standard recovery for gastric cancer patients: The evidences and the issues

The significant advances that have been reached, in the last decades, in the treatment of gastric cancer, contributed to the concept of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) with the aim to reduce the surgical stress, accelerate postoperative recovery, and reduce the length of hospital stay. The most important items included in the ERAS protocols are the pre-operative patient education, early mobilization and immediate oral intake from the first postoperative day. The aim of this narrative review is to focus the attention on the possible advantages of ERAS program on perioperative functional recovery outcomes after gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Comparison of Long-Term and Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of PSM and RCT Studies

Background

To investigate the perioperative and oncological outcomes of gastric cancer (GC) after robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy (RG versus LG), we carried out a meta-analysis of propensity score matching (PSM) studies and randomized controlled study (RCT) to compare the safety and overall effect of RG to LG for patients with GC.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register were searched based on a defined search strategy to identify eligible PSM and RCT studies before July 2021. Data on perioperative and oncological outcomes were subjected to meta-analysis.

Results

Overall, we identified 19 PSM studies and 1 RCT of RG versus LG, enrolling a total of 13,446 patients (6,173 and 7,273 patients underwent RG and LG, respectively). The present meta-analysis revealed nonsignificant differences in tumor size, proximal resection margin distance, distal resection margin distance, abdominal bleeding, ileus, anastomosis site leakage, duodenal stump leakage rate, conversion rate, reoperation, overall survival rate, and long-term recurrence-free survival rate between the two groups. Alternatively, comparing RG with LG, RG has a longer operative time (p < 0.00001), less blood loss (p <0.0001), earlier time to first flatus (p = 0.0003), earlier time to oral intake (p = 0.0001), shorter length of stay (p = 0.0001), less major complications (p = 0.0001), lower overall complications (p = 0.0003), more retrieved lymph nodes (P < 0.0001), and more cost (p < 0.00001).

Conclusions

In terms of oncological adequacy and safety, RG is a feasible and effective treatment strategy for gastric cancer but takes more cost in comparison with LG.

A Human Gesture Mapping Method to Control a Multi-Functional Hand for Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery: The MUSHA Case

This work presents a novel technique to control multi-functional hand for robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. We tested the technique using the MUSHA multi-functional hand, a robot-aided minimally invasive surgery tool with more degrees of freedom than the standard commercial end-effector of the da Vinci robot. Extra degrees of freedom require the development of a proper control strategy to guarantee high performance and avoid an increasing complexity of control consoles. However, developing reliable control algorithms while reducing the control side’s mechanical complexity is still an open challenge. In the proposed solution, we present a control strategy that projects the human hand motions into the robot actuation space. The human hand motions are tracked by a LeapMotion camera and mapped into the actuation space of the virtualized end-effector. The effectiveness of the proposed method was evaluated in a twofold manner. Firstly, we verified the Lyapunov stability of the algorithm, then an user study with 10 subjects assessed the intuitiveness and usability of the system.

A Fully 3D-Printed Steerable Instrument for Minimally Invasive Surgery

In the field of medical instruments, additive manufacturing allows for a drastic reduction in the number of components while improving the functionalities of the final design. In addition, modifications for users’ needs or specific procedures become possible by enabling the production of single customized items. In this work, we present the design of a new fully 3D-printed handheld steerable instrument for laparoscopic surgery, which was mechanically actuated using cables. The pistol-grip handle is based on ergonomic principles and allows for single-hand control of both grasping and omnidirectional steering, while compliant joints and snap-fit connectors enable fast assembly and minimal part count. Additive manufacturing allows for personalization of the handle to each surgeon’s needs by adjusting specific dimensions in the CAD model, which increases the user’s comfort during surgery. Testing showed that the forces on the instrument handle required for steering and grasping were below 15 N, while the grasping force efficiency was calculated to be 10–30%. The instrument combines the advantages of additive manufacturing with regard to personalization and simplified assembly, illustrating a new approach to the design of advanced surgical instruments where the customization for a single procedure or user’s need is a central aspect.

Feasibility and Short-Term Outcomes of Three-Dimensional Hand-Sewn Esophago-Jejunal Anastomosis in Completely Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Cancer

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy is on the rise. One of the most technically demanding steps of the approach is the construction of esophago-jejunal anastomosis. Several laparoscopic anastomotic techniques have been described, like linear stapler side-to-side or circular stapler end-to-side anastomosis; limited data exist regarding hand-sewn esophago-jejunal anastomosis. The study took place between January 2018 and June 2021. Patients enrolled in this study were adults with proximal gastric or esophago-gastric junction Siewert type III tumors that underwent 3D-assisted laparoscopic total gastrectomy. A hand-sewn esophago-jejunal anastomosis was performed in all cases laparoscopically. Forty consecutive cases were performed during the study period. Median anastomotic suturing time was 55 min, with intra-operative methylene blue leak test being negative in all cases. Median operating time was 240 min, and there were no conversions to open. The anastomotic leak rate and postoperative stricture rate were zero. The 30- and 90-day mortality rates were zero. Laparoscopic manual esophago-jejunal anastomosis utilizing a 3D platform in total gastrectomy for cancer can be performed with excellent outcomes regarding anastomotic leak and stricture rate. This anastomotic approach, although technically challenging, is safe and reproducible, with prominent results that can be disseminated in the surgical community.

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

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

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Direct Surgery for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer With Serosal Invasion (cT4NxM0): A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

For locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) with serosal invasion (cT4NxM0), adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) after D2 gastrectomy is the standard therapy in Asia. However, perioperative chemotherapy (PCT) combined with D2 gastrectomy is mostly suggested in Europe and America. As a part of PCT, the value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is unclear. We investigated whether NAC could further improve survival and other outcomes for these patients.

METHODS

Patients with cT4NxM0 gastric cancer who underwent D2 gastrectomy were analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received NAC: the neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and direct surgery (S) groups. After propensity score matching (1:1 ratio), survival and perioperative outcomes were analyzed between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 902 patients met all the eligibility criteria and were enrolled. After propensity score matching, 221 matched pairs of patients were identified. The median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of all patients were 75.10 and 43.67 months, respectively. The median OS of patients in the NAC and S groups were undefined and 29.80 months, respectively (P<0.0001). The median DFS of patients in the NAC and S groups were undefined and 22.60 months (P<0.0001). There were no significant differences in the radical degrees of operation between the two groups (P=0.07). However, there were significant differences in postoperative hospital stay (P<0.001) and complications (P=0.037) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested NAC can further improve prognosis and prevent recurrence in LAGC (cT4NxM0) patients. NAC is feasible and safe for LAGC (cT4NxM0) patients, and does not increase the risk of perioperative surgery.

Systematic review and updated network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing open, laparoscopic-assisted, and robotic distal gastrectomy for early and locally advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of early and locally advanced gastric cancer remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of major surgical approaches for operable distal gastric cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were performed to compare open distal gastrectomy, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy, and robotic distal gastrectomy. Risk ratio, weighted mean difference, and 95% credible intervals were used as pooled effect size measures.

RESULTS

Seventeen randomized controlled trials (5,909 patients) were included. Overall, 2,776 (46.8%) underwent open distal gastrectomy, 2,964 (50.1%) laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy, and 141 (3.1%) robotic distal gastrectomy. Among these 3 groups, there were no significant differences in 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak, and overall complications. Compared to open distal gastrectomy, laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss, early postoperative pain, time to first flatus, and hospital length of stay. Similarly, robotic distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly reduced blood loss and time to first flatus compared to open distal gastrectomy. No differences were found in the total number of harvested lymph nodes, tumor-free resection margins, 5-year overall, and disease-free survival. The subgroup analysis in locally advanced gastric cancer showed trends toward reduced blood loss, time to first flatus, and hospital length of stay with minimally invasive approaches but similar overall and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy and robotic distal gastrectomy performed by well-trained experienced surgeons, even in the setting of locally advanced gastric cancer, seem associated with improved short-term outcomes with similar overall and disease-free survival compared with open distal gastrectomy.

[Evidence in minimally invasive oncological gastric surgery]

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence on laparoscopic and robotic distal and total gastrectomy in comparison to open surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search of EMBASE and PubMed was conducted and 197 randomized (RCT) and non-randomized (non-RCT) studies were identified. An evaluation of early gastric cancer (EGC) and advanced (AGC) gastric cancer was carried out.

RESULTS

For EGC and laparoscopic distal resection (LDG) and total gastrectomy (LTG) a total of 10 RCT and 6 non-RCT, including 4329 patients (laparoscopic 2010 vs. open 2319) were identified. At a high evidence level (1+, 1++) there was no significant difference in terms of feasibility, intraoperative outcome and oncological quality, mortality and long-term oncological outcome compared to open gastrectomy (OG). After LDG and LTG patients showed a significantly faster early postoperative recovery and lower total morbidity. In contrast, the operation times were significant longer compared to ODG and OTG. For distal AGC and LDG in 6 RCT, including 2806 patients (LDG 1410 vs. ODG 1369) comparable results could be found also with a high evidence level (1++). The evidence for LTG in cases of AGC was lower (2-, 2+). Currently ,only 6 non-RCT with a total of 1090 patients (LTG 539 vs. OTG 551) are available, which showed comparable results to LDG but further high-quality RCTs are necessary. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is currently being evaluated. According to the first studies RG for EGC seems to be equivalent to LDG; however, the evidence is currently low (3 to 2-).

Robotic gastric surgery: a monocentric case series and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The technical complexity of D2 lymphadenectomy and esophago-jejunal anastomosis are the main factors that limit the application of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer. Robotic assisted gastric surgery provides potential technical advantages over conventional laparoscopy but an improvement in clinical outcomes after robotic surgery has not been demonstrated yet.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Data from 128 consecutive patients who had undergone robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer at our center institution from April 2017 to June 2020 where retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively updated database. A narrative review was then carried out on PubMed, Embase and Scopus using the following keywords: "gastric cancer," "robotic surgery," "robotic gastrectomy" and "robotic gastric surgery".

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Ninety-eight patients underwent robotic distal gastrectomy and 30 underwent robotic total gastrectomy. The mean value of estimated blood loss was 99.5 ml. No patients required conversion to laparoscopy or open surgery. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 42. No tumor involvement of the proximal or distal margin was found in any patient. The median time to first flatus and first oral feeding was on postoperative day 3 and 5, respectively. We registered 6 leakages (4.6%), namely, 1 duodenal stump leakage and 5 anastomotic leakages. No 30-day surgical related mortality was recorded. The median length of hospital stay was 10.5 days (range 4-37).

CONCLUSIONS

Published data and our experience suggest that the robotic approach for gastric cancer is safe and feasible with potential advantages over conventional laparoscopy.

Effect of Surgical Approach on Node Harvest in Gastrectomy: Analysis of the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Gastrectomy is the cornerstone of treatment for gastric cancer. Recent studies demonstrated significant surgical outcome advantages for patients undergoing minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy. Lymph node harvest is an indicator of adequate surgical resection, and greater harvest is associated with improved staging and patient outcomes. This study evaluated lymph node harvest based on surgical approach.

METHODS

Gastric adenocarcinoma patients were identified from NCDB who underwent gastrectomy between 2010 and 2016. Patients were classified by surgical approach into three cohorts: robotic, laparoscopic, or open gastrectomy. Clinical and demographic data were collected. Lymph node harvest was compared with univariate analysis and multivariable generalized linear mixed model. Univariate analysis with propensity matching was also performed to control for differences in patient population across cohorts.

RESULTS

We identified 10,690 patients that underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma, with 68% males and median age of 66 (IQR 5774) years. 7161 (67%) underwent open, 2841 (26.6%) laparoscopic, and 688 (6.4%) robotic gastrectomy. Multivariable analysis revealed robotic was associated with a significantly higher median node harvest (18, IQR 1326) compared to laparoscopic (17, IQR 1125) and open gastrectomy (16, IQR 1023). Laparoscopic was also associated with significantly higher node harvest then open gastrectomy. Propensity-matched analysis (6950 patients) showed robotic gastrectomy was still associated with significantly higher node harvest (18, IQR 1226) compared to laparoscopic (17, IQR 1125) and open (17, IQR 1124); however, laparoscopic and open were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Robotic approach is associated with increased node harvest compared to laparoscopic and open approach in gastrectomy patients.

Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy

Robotic systems were developed to overcome limitations of laparoscopic surgery with its mechanical advantages. Along with the technical advances, robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer is increasing. However, the evidence regarding safety and efficacy for robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer is not mature yet. Although studies are limited, it is evident that robotic gastrectomy has a longer operation and less blood loss compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Studies revealed long-term oncological outcomes after robotic gastrectomy was comparable to those after laparoscopic gastrectomy. Taken together, robotic gastrectomy with systemic lymph node dissection is suggested as a safe procedure with equivalent short- and long-term oncologic outcomes to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy for the surgical treatment of gastric cancer. However, high cost is the most significant barrier to justify robotic surgery as a routine and standard treatment for patients with gastric cancer. In the meanwhile, robotic surgery will be expansively used as long as technologic developments continue.

A cable-driven distal end-effector mechanism for single-port robotic surgery

PURPOSE

The development of surgery is to be minimally invasive and collaborative with robot systems, which has caught increasing attention in recent years. However, the narrow access routes and confined working spaces in vivo usually make distal end-effectors of surgical systems not easy to operate. To overcome this problem, a novel cable-driven distal end-effector mechanism designed for single-port robotic surgery was proposed.

METHODS

A cable-driven joint structure and the corresponding methods of threading cables were proposed which can maintain the length and even the tension force of cables constant during operation. Based on the proposed joint structure, the cable-driven distal end-effector mechanism consists of a parallelogram mechanism and a snake mechanism. The parallelogram mechanism is used to enlarge its reachable workspace through establishing the triangulation of operation. The snake mechanism is used to achieve the expected pose through providing sufficient bending degrees of freedom. All of the degrees of freedom can be decoupled at the expense of a slightly more tedious process of threading cables.

RESULTS

The primary prototype and its miniature assembled and threaded manually performed as expected regardless of bend, translation and their combination. But the inadequate tension force of cables and assembly errors affect the load capacity and accuracy, which need to be improved by automatic assembly.

CONCLUSION

A cable-driven distal end-effector mechanism composed of a parallelogram mechanism, and a snake mechanism used for single-port robotic surgery was proposed. The mechanism adopts a novel cable-driven joint structure and corresponding methods of threading cables to keep the length and even the tension force of cables constant during surgery.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer: Case series of initial experience

BACKGROUND

In the last decade's robotic gastrectomy (RG) has increasingly widespread as a valid minimally invasive option for treatment of gastric cancer. In literature, evidence of its routine use is not yet well established. The aims of this study are to report our initial experience and to present possible advantages of our hybrid operative technique for subtotal gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospectively, we analyzed data from 41 patients (22 male and 19 female) who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (RALG) with D2 lymphadenectomy using the da Vinci XI robotic system. Inclusion criteria were gastric cancer in the middle or lower portion of the stomach amenable of radical subtotal gastrectomy without preoperative suspicion of positive lymph-nodes or other organs involving and distant metastasis. All the procedures were performed by attending surgeons.

RESULTS

The mean operative time was 270 min with one case of conversion to open surgery. The mean age was 71.4 (IQR 68.2-76.8) with 43.9% of patients classified as ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) score ≥3. The median of lymph-nodes retrieved was 25 (IQR 19-35). No intra-operative complications occurred. Time to resume a soft diet was 5 days. Patients were hospitalized a median of 7 days. According to pathological AJCC-TNM, 21 patients were classified as advanced gastric cancer. Post-operative morbidity was recorded in 9 patients (21.9%) with major complications requiring surgical operation in 4 patients (9.8%). Elevated ASA score, fewer lymph-nodes retrieved and ICU recovery requirements were significant increased in patients with major complications.

CONCLUSION

The preliminary results demonstrated that robot-assisted laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy is safe and feasible. In particular, we found that the da Vinci platform improves surgeon abilities to perform an adequate lymphadenectomy and digestive reconstruction. Further studies are necessary to better clarify the role of this high-cost technology in minimally invasive treatment of gastric cancer.

Trends in Oncology: an Updated Review of Minimally Invasive Surgery vs. Traditional Open Surgery

Objective: To review the recent trends in methodology for the most frequent oncological surgeries. More specifically, this paper will compare the minimally invasive methods to the conventional open method. It aims to find out whether minimally invasive surgeries are feasible treatments for certain types of cancers.

Methods: A review of retrospective studies searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library etc. was used to identify the studies published on this topic within a period of 6 years. Oncologic outcomes, postoperative complications/outcomes, and intraoperative outcomes were the main variables in the comparison to the surgical methods under review.

Conclusion: Despite the recent controversy with minimally invasive surgery being contraindicated for cervical cancer, it is still an acceptable method for other types of common cancers. However, there are limitations to the approach, and the surgeon should make a prudent selection between minimally invasive and open surgery depending on the type of tumor and patient characteristics. Further studies, especially with randomized control trials, must be conducted.

Risk Factors and Clavien-Dindo Classification of Postoperative Complications After Laparoscopic and Open Gastrectomies for Gastric Cancer: A Single-Center, Large Sample, Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Laparoscopy has been increasingly used for the surgery of gastric cancer. However, the postoperative complications are still under-investigated and the short-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy remain controversial. This study aimed to explore the differences of postoperative complications between laparoscopic and open radical gastrectomies in patients with gastric cancer through the large sample size, retrospective cohort study, and evaluate the safety of laparoscopy in patients who underwent radical gastrectomy.

Patients and Methods

A total of 2,966 patients with gastric cancer (TNM I~III) who underwent laparoscopy or open gastrectomy from February 2009 to March 2016 were enrolled in this study. Complications were categorized according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. The incidence and severity of complications between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy were compared using one-to-three propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors related to postoperative complications.

Results

A total of 2,966 patients were included in the study, including 687 (23.2%) in the LG (Laparoscopy gastrectomies) group and 2,279 (76.8%) in the OG (open gastrectomies) group. After PSM, a well-balanced cohort of 2,373 patients (676 cases in the LG group and 1,697 cases in the OG group) was further analyzed. The results showed that the incidence of overall complications in the LG group was significantly less than the OG group (15.4% vs 20.8%, P=0.003). However, the severe complications of the LG group showed no difference towards the OG group (5.8% vs 5.8%, P=0.952). Multivariate analysis revealed that laparoscopic surgery is a protective factor for the reduction of postoperative complications. Age ≥60 years, ASA classification IIIc and estimated blood loss ≥200 mL were confirmed as independent risk factors of overall complications.

Conclusion

Compared with traditional open gastrectomy, LG is safe and feasible with less trauma and fewer complications for patients with gastric cancer.

Current perspectives on the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted surgery for gastric cancer

INTRODUCTION

Robotic gastrectomy is performed worldwide as part of the treatment for gastric cancer and is associated with good clinical outcome. This review aims to describe the current issues, debates, and future directions associated with the use of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

AREA COVERED

Here, we review the current evidence surrounding the safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy, including our institutional experience. Current issues associated with robotic gastrectomy, including feasibility, perioperative outcomes, and oncological outcomes, are described.

EXPERT OPINION

Sophisticated movements, articulating instruments, and the rapid introduction of fast-developing novel technology make robotic gastrectomy use more frequent. However, the need for well-designed prospective randomized trials is warranted.

Should robotic gastrectomy become a standard surgical treatment option for gastric cancer?

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) using the da Vinci Surgical System for gastric cancer was approved for national medical insurance coverage in Japan in April, 2018, and has been used increasingly since. We reviewed the current evidence on RG, open gastrectomy (OG), and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) to identify differences in surgical outcomes between Japan and other countries. Briefly, three independent reviewers systematically reviewed the data collected from a comprehensive literature search by an independent organization and focused on the following nine endpoints: mortality, morbidity, operative time, estimated volume of blood loss, length of postoperative hospital stay, long-term oncologic outcome, quality of life, learning curve, and cost. Overall, the mortality rate of the three approaches did not differ, but RG and LG had less intraoperative blood loss and resulted in a shorter postoperative hospital stay than OG. RG had longer operative times and incurred higher costs than LG and OG. However, in Japan, RG may be more effective than LG and OG for decreasing morbidity. Further studies are needed to establish the specific indications for RG, optimal robotic setup, and dissection methods to best utilize the surgical robot.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: The largest meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been increasingly used in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has shown several advantages over open surgery in dealing with GC, although it is still considered a demanding procedure. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is now being employed with increased frequency worldwide and has been reported to overcome some limitations of conventional LG. The aim of this updated meta-analysis is to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of RG versus LG for gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PubMed, MEDLINE and Cochrane library database of published studies comparing RG and LG up to March 2020. The evaluated end-points were intra-operative, post-operative and oncological outcomes. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and a random-effect model was always applied.

RESULTS

Forty retrospective studies describing 17,712 patients met the inclusion criteria. With respect to surgical outcomes, robotic compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with higher operating time [MD 44.73, (95%CI 36.01, 53.45) p < 0.00001] and less intraoperative blood loss [MD -18.24, (95%CI -25.21, -11.26) p < 0.00001] and lower rate of surgical complication in terms of Dindo-Clavien ≥ 3 classification [OR 0.66, (95%CI 0.49, 0.88) p = 0.005]. With respect to oncological outcomes, the RG group showed a significantly increased mean number of retrieved lymph nodes [MD 1.84, (95%CI 0.84, 2.84) p = 0.0003], but mean proximal and distal resection margin distance and the recurrence rate were not significantly different between the two approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

With respect to safety, technical feasibility and oncological adequacy, robotic and laparoscopic groups were comparable, although the robotic approach seems to achieve better short-term surgical outcomes. Moreover, a higher rate of retrieved lymph nodes was observed in the RG group.

Experience and technique of simultaneous robotic resection for synchronous advanced gastric and rectal cancers: a case report

Background

Recently, robotic surgery has become more common as a minimally invasive treatment for gastric cancer (GC) and rectal cancer (RC). Herein, we report successful simultaneous robotic gastrectomy and low anterior resection in a patient with advanced GC and RC.

Case presentation

A 76-year-old woman who presented with bloody stool was found to have advanced GC with lymph node metastases and advanced RC. Simultaneous robotic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection and Billroth I reconstruction and low anterior resection with D3 lymph node dissection were performed. Preoperatively, multidisciplinary medical staff discussed the case in detail and conducted a simulation with the robot, operating room, and patient. The total operative time was 648 min (console time, 520 min), and the estimated blood loss was small. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 10 without any adverse events. In this case, careful simulation of the patient cart setting and planning of the best port layout resulted in a successful surgical outcome despite this being our first simultaneous total robotic surgery for advanced GC and RC.

Conclusions

Simultaneous robotic surgery for advanced GC and RC may be technically feasible and could provide an option for future minimally invasive treatment.

Gastric Cancer: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Classification, Genomic Characteristics and Treatment Strategies

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide and it is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death. GC is a multifactorial disease, where both environmental and genetic factors can have an impact on its occurrence and development. The incidence rate of GC rises progressively with age; the median age at diagnosis is 70 years. However, approximately 10% of gastric carcinomas are detected at the age of 45 or younger. Early-onset gastric cancer is a good model to study genetic alterations related to the carcinogenesis process, as young patients are less exposed to environmental carcinogens. Carcinogenesis is a multistage disease process specified by the progressive development of mutations and epigenetic alterations in the expression of various genes, which are responsible for the occurrence of the disease.

Outcomes of Gastric Resection in the Establishment of a Comprehensive Oncologic Robotic Program

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted gastrectomy is increasingly utilized for the treatment of gastric malignancies. However, the benefits of robotic surgery have been questioned. This study describes short-term outcomes in the establishment of a comprehensive robotic program for gastric malignancies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent robotic-assisted gastric resections between 2013 and 2018 were studied. Preoperative measures and surgical outcomes were analyzed. Finally we studied and analyzed robotic and open gastrectomy for the management of gastric adenocarcinoma (GC) at the same institution between 2000 and 2018 for quality benchmarking.

RESULTS

Forty six patients (pts.) underwent robotic-assisted gastric resections. 26 (56.5%) were male, with a median age of 62 y (range: 29-87). Pathology included GC, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, neuroendocrine tumors, metastatic lesions, and benign processes. 19 pts. underwent total gastrectomy, 16 distal gastrectomy, four subtotal gastrectomy, and seven wedge resection. Pts. undergoing distal gastrectomy and wedge resection experienced shorter operative times and length of stay than total gastrectomy (P < 0.01; P < 0.01). Four operations (8.8%) were converted to open and 13 pts (28.3%) had postoperative complications, including an 8.7% readmission rate. Median lymph nodes retrieved during total, subtotal, and distal gastrectomy were 20 (13-46), 12.5 (0-26), and 16.5 (0-34), respectively. All pts. underwent margin negative resection. Median follow-up for GC was 21 mo, and 60% of pts. received adjuvant therapy at a median of 59d (range: 23-106).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic gastrectomy is a feasible alternative to open gastrectomy. Our results will help establish benchmarks to improve perioperative outcomes, especially length of stay and time to initiation of therapy.