Three-dimensional (3D) visualization provides better outcome than two-dimensional (2D) visualization in single-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: a propensity-matched analysis

3D versus 2D laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While laparoscopic gastrectomy is a prominent therapeutic approach for distal gastric cancer, the clinical benefits of 3D laparoscopy over 2D laparoscopy remain unclear. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of 3D laparoscopy and 2D laparoscopy for distal gastric cancer resection through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published from inception through January 2023, according to the PRISMA guidelines. The MD or RR was used to compare 3D and 2D distal gastrectomy. Random-effects meta-analysis was estimated using the inverse variance and Mantel-Haenszel method for binary outcomes and the DerSimonian-Laird estimator for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

After reviewing 559 studies, 6 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The analysis included 689 patients, with 348 (50.5%) in the 3D group and 341 (49.5%) in the 2D group. 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy reduces the operative time (WMD - 28.57 min, 95% CI - 50.70 to - 6.44, p = 0.011), intraoperative blood loss (WMD - 6.69 mL, 95% CI - 8.09 to - 5.29, p < 0.001), and postoperative hospital stay (WMD - 0.92 days, 95% CI - 1.43 to - 0.42, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in time to first postoperative flatus (WMD - 0.22 days, 95% CI - 0.50 to 0.05, p = 0.110), postoperative complications (Relative Risk 0.56, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.41, p = 0.217), and the number of retrieved lymph nodes (WMD 1.25, 95% CI - 0.54 to 3.03, p = 0.172) between 3 and 2D laparoscopic distal gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the potential advantages of 3D laparoscopy in distal gastrectomy, including shorter operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and decreased intraoperative blood loss.

Short- and long-term outcomes of single-port versus multiport laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies and randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

At present, there is no convincing evidence-based medical basis for the efficacy of single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy. To make a high-quality comparison of the short- and long-term outcomes of single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy versus multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy, we performed this meta-analysis, which only included propensity score-matched studies and randomized controlled trials comparing single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy with multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Data were retrieved from the electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP up to January 2023, and the data included the outcomes of treatment after single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy and multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy. The primary outcomes were early complications, survival rate after surgery at 1 year, and survival rate after surgery at 5 years. The secondary outcomes were number of pain medications, mean operation time, estimated blood loss, hospital mortality, time to first soft fluid diet, time to first flatus, hospital stay after surgery, and retrieved number of lymph nodes. The Jadad score and Newcastle‒Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

After screening, 9 studies were finally included, including 988 patients. The meta-analysis results showed that estimated blood loss (MD=-29.35, 95% CI: -42.95-15.75, P < 0.0001), hospital stay (MD=-0.99, 95% CI:-1.82~-0.17, P = 0.02), and number of pain medications(MD=-0.65, 95% CI:-1.07~-0.23, P = 0.002) in the single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy group were better than those in the multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy group. There is no significant difference between the single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy group and the multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy group in mean operation time(MD = 5.23,95% CI:-16.58~27.04,P = 0.64), time to first soft fluid diet(MD=-0.06,95% CI: -0.30~0.18,P = 0.63), time to first flatus(MD=-0.18,95% CI:-0.43~0.07,P = 0.16), early complication(OR = 0.73,95% CI:0.50~1.09,P = 0.12), hospital mortality(OR = 1.00,95% CI:0.09~11.16,P = 1.00), retrieved number of lymph nodes(MD=-1.15, 95% CI:-2.71~0.40, P = 0.15), survival rate after surgery 1 year(OR = 2.14,95% CI:0.50~9.07,P = 0.30), and survival rate after surgery 5 year(93.7 vs. 87.6%; p = 0.689).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy is both safe and feasible for laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, with similar operation times and better short-term outcomes than multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy in terms of hospital stay, postoperative pain, and estimated blood loss. There was no significant difference in long-term outcomes between single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy and multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy.

3D laparoscopic-assisted vs open gastrectomy for carcinoma in the remnant stomach: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic technique has gradually been applied to the treatment of carcinoma in the remnant stomach (CRS), but its clinical efficacy remains controversial.

AIM

To compare the short-term and long-term results of 3D laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (3DLAG) with open gastrectomy (OG) for CRS.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients diagnosed with CRS and admitted to the First Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital from January 2016 to January 2021 were retrospectively collected. A total of 84 patients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled. All their clinical data were collected and a database was established. All patients were treated with 3DLAG or OG by experienced surgeons and were divided into two groups based on the different surgical methods mentioned above. By using outpatient and telephone follow-up, we were able to determine postoperative survival and tumor status. The postoperative short-term efficacy and 1-year and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Among 84 patients with CRS, 48 were treated with OG and 36 with 3DLAG. All patients successfully completed surgery. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, ASA score, initial disease state (benign or malignant), primary surgical anastomosis method, interval time of carcinogenesis, and tumorigenesis site. Patients in the 3DLAG group experienced less intraoperative blood loss (188.33 ± 191.35 mL vs 305.83 ± 303.66 mL; P = 0.045) and smaller incision (10.86 ± 3.18 cm vs 20.06 ± 5.17 cm; P < 0.001) than those in the OG group. 3DLAGC was a more minimally invasive method. 3DLAGC retrieved significantly more lymph nodes than OG (14.0 ± 7.17 vs 10.73 ± 6.82; P = 0.036), whereas the number of positive lymph nodes did not differ between the two groups (1.56 ± 2.84 vs 2.35 ± 5.28; P = 0.413). The complication rate (8.3% vs 20.8%; P = 0.207) and intensive care unit admission rate (5.6% vs 14.5%; P = 0.372) were equivalent between the two groups. In terms of postoperative recovery, the 3DLAGC group had a lower visual analog score, shorter indwelling time of gastric and drainage tubes, shorter time of early off-bed motivation, shorter time of postoperative initial flatus and initial soft diet intake, shorter postoperative hospital stay and total hospital stay, and there were significant differences, showing better short-term efficacy. The 1-year and 3-year OS rates of OG group were 83.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 72.4%-95.6%] and 73.3% (95%CI: 60.0%-89.5%) respectively. The 1-year and 3-year OS rates of the 3DLAG group were 87.3% (95%CI: 76.4%-99.8%) and 75.6% (95%CI: 59.0%-97.0%), respectively. However, the 1-year and 3-year OS rates were similar between the two groups, which suggested that long-term survival results were comparable between the two groups (P = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

Compared with OG, 3DLAG for CRS achieved better short-term efficacy and equivalent oncological results without increasing clinical complications. 3DLAG for CRS can be promoted safely and effectively in selected patients.

Current Status and Trends of Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy in Korea

Since its introduction in the early 1990s, laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely accepted for the treatment of gastric cancer worldwide. In the last decade, the Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study group performed important clinical trials and exerted various efforts to enhance the quality of scientific knowledge and surgical techniques in the field of gastric cancer surgery. Laparoscopic gastrectomy has shifted to a new era in Korea due to recent advances and innovations in technology. Here, we discuss the recent updates of laparoscopic gastrectomy—namely, reduced-port, single-incision, robotic, image-guided, and oncometabolic surgery.

Comparison of laparoscopic gastrectomy with 3-D/HD and 2-D/4 K camera system for gastric cancer: a prospective randomized control study

PURPOSE

We conducted a prospective clinical control study to identify the best imaging technology among three-dimensional (3-D) high-definition (HD) stereovision and two-dimensional (2-D) ultra-high-resolution (4 K) technology and confirm their effects on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

From April 2018 to August 2019, 50 patients were randomly classified into two groups based on the imaging technology (3-D/HD group = 25, 2-D/4 K = 25). After excluding eight patients based on laparoscopic findings, 42 patients were analyzed (3-D/HD group = 21, 2-D/4 K = 21). The primary endpoint was the operative time; the secondary endpoints were blood loss, postoperative infectious complications, and postoperative hospital stay.

RESULTS

The patients' backgrounds were similar (sex, age, body mass index [BMI], stage, procedure, and extent of lymph node dissection). There were no significant differences in operative time (252 vs. 238 min, P = 0.70), total blood loss, postoperative infectious complications, and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups. However, video analysis of surgeries revealed a significantly shortened median operative time (18 vs. 25 min, P = 0.04) in the suturing step with 3-D/HD; the median number of camera cleaning procedures during suprapancreatic lymph node dissection was significantly lower with 2-D/4 K than with 3-D/HD (n = 4.4 vs. 2.8, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

3-D/HD and 2-D/4 K laparoscopic radical gastrectomies provide similar surgical outcomes. However, the 3-D monitor reduces suturing time during reconstruction, while the 4 K monitor reduces the number of camera cleaning procedures during lymphadenectomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (identification number 000029227).