Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: technical and oncologic aspects

Chinese national clinical practice guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in the digestive system in China. Few comprehensive practice guidelines for early gastric cancer in China are currently available. Therefore, we created the Chinese national clinical practice guideline for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of early gastric cancer.

METHODS

This clinical practice guideline (CPG) was developed in accordance with the World Health Organization's recommended process and with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) in assessing evidence quality. We used the Evidence to Decision framework to formulate clinical recommendations to minimize bias and increase transparency in the CPG development process. We used the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) as reporting and conduct guidelines to ensure completeness and transparency of the CPG.

RESULTS

This CPG contains 40 recommendations regarding the prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of early gastric cancer based on available clinical studies and guidelines. We provide recommendations for the timing of Helicobacter pylori eradication, screening populations for early gastric cancer, indications for endoscopic resection and surgical gastrectomy, follow-up interval after treatment, and other recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

This CPG can lead to optimum care for patients and populations by providing up-to-date medical information. We intend this CPG for widespread adoption to increase the standard of prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of early gastric cancer; thereby, contributing to improving national health care and patient quality of life.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: has the time come for considered it a standard procedure?

Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymphadenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer. A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase III evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage gastric cancer. At present, laparoscopic gastrectomy is considered a standard procedure for early-stage gastric cancer, especially in Asian countries. On the other hand, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer have been recently published, in particular concerning the latest results obtained by laparoscopic approach to advanced gastric cancer. It seems very useful to update the review of literature in light of these new evidences for this subject and draw some considerations.

Comparing short-term outcomes after totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with Billroth I anastomosis: early experience of a single institution

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Compliance with D2 lymph node dissection in reduced-port totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer

This phase II clinical trial was performed to determine whether reduced-port laparoscopic surgery with complete D2 lymph node (LN) dissection for gastric cancer is a safe and feasible surgical technique. The prospectively enrolled 65 gastric cancer patients underwent reduced-port surgery (i.e., triple-incision totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy [Duet TLDG] with D2 lymphadenectomy). Compliance rate was the primary outcome, which was defined as cases in which there was no more than one missing LN station during D2 LN dissection. The secondary outcomes were the numbers of dissected and retrieved LNs in each station and other short-term surgical outcomes and postoperative course. The compliance rate was 58.5%. The total number of retrieved LNs was 41 (range: 14–83 LNs). The most common station missing from LN retrieval was station no. 5 (35/65; 53.8%), followed by station no. 1 (24/65; 36.9%). The overall postoperative complication rate was 20.0% (13/65). One patient underwent surgical treatment for postoperative complications. There was no instances of mortality. Duet TLDG is an oncologically and technically safe surgical method of gastrectomy and D2 lymphadenectomy.

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.

An Optimal Surgical Approach for Suprapancreatic Area Dissection in Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy with Complete Mesogastric Excision

BACKGROUND

During the radical operation, the suprapancreatic area is featured by anatomical complexity, and the lymph node dissection for this area is technically difficult and demanding.^1-4 Previously, we have demonstrated the presence of disseminated cancer cells in the mesogastrium^5,6 and presented a mesogastrium model for gastrectomy.⁷ As a consequence, laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastric excision (D2+CME) was proposed as a new concept in the surgical treatment of advanced gastric cancer.⁸ D2+CME procedure has been shown to be associated to lower number of free intraperitoneal cancer cells and with a better disease-free survival than conventional D2 gastrectomy.⁹ Under the concept of mesogastrium model, the proposed D2+CME procedure could help surgeons better define the anatomical boundaries of suprapancreatic mesogastrium, thus using it to achieve a complete and standard excision of the suprapancreatic area dissection. Here, we briefly present perioperative results of our case series with the laparoscopic curative subtotal gastrectomy and D2+CME with a R0 resection and present a video to detail the technical aspects of a laparoscopic D2+CME approach for suprapancreatic area dissection.

METHODS

All patients in this study underwent laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (D2+CME) with a curative R0 resection. This study was approved by the Tongji Hospital Ethics Committee (Unique Reference Number: TJ-IRB20180811). The procedures in the video are described as follows. Based on our previous mesogastrium model (also named "Table model", Supplemental Figure 1), the suprapancreatic mesogastrium is attached to the lesser curvature or the posterior gastric wall and extended to the suprapancreatic area, respectively.⁷ Surgeon stands on patient left side, and the assistant lifts the stomach upward and cephalic to expose the suprapancreatic mesogastrium including left gastric mesentery (LGM), right gastric mesentery (RGM) and posterior gastric mesentery (PGM). First of all, towards to the left side of the suprapancreatic area, the "tri-junction" point of LGM is exposed. Using an energy devise, surgeon opens serosa layer and identifies the retrogastric space. The LGM and PGM are mobilized bluntly, between which a fusion retrogastric space is revealed. Both the LGM and PGM are covered by smooth and shiny surfaces of fascial propria and regarded as the "meso-bed" mutually. Secondly, at the inner side of duodenum, surgeon bluntly separates the adjuvant tissues along gastro-duodenal artery (GDA) upward and exposes right gastric mesentery (RGM). Next, after mobilizing the left gastric mesentery, surgeon removes the adipose tissue adherent to the common hepatic artery (CHA) and exposes the root of the left gastric artery after dissecting the perivascular sheath with triple-clips. Then, surgeon dissects RGM along the CHA and portal vein (HPV) towards the right side of the suprapancreatic area; afterwards, the right gastric vessels and RGM are identified and ligated. Lastly, the superior border of splenic vessels is dissected. The anterior lobe of the PGM is raised up with ligated posterior gastric vessels. Remarkably, posterior gastric vessels may be absent in some cases. Reconstruction of the alimentary tract is Roux-en-Y method. Standard recovery protocols are followed in postoperative treatments.

RESULTS

Between August 28th 2017 and December 27th 2018, 107 patients receiving laparoscopic curative subtotal gastrectomy (D2+CME) with a R0 resection were retrospective collected in this study. After exposing the suprapancreatic mesogastrium including RGM, PGM and LGM with D2+CME procedure, the LNs and fat tissues around 7, 9, 8a, 12a and 11p were removed en bloc in all patients. This study recruited 67 males and 40 females. The median age was 55 years, with body mass index (BMI) 23.0 kg/m² (Supplemental Table 1). The median number of retrieved regional lymph nodes was 31 (range 25-41), including 22 (range 17-27.5) suprapancreatic lymph nodes. The median volume of blood loss was 14 ml (range 6-34). The median total operation time was 287 min (range 265.5-313.5) and laparoscopic surgery time was 132 min (range 116-142) (Supplemental Table 2). Postoperative morbidity occurred at a rate of 9.3 %, and the mortality rate was 0% (Supplemental Table 3). The median follow-up was 10 months (range 8-13). No patient was lost during follow-up (Supplemental Table 4).

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with D2+CME procedure provides for a complete and standardized en bloc excision of the suprapancreatic area dissection.

Is Laparoscopic Approach Also Safe for the Treatment of Remnant Gastric Cancer?

The most important advantages of laparoscopic gastrectomy are the minimal invasiveness, including less postoperative pain, shorter recovery, and minimal complications. A laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is accepted widely as a standard treatment for gastric cancer. On the other hand, a laparoscopic total gastrectomy has not been popularized as a distal gastrectomy because of the complexity of a lymph node dissection and the diversity of reconstruction. In terms of laparoscopic surgery for a remnant gastrectomy, there are three key points, which are critical for safe operation: adequate lymph node dissection, meticulous adhesiolysis, and reconstruction. After radical surgery for gastric cancer, the intra-abdominal condition is greatly changed. In addition, the lymphatic anatomy around the stomach is broken and surgeons should be aware of a newly developed lymphatic system to perform adequate node dissection. An esophago-jejunal reconstruction is at risk of leakage. Until evidence that is more concrete can be obtained, experienced surgeons should consider the laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer and the risk factors of lymph node metastasis

Objective:

Lymph node metastasis (LNM) is one of the important prognostic factors of early gastric cancer (EGC). Moreover, LNM is also important when choosing therapeutic intervention for EGC patients. The purpose of this study is to explore the risk factors of LNM in EGC and to discuss the corresponding treatment.

Design:

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 253 patients with EGC who underwent surgical therapy in our department between 2012 and 2015. Univariate analysis and Multivariate Cox regression were used to evaluate the independent risk factors of LNM.

Results:

LNM was present in 38 cases among 253 patients (15%). Univariate analysis showed an obvious correlation between LNM and tumour location, tumour size, depth of invasion, morphological classification, gross type of the lesion and venous invasion. Multivariate analysis indicated that poorly differentiated carcinoma, submucosal cancer, tumour size ≥2 cm and venous invasion were the independent risk factors for LNM.

Conclusion:

Tumour size, depth of invasion, morphological classification and blood vessel invasion were predictive risk factors for LNM in EGC. We propose that EGC patients with those risk factors should be accepted gastrectomy with LN dissection.

Intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy using hemi-double-stapling technique after laparoscopic total gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients

Purpose

To present the feasibility and safety of Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy using hemi-double-stapling technique after laparoscopic total gastrectomy.

Methods

We reviewed the outcomes from 58 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy. The clinicopathological characteristics including postoperative complications were examined.

Results

The mean age and body mass index were 57.3 ± 9.7 years and 23.7 ± 2.6 kg/m², respectively. The mean overall total operation was 199.8 ± 57.0 minutes. Intraoperative blood loss was 81.6 ± 56.3 mL and there was no open conversion. The patients' hospital stay was a mean 9.6 ± 2 days. The mean proximal margin of the specimens was 2.7 ± 1.8 cm. There were 3 cases (5.1%) of anastomosis leakage, but all were controlled successfully by endoscopic stent.

Conclusion

The circular HDST technique is simple and reliable without any significant demerits with respect to safety concerns or difficulty of operation.

Technical pro & cons of the laparoscopic lymphadenectomy

Laparoscopy has been introduced in treatment of gastric cancer to reduce surgical trauma and to improve post-operative functional recovery. Most of international guidelines allow the use of this minimally invasive approach in general surgical practice only in clinical stage I. One of the most important concerns in fact is the feasibility of D2 lymphadenectomy through laparoscopy. Reduced numbers of harvested lymph nodes have been reported, particularly in stations with a more difficult access. Nevertheless subsequent papers reported adequate numbers of total number of nodes retrieved, even with D2 dissection and even in complex stations but results from randomized controlled trials still lack. Laparoscopic approach has been proven safe and effective also in extremely complex maneuvers as spleen-preserving retropancreatic lymphadenectomy. The minimally invasive approach in D2 lymphadenectomy seems to be associated to comparable incidence of specific complications as compared to open surgery. The use of laparoscopy has extended the operating time but has reduced the blood loss. Because of high complexity of this kind surgery, laparoscopic gastric surgery for cancer should be done only in referral centers.

Clinically Early Gastric Cancer: Features and Treatment Strategy

This study aimed to clarify the clinicopathologic features and explore treatment strategies for patients with pathologically confirmed advanced gastric cancer (AGC) diagnosed as clinically early gastric cancer (cEGC) before surgery. We included 955 patients who were treated by curative gastrectomy between 2008 and 2013; 42 patients had cEGC. The clinicopathologic features of the patients with cEGC were compared with those of patients with early gastric cancer (EGC); AGC; cancer of the muscularis propria (MP cancer, gastric cancer invading the muscularis propria of the stomach); or SM3 cancer (gastric cancer invading all 3 parts of the submucosal layer). Patients with cEGC had more tumor lymph node metastasis; more lymphatic invasion; and more perineural invasion (all P &lt; 0.001) compared with those with EGC. Patients with cEGC had more tumor lymph node metastasis (P = 0.017) than did patients with SM3. Compared with patients with AGC or MP cancer, patients with cEGC were more likely to be operated on using a laparoscopic procedure and less likely to receive lymph node dissection. Multivariate analysis showed that gross type III [odds ratio (OR), 12.92; P &lt; 0.001] and tumor location (middle body, OR, 2.691; P = 0.009) were significant predictors of cEGC before surgery. Although patients with cEGC had clinicopathologic features similar to those of patients with MP cancer, they were treated like patients with SM3 cancer (e.g., limited use of lymphadenectomy). These findings suggest that patients with cEGC should be given a more aggressive treatment strategy.

Oncologic value of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND:

The oncologic validity of laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains controversial. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

A comprehensive search was performed between 2008 and 2014 to identify comparative studies evaluating morbidity/mortality, oncologic surgery-related outcomes, recurrence and survival rates. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.2 software.

RESULTS:

Eight studies with a total of 1456 patients were included in this analysis. The complication rate was lower in LADG [odds ratio (OR) 0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.42-0.83; P < 0.002]. The in-hospital mortality rate was comparable (OR 1.22; 95% CI = 0.28-5-29, P = 0.79). There was no significant difference in the number of harvested lymph nodes, resection margins, cancer recurrence rate, cancer-related mortality or overall and disease-free survival (OS and DFS, respectively) rates between the laparoscopic and the open groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

The current study supports the view that LADG for AGC is a feasible, safe and effective procedure in selected patients. Adequate lymphadenectomy, resection margins, recurrence, cancer-related mortality and long-term outcomes appear equivalent to open distal gastrectomy (ODG).

Decreased Morbidity of Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy Compared With Open Distal Gastrectomy for Stage I Gastric Cancer: Short-term Outcomes From a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (KLASS-01)

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) compared with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer in Korea.

BACKGROUND

There is still a lack of large-scale, multicenter randomized trials regarding the safety of LADG.

METHODS

A large-scale, phase 3, multicenter, prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted. The primary end point was 5-year overall survival. Morbidity within 30 postoperative days and surgical mortality were compared to evaluate the safety of LADG as a secondary end point

RESULTS

: A total of 1416 patients were randomly assigned to the LADG group (n = 705) or the ODG group (n = 711) between February 1, 2006, and August 31, 2010, and 1384 patients were analyzed for modified intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and 1256 were eligible for per protocol (PP) analysis (644 and 612, respectively). In the PP analysis, 6 patients (0.9%) needed open conversion in the LADG group. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the LADG group (LADG vs ODG; 13.0% vs 19.9%, P = 0.001). In detail, the wound complication rate of the LADG group was significantly lower than that of the ODG group (3.1% vs 7.7%, P < 0.001). The major intra-abdominal complication (7.6% vs 10.3%, P = 0.095) and mortality rates (0.6% vs 0.3%, P = 0.687) were similar between the 2 groups. Modified ITT analysis showed similar results with PP analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

LADG for patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer is safe and has a benefit of lower occurrence of wound complication compared with conventional ODG.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Distal Gastrectomy With D2 Lymph Node Dissection for cT2 Gastric Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

The purpose of this study was to determine whether laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 lymphadenectomy could be a standard treatment for cT2N0-1 gastric cancer. There have been few reports regarding the long-term outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer who underwent LDG with D2 lymphadenectomy. The study included 32 patients who underwent LDG with D2 lymphadenectomy and 44 patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy (ODG) with D2 lymphadenectomy. There was no clinicopathologic difference in patient background between the groups. Operative duration was significantly longer in the LDG group than in the ODG group (297 ± 12 minutes versus 226 ± 10 minutes; P &lt; 0.001). However, blood loss was significantly less (90 ± 27 mL versus 314 ± 23 mL; P &lt; 0.001) and the number of days to assisted ambulation significantly shorter (1.1 ± 0.1 days versus 1.5 ± 0.1 days; P = 0.010) in the LDG group than in the ODG group. Median follow-up period was 60 months. The 5-year overall survival rates for the LDG group and the ODG group were 89.5% and 97.1%, respectively. The 5-year relapse-free survival rates for the LDG group and the ODG group were 88.0% and 97.7%, respectively. There were no significant differences in overall and relapse-free survival rates between the groups. LDG with D2 lymphadenectomy for cT2N0-1 gastric cancer is oncologically and technically safe and feasible, and is an option in the surgeon's arsenal. Randomized controlled study including the investigation of cost-effectiveness should be conducted.

Laparoscopic gastric tube formation with pyloromyotomy for reconstruction in patients with esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To analyze the benefit and feasibility of this procedure compared with those of open method.

METHODS

Abdominal procedure includes laparoscopic gastric mobilization, celiac axis lymph node dissection, formation of the gastric tube, and pyloromyotomy. The actual procedure performed during open surgery is the same as those of laparoscopic surgery except for the main incision. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) was performed on 54 patients with esophageal cancer. The short-term outcomes, including postoperative complications were analyzed and compared with 44 cases of open method.

RESULTS

Although the total operative time was not different between 2 groups (349.8 minutes vs. 374.8 minutes, P = 0.153), the operation time of abdominal procedure was shorter in laparoscopic group (90.6 minutes vs. 162.1 minutes, P < 0.001). Operation related complications and hospital stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The number of transfused patients was significantly smaller in laparoscopic group (11.1% vs. 27.9%, P = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastric tubing with pyloromyotomy is a feasible and safe treatment option for patients with esophageal cancer.

Laparoscopic-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node resection for advanced gastric cancer: effect of learning curve on short-term outcomes. a meta-analysis

Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with D2 resection is gradually being performed for treating advanced gastric cancer. This meta-analysis aims to compare the clinical outcomes between LADG and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) when considering the impact of the learning curve. The PubMed, Embase, and ISI databases and the Cochrane Library were electronically searched. Randomized controlled trails and retrospective comparative studies published between 1994 and 2013 were collected. We divided the included studies into two subgroups according to whether the authors had experience of at least or fewer than 40 cases of LADG with D2 resection and then compared the operative time, intraoperative bleeding, the amount of resected lymph nodes, short-term recovery parameters, and complications between LADG and ODG groups. Ten comparative studies including 1100 patients were selected. Meta-analysis showed that when LADG was compared with ODG, surgeons with experience of at least 40 cases could achieve more resected lymph nodes (P=.002), reduced time to flatus (P<.0001), shortened time to liquid diet (P<.00001), and lower complication rates (P=.02). However, the above advantages of LADG faded in the subgroup of surgeons with experience of fewer than 40 cases. Our meta-analysis suggested that the learning curve has significant effects on most of the important surgical and short-term recovery outcome parameters. Accomplishment of 40 cases of LADG with D2 lymphadenectomy is required to achieve optimum proficiency.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: A meta-analysis based on seven randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to answer the superiority of comparing laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in the treatment early gastric cancer (EGC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A comprehensive search up to May 31, 2014 was conducted on PubMed, Web of science, and the Cochrane Library. All eligible studies comparing LADG versus ODG were included. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were performed using RevMan 5.2 software.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) totaling 390 patients (195 LADG and 195 ODG) were analyzed. Compared to ODG, LADG showed longer operative time (WMD = 79.60; 95%CI = 59.86 to 99.35; P < 0.00001), but was associated with less blood loss (WMD = -108.11; 95%CI = -145.97 to -70.26; P < 0.00001), fewer administered analgesics (WMD = -1.70; 95%CI = -2.19 to -1.22; P < 0.00001), fewer number of harvested lymph node (WMD = -2.77; 95%CI = -4.38 to -1.16; P = 0.0007), lower incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.26; 95%CI = 0.13 to 0.54; P = 0.0003), shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -1.0; 95% CI = -1.83 to -0.16; P = 0.02) and earlier passage of flatus (WMD = -0.62; 95% CI = -0.96 to -0.27; P = 0.0005).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that LADG significantly reduced blood loss, decreased the frequency of analgesic administration, faster recovery, a shorter hospital stay and fewer postoperative complications compared with ODG, though at the price of longer operative times and the number of harvested lymph nodes lesser as compared to ODG.

Surgical outcomes of 2041 consecutive laparoscopic gastrectomy procedures for gastric cancer: a large-scale case control study

Background

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer has increased in popularity due to advances in surgical techniques. The aim of this study is to validate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer compared with open gastrectomy (OG).

Methods

The study comprised 3,580 patients who were treated with curative intent either by laparoscopic gastrectomy (2,041 patients) or open gastrectomy (1,539 patents) between January 2005 and October 2013. The surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with significantly less blood loss, transfused patient number, time to ground activities, and post-operative hospital stay, but with similar operation time, time to first flatus, and time to resumption of diet, compared with the open gastrectomy. No significant difference in the number of lymph nodes dissected was observed between these two groups. The morbidity and mortality rates of the LG group were comparable to those of the OG group (13.6% vs. 14.4%, P = 0.526, and 0.3% vs. 0.2%, P = 0.740). The 3-year disease-free and overall survival rates between the two groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). According to the UICC TNM classification of gastric cancer, the 3-year disease-free and overall survival rates were not statistically different at each stage.

Conclusions

Our single-center study of a large patient series revealed that LG for gastric cancer yields comparable surgical outcomes. This result was also true of local advanced gastric cancer (AGC). A well-designed randomized controlled trial comparing surgical outcomes between LG and OG in a larger number of patients for AGC can be carried out.

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy reduced surgical site infection as compared with open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in a meta-analysis of both randomized controlled and case-controlled studies

BACKGROUND

In some meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), laparoscopic or laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LDG) had several short-term advantages. However, several specific postoperative complications (PCs) were not analyzed sufficiently.

METHODS

RCTs and case-controlled studies (CCSs) comparing postoperative complications between LDG and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) were identified in PubMed and Embase. Studies in which patients' status, extent of lymph-node dissection, or reconstruction procedures were matched between the groups were included in a meta-analysis. Postoperative complications such as surgical-site infection (SSI; which included wound infection and intra-abdominal abscess), leakage, anastomotic stenosis, bleeding, ileus, delayed gastric emptying, pneumonia were evaluated in a meta-analysis performed using Review Manager version 5.2 software.

RESULT

This meta-analysis included a total of 2144 patients (1065 underwent LDG and 1079 underwent ODG) from 5 RCTs and 13 CCSs. SSI and wound infections were reported in 14 studies, and the incidences were significantly lower in LDG than in ODG (n = 1737; odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.85, P = 0.01, I(2) = 0%, and OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24-0.88, P = 0.02; I(2) = 0%). There were no significant differences in intra-abdominal abscess or other specific complications between the procedures.

CONCLUSION

LDG was associated with a lower incidence of SSI, especially wound infection, as compared with ODG in a meta-analysis of both RCTs and CCSs.

The overlap method is a safe and feasible for esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy

Background

Laparoscopic procedures are increasingly being applied to gastric cancer surgery, including total gastrectomy for tumors located in the upper gastric body. Even for expert surgeons, esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) can be technically challenging. We perform the overlap method of esophagojejunostomy after LATG for gastric cancer. However, technical questions remain. Is the overlap method safer and more useful than other anastomosis techniques, such as methods using a circular stapler? In addition, while we perform this overlap reconstruction after LATG in a deep and narrow operative field, can the overlap method be performed safely regardless of body habitus? This study aimed to evaluate these issues retrospectively and to review the literature.

Methods

From October 2005 to August 2013, we performed LATG with lymph-node dissection and Roux-en-Y reconstruction using the overlap method in 77 patients with gastric cancer. This study examined pre-, intra- and postoperative data.

Results

Mean operation time, time to perform anastomosis, and estimated blood loss were 391.4 min, 36.3 min, and 146.9 ml, respectively. There were no deaths, and morbidity rate was 13%, including one patient (1%) who developed anastomotic stenosis. Mean postoperative hospitalization was 13.4 days. Surgical outcomes did not differ significantly by body mass index.

Conclusions

First, the overlap method for esophagojejunostomy after LATG is safe and useful. Second, this method can be performed irrespective of the body type of the patient. In particular, in a deep and narrow operative field, the overlap method is more versatile than other anastomosis methods. We believe that the overlap method can become a standard reconstruction technique for esophagojejunostomy after LATG.

Postoperative pancreatic fistula after robot distal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

To compare the incidences of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) between robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 40 patients with gastric cancer who underwent RADG were compared with 40 initial patients who underwent LADG by a single surgeon. We evaluated and compared the clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical outcomes, and operative complications including POPF in two groups.

RESULTS

The POPF was observed more frequently in the LADG group than in the RADG group (22.5% versus 10%, P < 0.001). Although the serum amylase levels in the 20 first-half cases did not statistically differ between LADG and RADG (P = 0.32), those in the 20 latter-half cases were significantly lower in the RADG group (P < 0.05). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified laparoscopic surgery and visceral fat area as POPF-associated risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

RADG is feasible and safe for distal gastrectomy in terms of POPF.

Standardization of D2 lymphadenectomy and surgical quality control (KLASS-02-QC): a prospective, observational, multicenter study [NCT01283893]

BACKGROUND

Extended systemic lymphadenectomy (D2) is standard procedure for surgical treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) although less extensive lymphadenectomy (D1) can be applied to early gastric cancer. Complete D2 lymphadenectomy is the mandatory procedure for studies that evaluate surgical treatment results of AGC. However, the actual extent of D2 lymphadenectomy varies among surgeons because of a lacking consensus on the anatomical definition of each lymph node station. This study is aimed to develop a consensus for D2 lymphadenectomy and also to qualify surgeons that can perform both laparoscopic and open D2 gastrectomy.

METHODS/DESIGN

This (KLASS-02-QC) is a prospective, observational, multicenter study to qualify the surgeons that will participate in the KLASS-02-RCT, which is a prospective, randomized, clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for AGC. Surgeons and reviewers participating in the study will be required to complete a questionnaire detailing their professional experience and specific gastrectomy surgical background/training, and the gastrectomy metrics of their primary hospitals. All surgeons must submit three laparoscopic and three open D2 gastrectomy videos, respectively. Each video will be allocated to five peer reviewers; thus each surgeon's operations will be assessed by a total of 30 reviews. Based on blinded assessment of unedited videos by experts' review, a separate review evaluation committee will decide whether or not the evaluated surgeon will participate in the KLASS-02-RCT. The primary outcome measure is each surgeon's proficiency, as assessed by the reviewers based on evaluation criteria for completeness of D2 lymphadenectomy.

DISCUSSION

We believe that our study for standardization of D2 lymphadenectomy and surgical quality control (KLASS-02-QC) will guarantee successful implementation of the subsequent KLASS-02-RCT study. After making consensus on D2 lymphadenectomy, we developed evaluation criteria for completeness of D2 lymphadenectomy. We also developed a unique surgical standardization and quality control system that consists of recording unedited surgical videos, and expert review according to evaluation criteria for completeness of D2 lymphadenectomy. We hope our systematic approach will set a milestone in surgical standardization that is essential for surgical clinical trials. Additionally, our methods will serve as a novel system for educating surgeons and assessing surgical proficiency.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01283893.

Laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an updated meta-analysis

Objective

To expand the current knowledge on the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer in comparison with open total gastrectomy (OTG).

Background

Additional studies comparing laparoscopic versus open total gastric resection have been published, and it is necessary to update the meta-analysis of this subject.

Methods

Original articles compared LTG and OTG for gastric cancer, which published in English from January 1990 to July 2013 were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge by two reviewers independently. Operative time, blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, analgesic medication, first flatus day, first oral intake, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, hospital mortality, 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared using STATA version 10.1.

Results

17 studies were selected in this analysis, which included a total of 2313 patients (955 in LTG and 1358 in OTG). LTG showed longer operative time, less blood loss, fewer analgesic uses, earlier passage of flatus, quicker resumption of oral intake, earlier hospital discharge, and reduced postoperative morbidity. The number of harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, hospital mortality, 5-year OS and DFS were similar.

Conclusion

LTG had the benefits of less blood loss, less postoperative pain, quicker bowel function recovery, shorter hospital stay and lower postoperative morbidity, at the price of longer operative time. There were no statistical differences in lymph node dissection, resection margin, hospital mortality, and long-term outcomes, which indicated the similar oncological safety with OTG. A positive trend was indicated towards LTG. So LTG can be performed as an alternative to OTG by the experienced surgeons in high-volume centers. Whereas, due to the relative small sample size of long-term outcomes and lack of randomized control trials, more studies are required.

Long-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large-scale case-control and case-matched Korean multicenter study

PURPOSE

The oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer have not been evaluated. The aim of this study is to validate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer in terms of long-term survival, morbidity, and mortality retrospectively.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study group comprised 2,976 patients who were treated with curative intent either by laparoscopic gastrectomy (1,477 patients) or open gastrectomy (1,499 patients) between April 1998 and December 2005. The long-term 5-year actual survival analysis in case-control and case-matched population was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. The morbidity and mortality and learning curves were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the case-control study, the overall survival, disease-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival (median follow-up period, 70.8 months) were not statistically different at each cancer stage with the exception of an increased overall survival rate for patients with stage IA cancer treated via laparoscopy (laparoscopic group; 95.3%, open group: 90.3%; P < .001). After matching using a propensity scoring system, the overall survival, disease-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival rates were not statistically different at each stage. The morbidity of the case-matched group was 15.1% in the open group and 12.5% in the laparoscopic group, which also had no statistical significance (P = .184). The mortality rate was also not statistically significant (0.3% in the open group and 0.5% in the laparoscopic group; P = 1.000). The mean learning curve was 42.

CONCLUSION

The long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer were comparable to those of open gastrectomy in a large-scale, multicenter, retrospective clinical study.

Clinical significance of medial approach for suprapancreatic lymph node dissection during laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

Suprapancreatic lymph node dissection is critical for gastric cancer surgery. Beginning in 2010, a medial approach was adopted for suprapancreatic lymph node dissection during laparoscopic gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer in our institution. The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes of the medial approach and conventional approach in laparoscopic gastric surgery.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and December 2012, a total of 100 patients with clinical T1 or T2 tumors underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy involving suprapancreatic lymph node dissection by the medial approach (n = 44) and conventional approach (n = 56) with curative intent. The comparison was based on clinicopathological characteristics and surgical outcome.

RESULTS

The laparoscopic procedure was not converted to laparotomy in any patient. The patients' demographics and tumor characteristics did not show any statistically significant difference, except for tumor location. In the conventional approach group, the tumors were at a higher position (p = 0.037) and more frequently received Roux-en-Y reconstruction (p < 0.001). Intracorporeal anastomosis was significantly more common in the medial approach group (p < 0.001). Compared with the conventional approach, the medial approach was associated with significantly less operative blood loss (p < 0.001), more retrieved suprapancreatic lymph nodes (p = 0.019), and a shorter hospital stay (p = 0.018). The rates of complications were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the medial approach to suprapancreatic lymph node dissection seems to be convenient and useful in laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery.

Comparison of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic and Open Radical Distal Gastrectomy for Obese Patients

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer in obese patients, we compare the operative outcomes in obese patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (HALDG) and open distal gastrectomy (ODG). One hundred sixty-two obese patients with gastric cancer operated on in our department from January 2009 to December 2011 were divided into two groups: the open distal gastrectomy group (the ODG group) and the hand-assisted laparoscopic distal gastrectomy group (the HALDG group). Operative time, estimated blood loss, number of lymph node retrieval, wound length, times of analgesic injection, time to the first flatus, and postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Estimated blood loss, wound length, times of analgesic injection, time to the first flatus, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly less or shorter in the HALDG group than in the ODG group. There were no significant differences in tumor size, retrieved lymph nodes, American Joint Cancer Committee /Union Internationale Contre le Cancer staging, and resection margins between the two groups. Obesity should not be seen as a contraindication for HALDG. HALDG for obese patients is a safe, feasible, and oncologically sound procedure and has advantages over ODG.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: are the long-term results comparable with conventional open gastrectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer has been adopted to treat both early and locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC), but there are still concerns about its oncologic safety especially in AGC. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the long-term outcomes of LG with those of open gastrectomy (OG) in patients with AGC.

METHODS

The quantitative synthesis of outcomes of studies from three major databases, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central, was performed using common keywords related to gastric cancer and laparoscopy on July 31, 2012.

RESULTS

Ten studies (one randomized controlled trial and nine retrospective cohort studies) with 1,819 participants (960 patients in OG, and 859 patients in LG) were included in the current meta-analysis. Nine studies compared the overall survival rate between LG and OG for AGC, and five studies reported the disease-free survival. There was no statistical difference in overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-1.06, P = 0.22) and disease-free survival (HR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.76-1.40, P = 0.86) between the two modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The current clinical evidence revealed that there was no evidence that LG is inferior to OG even for AGC if the surgeons have sufficient experience.

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 dissection for advanced gastric cancer

The successful application of the laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 dissection for gastric cancer requires adequate understanding of the anatomic characteristics of peripancreatic and intrathecal spaces, the role of pancreas and vascular bifurcation as the surgical landmarks, as well as the variations of gastric vascular anatomy. The standardized surgical procedures based on distribution of regional lymph node should be clarified.

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

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

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

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

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

Laparoscopic splenic hilum lymph node dissection for advanced proximal gastric cancer: A modified approach for pancreas- and spleen-preserving total gastrectomy

AIM: To investigate the feasibility and optimal approach for laparoscopic pancreas- and spleen-preserving splenic hilum lymph node dissection in advanced proximal gastric cancer.

METHODS: Between August 2009 and August 2012, 12 patients with advanced proximal gastric cancer treated in Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China were enrolled and subsequently underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy with pancreas- and spleen-preserving splenic hilum lymph node (LN) dissection. The clinicopathological characteristics, surgical outcomes, postoperative course and follow-up data of these patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed in the study.

RESULTS: Based on our anatomical understanding of peripancreatic structures, we combined the characteristics of laparoscopic surgery and developed a modified approach (combined supra- and infra-pancreatic approaches) for laparoscopic pancreas- and spleen-preserving splenic hilum LN dissection. Surgery was completed in all 12 patients laparoscopically without conversion. Only one patient experienced intraoperative bleeding when dissecting LNs along the splenic artery and was handled with laparoscopic hemostasis. The mean operating time was 268.4 min and mean number of retrieved splenic hilum LNs was 4.8. One patient had splenic hilum LN metastasis (8.3%). Neither postoperative morbidity nor mortality was observed. Peritoneal metastasis occurred in one patient and none of the other patients died or experienced recurrent disease during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic total gastrectomy with pancreas- and spleen-preserving splenic hilum LN dissection using the modified approach for advanced proximal gastric cancer could be safely achieved.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

Background

The use of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remains a controversial topic, mainly because of doubts about its oncologic validity. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence.

Methods

A comprehensive search was performed until June 2013 to identify comparative studies evaluating survival rates, recurrence rates, surgical outcomes and complications. Pooled risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the random effects model. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.1 software.

Results

Fifteen trials were involved in this analysis. Compared to open gastrectomy (OG), LG involved a longer operating time (WMD = 48.67 min, 95% CI 34.09 to 63.26, P < 0.001); less blood loss (WMD = −139.01 ml, 95% CI −174.57 to −103.44, P < 0.001); earlier time to flatus (WMD = −0.79 days, 95% CI −1.14 to −0.44, P < 0.001); shorter hospital stay (WMD = −3.11 days, 95% CI −4.13 to −2.09, P < 0.001); and a decrease in complications (RR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.90, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the number of harvested lymph nodes, margin distance, mortality, cancer recurrence rate and long-term survival rate between the AGC patients treated with LG or OG (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Despite a longer operation, LG is a safe technical alternative to OG for AGC with a lower complication rate and enhanced postoperative recovery. Moreover, there were similar outcomes between both approaches in terms of cancer recurrence and the long-term survival rate. Because of the limitation of this study, methodologically high-quality studies are needed for further evaluation.

Laparoscopy versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is one of the most accepted laparoscopic procedures in the field of gastric surgery. However, currently this procedure for the advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has still not reached the area of the popularization. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopy with open distal gastrectomy in AGC patients using the meta-analytical techniques.

METHODS

The Medline Ovid, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and the Controlled Trials Registry were electronically searched. Randomized controlled trails and retrospective case-control studies, which were published between 2001 and 2011 on the management of AGC were collected on the basis of the predetermined eligibility criteria to establish a literature database. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0 software (Cochrane Library).

RESULTS

There were no randomized controlled trails available online; 7 case-control studies involving 1271 patients, of which 626 (49.2%) were laparoscopic and 645 (50.3%) were open procedures, were included in final pooled analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that LADG patients had a longer operative time [mean difference (MD), 37.2; 95% confidence interval (CI), 19.92 to 54.72, P < 0.0001] but a less estimated blood loss (MD, 122.94; 95% CI, -171.13 to -74.75; P < 0.0001), a few analgesic requirement (MD, 1.62; 95% CI, -2.51 to -0.73; P = 0.004), and a shorter hospital stay (MD, 3; 95% CI, -3.14 to -2.26; P < 0.00001) compared with patients undergoing open distal gastrectomy. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in number of lymph node dissections (MD, -0.73; 95% CI, -3.04 to 1.57; P = 0.53), postoperative mortality [odds ratio (OR), 0.80; 95% CI, 0.14 to 4.73; P = 0.81], overall complications (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.53 to 2.91; P = 0.62), and a 3-year overall survival rate (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.60; P = 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

The oncologic outcomes of LADG for AGC patients were comparable with open approach. Although open distal gastrectomy may be associated with shorter operative time, patients undergoing laparoscopic approach may be benefitted from a shorter hospital stay and a faster resumption without translation into an increase in both postoperative morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, further prospective, controlled studies, and extended follow-up are needed for a more comprehensive comparison between the 2 procedures.

Various types of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Even for expert surgeons, esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is not always easy to perform. Herein, we compare various types of esophagojejunostomy in terms of the technical aspects and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 48 patients underwent LTG for gastric cancer by the same surgeon. Four types of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomies have been applied after LTG: type A, a conventional anvil head method; type B, an OrVil™ system method; type C, a hemi-double stapling technique with anvil head; and type D, side-to-side esophagojejunostomy with linear stapler. We describe and review these types of esophagojejunostomy using a step-by-step approach.

RESULTS

The mean reconstruction times were longer for types A and B than for types C and D (p < 0.05). In terms of complications, there were five cases (10.4%) of anastomosis leakage, which was more common in types A and B: two cases in each of type A and B and one case in type C. Moreover, anastomosis stricture requiring intervention was more common in types A and B (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

To date, there are no reliable reconstruction methods after LTG. Therefore, special care is needed to prevent postoperative complication regardless of methods; also, technical innovations to support development of the safest methods of esophagojejunostomy are warranted.

Case-matched comparison of laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM: To compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS: A retrospective study was performed by comparing the outcomes of 54 patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with those of 54 patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy (ODG) between October 2004 and October 2007. The patients’ demographic data (age and gender), date of surgery, extent of lymphadenectomy, and differentiation and tumor-node-metastasis stage of the tumor were examined. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, complications, pathological findings, and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LADG group than in the ODG group (259.3 ± 46.2 min vs 199.8 ± 40.85 min; P < 0.05), whereas intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were significantly lower (160.2 ± 85.9 mL vs 257.8 ± 151.0 mL; 13.0% vs 24.1%, respectively, P < 0.05). In addition, the time to first flatus, time to initiate oral intake, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the LADG group than in the ODG group (3.9 ± 1.4 d vs 4.4 ± 1.5 d; 4.6 ± 1.2 d vs 5.6 ± 2.1 d; and 9.5 ± 2.7 d vs 11.1 ± 4.1 d, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the LADG group and ODG group with regard to the number of harvested lymph nodes. The median follow-up was 60 mo (range, 5-97 mo). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 94.3%, 90.2%, and 76.7%, respectively, in the LADG group and 89.5%, 84.7%, and 82.3%, respectively, in the ODG group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.0%, 91.9%, and 81.1%, respectively, in the LADG group and 91.5%, 86.9%, and 82.1%, respectively, in the ODG group. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the survival rate.

CONCLUSION: LADG is suitable and minimally invasive for treating distal gastric cancer and can achieve similar long-term results to ODG.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy: a matched-cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to compare short-term laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with open total gastrectomy (OTG) outcomes in gastric cancer.

METHODS

Seventy patients who underwent total gastrectomy via LTG or OTG were included. All cases were matched for stage, age, and sex by means of statistically generated selection of all gastrectomies performed during the same period.

RESULTS

Although the operation time was not longer for LTG, the time required for esophagojejunostomy was significantly longer in LTG than in OTG (43 vs 14 min, P < .05). The incidence of anastomotic complications was higher in the LTG group as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative complications such as anastomotic leakage and stenosis were observed more frequently in LTG. To improve the safety of esophagojejunostomy in LTG, technical innovations should be pursued.

Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: the short-term outcome at a low volume center

Purpose

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been adopted for the treatment of gastric cancer, and despite the technical difficulties, totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy has been considered less invasive than laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy. Although there have been many reports regarding the feasibility and safety of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy at large volume centers, few reports have been conducted at low-volume centers. The purpose of this study is to try to assess the feasibility and safety of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy at a low volume center through the analysis of short-term outcomes of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy compared with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy.

Materials and Methods

The clinical data and short-term surgical outcomes of 35 patients who had undergone laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy between April 2007 and March 2010, and 37 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy between April 2010 and August 2012 were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

There was no significant difference in the demographic and clinical data. However the reconstruction method and extent of lymphadenectomy showed statistically significant differences. Operation time and estimated blood loss did not show significant differences. Surgical and medical complications did not show significant differences but postoperative courses including time-to-first oral intake and postoperative hospital stay were significantly increased.

Conclusions

Our study shows that totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is technically feasible at a low volume center. Therefore, totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy can be considered as one of the surgical treatment for early gastric cancer. However the possibility that totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy may have less benefit should also be considered.

A propensity score-matched case-control comparative study of laparoscopic and open extended (D2) lymph node dissection for distal gastric carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Technical proficiency at laparoscopic D2 lymph node dissection (LND) is essential for extending the use of laparoscopic surgery beyond the treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical and oncological feasibility of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 LND for distal gastric cancer.

METHODS

Of 922 patients who underwent open or LDG with D2 LND for gastric carcinoma, 133 treated by LDG and 133 treated by open distal gastrectomy (ODG) were selected using the propensity score matching method. The short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survivals of these matched groups were compared.

RESULTS

The two study groups were well matched with respect to age, sex, body mass index, comorbidity, ASA score, abdominal operation history, and tumor stage. The LDG group had a significantly longer mean operating time (227 vs. 161 min, p < 0.001) but showed significantly less intraoperative blood loss (149 vs. 189 ml, p = 0.007). Total numbers of collected lymph nodes were similar in the two groups. Postoperatively, no significant intergroup differences were found for hospital stay, morbidity, or mortality. Furthermore, overall survivals were similar in the two groups (p = 0.621). Multivariate analysis showed that male gender, age ≥70 years, and intraoperative blood loss of ≥200 ml were independent risk factors of postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic D2 LND for distal gastric cancer is technically safe and feasible compared with ODG. A prospective randomized trial is warranted to evaluate long-term oncological outcomes in advanced gastric carcinoma.

Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for advanced gastric cancer without serosa invasion: a matched cohort study from South China

Background

Gastric cancer is a common malignancy worldwide and a common cause of death from cancer. Despite recent advances in multimodality treatment and targeted therapy, complete resection remains the only treatment that can lead to cure. This study was devised to investigate the technical feasibility, safety and oncologic efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer without serosa invasion.

Methods

A retrospective matched cohort study was performed in south China comparing laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy and open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer without serosa invasion. Eighty-three patients with advanced gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy between January 2008 and December 2010 were enrolled. These patients were compared with 83 patients with advanced gastric cancer undergoing open gastrectomy during the same period.

Results

There was no significant difference in clinicopathologic characteristics between the two groups. Regarding perioperative characteristics, the operation time and time to ground activities did not differ between the two groups, whereas the blood loss, transfused patient number, time to first flatus, time to resumption of diet, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly less in laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy than in open gastrectomy (P <0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative morbidity and mortality. No significant difference in the number of lymph nodes dissected was observed between these two groups. There was no significant difference in the cumulative survival rate between the two groups.

Conclusion

Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is a safe and feasible procedure for advanced gastric cancer without serosa invasion. To be accepted as a choice treatment for advanced gastric cancer, well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing short-term and long-term outcomes between laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy and open gastrectomy in a larger number of patients are necessary.

Clinical experience of 528 laparoscopic gastrectomies on gastric cancer in a single institution

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) as well as early gastric cancer (EGC) has gradually gained popularity. However, long-term experiences of LG for AGC as well as EGC rarely have been reported.

METHODS

A total of 528 patients with gastric cancer were enrolled in the study, and clinical experiences of LG were evaluated.

RESULTS

The study included 332 men and 196 women. The mean age was 61.3 ± 11.8 years. Of the 528 patients, 432 underwent distal gastrectomy, 87 had a total gastrectomy, and 9 had a proximal gastrectomy. There were 198 T1a, 139 T1b, 63 T2, 83 T3, and 45 T4a lesions. In 127 patients, lymph node metastasis was observed, and the rate of it was 1.5% in T1a, 12.2% in T1b, 34.9% in T2, 59.0% in T3, and 80.0% in T4a. The median follow-up period was 24 months (range, 1-83 months). The 5-year survival and disease-free survival rates according to the stage of tumor were 99.3% and 97.8% in stage I, 95.4% and 89.7% in stage II, and 44.4% and 31.3% in stage III, respectively. Operation related morbidities occurred in 45 patients, and there were 2 mortalities. Tumors recurred in 36 patients consisting of 2 in T1a, 2 T1b, 2 T2, 12 T3, and 18 T4a. Carcinomatosis peritonei was observed most commonly.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, oncologic results and the safety of LG for EGC and serosa-negative AGC were acceptable. This treatment may be considered as an alternative operative approach.

Totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy and Billroth II gastrojejunostomy for gastric cancer: short- and medium-term results of 139 consecutive cases from a single institution

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to investigate the feasibility, safety, and associated 3-year survival outcomes of the totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) for the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS

Herein, we analyzed the clinical data from 139 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who received TLDG at our institution from March of 2007 to March of 2013.

RESULTS

TLDG was successfully carried out in 139 patients; no cases were converted to open surgery. The mean operation time was 228.6 ± 51.0 minutes, mean blood loss was 131.2 ± 85.2 mL, and mean number of dissected lymph nodes was 31.1 ± 9.0. The average time to flatus, time to fluid diet, and length of hospital stay were 3.6 ± 1.1 days, 4.8 ± 1.6 days, and 9.8 ± 4.0 days, respectively. The postoperative morbidity was 10.1%. A total of 135 patients were followed for a subsequent 1-73 months (median, 24.0 months). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 82.3% and 82.9%, respectively. When divided by stage, the 3-year DFS for stage I, II, and III were 100%, 86.2%, and 48.8%, respectively; and the 3-year OS for stage I, II, and III were 98.0%, 92.3%, and 51.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this preliminary report, TLDG was found to be a safe, feasible, and efficacious procedure for the treatment of gastric cancer with encouraging 3-year overall and stage-by-stage survival rates.