Single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic gastrectomy versus conventional multi-port laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a retrospective study

Comparison efficacy and safety of total laparoscopic gastrectomy and laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy in treatment of gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The development of laparoscopic technology has provided a new choice for surgery of gastric cancer (GC), but the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) in treatment effect and safety are still controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of the two methods in the treatment of GC, and to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of totally LTG (TLTG) and LATG in the context of radical gastrectomy for GC. Additionally, we investigated the safety and feasibility of the total laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy technique.

METHODS

Literature on comparative studies of the above two surgical methods for GC (TLTG group and LATG group) published before September 2022 were searched in the PubMed, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, CNKI, and other Chinese and English databases. In addition, the following search keywords were used: Gastric cancer, total gastrectomy, total laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, esophagojejunal anastomosis, gastric/stomach cancer, total gastrectomy, totally/completely laparoscopic, laparoscopic assisted/laparoscopy assisted/laparoscopically assisted, and esophagojejunostomy/esophagojejunal anastomosis. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies.

RESULTS

After layer-by-layer screening, 258 pieces of literature were recovered, and 11 of those pieces were eventually included. This resulted in a sample size of 2421 instances, with 1115 cases falling into the TLTG group and 1306 cases into the LATG group. Age or sex differences between the two groups were not statistically significant, according to the meta-analysis, however the average body mass index of the TLTG group was considerably higher than that of the LATG group (P = 0.01). Compared with those in the LATG group, the incision length in the TLTG group was significantly shorter (P < 0.001), the amount of intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower (P = 0.003), the number of lymph nodes removed was significantly greater (P = 0.04), and the time of first postoperative feeding and postoperative hospitalization were also significantly shorter (P = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). There were no significant differences in tumor size, length of proximal incisal margin, total operation time, anastomotic time, postoperative pain score, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative anastomosis-related complications (including anastomotic fistula, anastomotic stenosis, and anastomotic hemorrhage), or overall postoperative complication rate (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLTG and esophagojejunostomy are safe and feasible. Compared with LATG, TLTG has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, easier access to lymph nodes, and faster postoperative recovery, and TLTG is also suitable for obese patients.

Current Issues in Reduced-Port Gastrectomy: A Comprehensive Review

Reduced-port gastrectomy (RPG) includes all procedures derived from various efforts to minimize surgical invasiveness, with single-incision laparoscopic gastrectomy (SILG) being the ultimate reduced-port technique. However, there are challenges related to its feasibility, oncological validity, training, and education. This review describes the current issues and challenges, as well as the future prospects of RPG for gastric cancer. Gastrectomy, which started as an open surgery, has evolved into a laparoscopic surgery. With the advancements in laparoscopic technology, SILG has been used to minimize surgical scarring. However, owing to the technical difficulties of SILG, cases involving the addition of 1 trocar or needle grasper alongside the multichannel port have also been reported. Additionally, 3-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (3PLG) using only 3 trocars is also being performed. RPG, as a concept, includes a range of approaches such as SILG, 2-port laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 3PLG. These techniques aimed to reduce the number of ports or incisions required for laparoscopic gastrectomy. Despite technical difficulties, RPGs offer numerous advantages, including minimal invasiveness, excellent cosmetic outcomes, and the potential for improved post-operative recovery, such as reduced length of hospital stay and post-operative pain. It could be considered similar to conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, and may not be oncologically inferior. Ongoing studies, such as the KLASS 12, are required to gain further insights.

Clinical application of two-port laparoscopic surgery in sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer resection

Background

In the field of minimally invasive surgery, the two-port laparoscopic surgery is on the rise. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of two-port laparoscopic surgery (TLS) for resecting sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancers compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS).

Methods

The clinical data of patients undergoing laparoscopic sigmoid colon cancer and upper rectal cancer resection at the Department of General Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Gannan Medical College between July 2019 and January 2022 were retrospectively collected. Grouped according to different laparoscopic surgery. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria,A total of 81 patients were enrolled, of the 25 patients from the TLS group,and of the 56 patients from the CLS group. We mainly compared whether there were statistical differences between the two groups in terms of operative time, intraoperative bleeding, incision length, time to first ambulation, time to first flatus, time to first defecation, postoperative complication rate, and other surgical outcomes.

Results

There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of baseline clinical characteristics (P > 0.05). In terms of the surgical outcomes, there were statistical differences in the total incision length (TLS: 6.21 ± 0.67 cm, CLS: 8.64 ± 1.08 cm, P < 0.001)), time to first ambulation (TLS: 2.0 ± 0.7 d, CLS:3.1 ± 0.9 d, P < 0.001), time to first flatus (TLS: 2.5 ± 0.8 d, CLS: 3.0 ± 0.8 d, P = 0.028), time to first defecation (TLS: 3.8 ± 1.3 d, CLS: 5.1 ± 2.1 d, P = 0.010), and time for liquid diet (TLS: 4.3 ± 1.4 d, CLS: 5.3 ± 1.9 d, P = 0.021). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of the pathology (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

In terms of safety, TLS in sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer resection is comparable to CLS. However, its incision is smaller and more aesthetic, and it causes lesser trauma than CLS. Additionally, it is also superior to CLS in postoperative recovery.

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.

Postoperative pain and quality of life after single-incision distal gastrectomy versus multiport laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer - a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although it has been more than ten years since its first introduction, single-incision distal gastrectomy (SIDG) still lacks solid evidence and there are also no reports on patient quality of life (QOL). This study evaluates the postoperative outcomes and patient QOL of SIDG compared to multiport laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (MLDG).

METHODS

This study was designed as a prospective phase II randomized controlled study. Patients diagnosed with early gastric cancer in the distal 2/3rd of the stomach were randomized to either multiport or single-port group. Primary endpoint was pain using the visual analogue scale on postoperative day (POD) 1. Other outcomes include operative data, complications, and patient QOL using the EORTC C30 and STO22 modules.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients in the SIDG group and 40 patients in the MLDG group were enrolled from September 2017 to February 2020. Mean operation time was 154.3 ± 53.3 min in the MLDG group and 148.9 ± 50.1 min in the SIDG group (p = 0.631). There was no difference in POD1 pain scores between the two groups (MLDG = 4.0 ± 1.3, SIDG = 4.3 ± 1.3, p = 0.372). Mean hospital stay was 5.5 (range 4-12) days in the MLDG group and 5 (range 4-17) days in the SIDG group (p = 0.993). There was no statistical significance in postoperative QOL scores.

CONCLUSION

Unlike previous reports, there was no difference in POD1 pain scores between SIDG and MLDG. Nevertheless, SIDG did not increase short-term morbidity compared to MLDG and had similar outcomes in QOL.

Feasibility and preliminary experience of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic total gastrectomy with Overlap esophagojejunostomy for gastric cancer: A study of 10 cases

Background

This study aimed to explore the feasibility and safety of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic total gastrectomy (SITG + 1) with Overlap esophagojejunostomy (SITG + 1-Overlap) and to share preliminary experiences.

Methods

This retrospective study included 10 patients with gastric cancer located in the cardia or body who underwent SITG + 1-Overlap between August 2020 and October 2021.The demographics, tumor characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and short-term complications of all the enrolled patients were summarized and statistically analyzed. Data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD) if they were normally distributed. Otherwise, Median (Quartile1, Quartile3) was used.

Results

In the collective perioperative data of these 10 patients who underwent radical gastrectomy, the median of the length of transumbilical incision and blood loss were 3.0 cm and 100.0 ml respectively, and the mean operation time and 385.5 ± 51.6 min. Postoperative data indicated that the gastric tube was removed on 2.0 (2.0, 3.0) days, and the timing of first feeding, activity, flatus, and defecation was 1.5 (1.0, 2.0) days, 2.0 (2.0, 2.0) days, 3.0 (2.0, 3.0) days, and 3.8 ± 0.6 days, respectively. The timing of drainage tube removal was 4.6 ± 1.0 days after operation. The duration of hospital stay was 7.5 ± 1.2 days and the VAS pain scores for the 3 days following surgery were 3.0 (2.0, 3.3), 2.0 (2.0, 3.0), and 1.5 (1.0, 2.0) respectively. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 30.7 ± 13.2. Most biochemical indicators gradually normalized with the recovery of the patients after surgery. No 30-day postoperative complications were noted.

Conclusions

For the first time, our preliminary data indicate the feasibility and safety of Overlap esophagojejunostomy in SITG + 1 surgery. This modified Overlap procedure has the potential to simplify the reconstruction procedure and lower the technical challenge of SITG + 1 radical gastrectomy for cardia or upper gastric cancer in the early and advanced stages.