Comparison of robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

Myosteatosis predicts postoperative complications and long-term survival in robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy is increasingly utilized for gastric cancer, but high morbidity remains a concern. Myosteatosis or low skeletal muscle density reflecting fatty infiltration, associates with complications after other cancer surgeries but has not been evaluated for robotic gastrectomy.

METHODS

This retrospective study analysed 381 patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer from September 2019 to October 2022. Myosteatosis was quantified on preoperative computed tomography (CT) images at lumbar 3 (L3). Propensity score matching addressed potential confounding between myosteatosis and non-myosteatosis groups. Outcomes were postoperative complications, 30 days mortality, 30 days readmissions and survival.

RESULTS

Myosteatosis was present in 33.6% of patients. Myosteatosis associated with increased overall (47.7% vs. 26.5%, p < 0.001) and severe complications (12.4% vs. 4.9%, p < 0.001). After matching, myosteatosis remained associated with increased overall complications, major complications, intensive care unit (ICU) transfer and readmission (all p < 0.05). Myosteatosis independently predicted overall [odds ratio (OR) = 2.86, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.57-5.20, p = 0.001] and severe complications (OR = 4.81, 95% CI: 1.51-15.27, p = 0.008). Myosteatosis also associated with reduced overall (85.0% vs. 93.2%, p = 0.015) and disease-free survival (80.3% vs. 88.4%, p=0.029). On multivariate analysis, myosteatosis independently predicted poorer survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.83, 95% CI: 1.32-6.08, p=0.012] and disease-free survival (HR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.01-3.30, p=0.032).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative CT-defined myosteatosis independently predicts increased postoperative complications and reduced long-term survival after robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Assessing myosteatosis on staging CT could optimize preoperative risk stratification.

Robotic gastrectomy is more beneficial for advanced than early-stage gastric cancer: a comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy using propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is the fifth most prevalent malignancy globally and the fourth major contributor to cancer-related mortality. The comparative effectiveness of robotic gastrectomy (RG) versus laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) at different stages of gastric cancer is unclear regarding surgical and survival outcomes. We compared surgical and survival outcomes between RG and LG in early-stage (cStage I) and advanced (cStage II/III) gastric cancers to elucidate the difference in the efficacy of RG across various stages of gastric cancer.

METHODS

We identified 299 patients (LG, 170; RG, 129) with cStage II/III disease and 569 (LG, 455; RG, 114) with cStage I disease who underwent either LG or RG. Following propensity score matching for RG and LG, 118 pairs were selected for cStage II/II and 113 pairs for cStage I. Surgical and survival outcomes of LG and RG were separately compared for cStage II/III and cStage I.

RESULTS

In cStage II/III, RG showed significantly fewer intra-abdominal complications of Clavien-Dindo (C.D.) Grade ≥ III in the RG group than in the LG group (LG = 8.5 vs. RG = 1.7%, P = 0.033). Multivariate analysis identified LG as an independent risk factor for intra-abdominal complications of C.D. Grade ≥ III (OR 5.69, 95% CI 1.17-27.70, P = 0.031). However, in cStage I, no difference in surgical outcomes between LG and RG was observed. No differences were observed in survival outcomes between LG and RG in both cStage I or cStage II/III.

CONCLUSIONS

The real benefit of RG was demonstrated in surgical outcomes, especially for advanced-stage gastric cancer.

Robotic gastrectomy was reliable option for overweight patients with gastric cancer: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

The role of minimally invasive surgery using robotics versus laparoscopy in resectable gastric cancer patients with a high body mass index (BMI) remains controversial.

METHODS

A total of 482 gastric adenocarcinoma patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 who underwent minimally invasive radical gastrectomy between August 2016 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, including 109 cases in the robotic gastrectomy (RG) group and 321 cases in the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) group. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1:1 ratio was performed, and the perioperative outcomes, lymph node dissection, and 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were compared.

RESULTS

After PSM, 109 patients were included in each of the RG and LG groups, with balanced baseline characteristics. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had similar intraoperative estimated blood loss [median (IQR) 30 (20-50) vs. 35 (30-59) mL, median difference (95%CI) - 5 (- 10 to 0)], postoperative complications [13.8% vs. 18.3%, OR (95%CI) 0.71 (0.342 to 1.473)], postoperative recovery, total harvested lymph nodes [(34.25 ± 13.43 vs. 35.44 ± 14.12, mean difference (95%CI) - 1.19 (- 4.871 to 2.485)] and textbook outcomes [(81.7% vs. 76.1%, OR (95%CI) 1.39 (0.724 to 2.684)]. Among pathological stage II-III patients receiving chemotherapy, the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy in the RG group was similar to that in the LG group [median (IQR): 28 (25.5-32.5) vs. 32 (27-38.5) days, median difference (95%CI) - 3 (- 6 to 0)]. The 3-year OS (RG vs. LG: 80.7% vs. 81.7%, HR = 1.048, 95%CI 0.591 to 1.857) and DFS (78% vs. 76.1%, HR = 0.996, 95%CI 0.584 to 1.698) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

RG conferred comparable lymph node dissection, postoperative recovery, and oncologic outcomes in a selected cohort of patients with BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2.

Comparison of short‑term outcomes and 3-year overall survival between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing use of robotic gastrectomy (RG) as an alternative to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer, controversy remains over the advantages of RG compared to LG and there is a paucity of studies comparing the two techniques regarding patient survival.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, 675 patients undergoing minimally invasive gastrectomy were recruited from January 2016 to January 2018 (LG: n = 567; RG: n = 108). A one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was applied to minimize the selection bias due to confounding factors, yielding 104 patients in each of the RG and LG groups. After matching, the short-term outcomes and 3-year overall survival were compared in the two groups.

RESULTS

The PSM cohort analysis showed a similar 3-year overall survival between RG and LG groups (p = .249). Concerning the short-term outcomes, the RG compared to LG resulted in lower blood loss (p = .01), lower postoperative complications (p = .001), lower postoperative pain (p = .016), earlier initiation of soft diet (p = .011), shorter hospital stay ‌(p = .012), but higher hospitalization expenses (p = .001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that RG may offer advantages in terms of blood loss, surgical complications, recovery time, and pain management compared to LG while maintaining similar overall survival rates. However, RG is associated with higher hospital costs, potentially limiting its wider adoption. Further research, including large, multi-center randomized controlled trials with longer patient follow-up, particularly for advanced gastric cancer, is needed to confirm these findings.

Initial 12 Cases of Robot-Assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer Using the Hinotori Surgical Robot System: Tips for the Efficient Introduction of a New Surgical Robot

Introduction: The use of robotic platform for gastrectomy for gastric cancer is rapidly increasing. This study aimed to describe the perioperative outcomes of 12 patients who underwent robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using the hinotori™ surgical robot system (hinotori), a novel robot-assisted surgical platform, and compare the outcomes with the existing system, the da Vinci® Surgical System (DVSS). Methods: This study included 12 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using the hinotori between March 2023 and September 2023 at our institution. The comprehensive perioperative outcomes of these patients were retrospectively analyzed and compared to 11 patients who underwent robotic gastrectomy using the DVSS during the same period. Results: The median age and body mass index were 71 years (range: 56-86) and 22.7 kg/m2 (range: 16.1-26.7). Distal and total gastrectomy were performed in 8 and 4 patients, respectively. The median console time and operation times were 187 (range: 112-270) and 252 minutes (range: 173-339), respectively. The median blood loss was 3 mL (range: 2-5). No intra- or postoperative complications were observed. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes between the hinotori and the DVSS. Conclusions: Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using the hinotori is a feasible procedure and achieved perioperative outcomes similar to that using the DVSS. Clinical Trial Registration number: 114167-1.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A Western propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) has been shown to be safe and feasible in the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). However, it is unclear whether RG is equivalent to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), especially in the Western world. Our objective was to compare the outcomes of RG and LG in GC patients.

METHODS

We reviewed all gastric adenocarcinoma patients who underwent curative gastrectomy by minimally invasive approach in our institution from 2009 to 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to reduce selection bias. DaVinci Si platform was used for RG.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were eligible for inclusion (48 RG and 108 LG). Total gastrectomy was performed in 21.3% and 25% of cases in LG and RG, respectively. The frequency of stage pTNM II/III was 48.1%, and 54.2% in the LG and RG groups (p = 0.488). After PSM, 48 patients were matched in each group. LG and RG had a similar number of dissected lymph nodes (p = 0.759), operative time (p = 0.421), and hospital stay (p = 0.353). Blood loss was lower in the RG group (p = 0.042). The major postoperative complications rate was 16.7% for LG and 6.2% for RG (p = 0.109). The 30-day mortality rate was 2.1% and 0% for LG and RG, respectively (p = 1.0). There was no significant difference between the LG and RG groups for disease-free survival (79.6% vs. 61.2%, respectively; p = 0.155) and overall survival (75.9% vs. 65.7%, respectively; p = 0.422).

CONCLUSION

RG had similar surgical and long-term outcomes compared to LG, with less blood loss observed in RG.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Real-world evidence from a large-scale inpatient database in Japan

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) has been widely performed throughout Japan since it became insured in 2018. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of RDG and laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for gastric cancer using real-world data.

METHODS

A total of 4161 patients who underwent LDG (n = 3173) or RDG (n = 988) for gastric cancer between April 2018 and October 2022 were identified through the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination Database, which covers 42 national university hospitals. The primary outcome was postoperative in-hospital mortality rate. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complication rates, time to diet resumption, and postoperative length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality and postoperative complication rates in the RDG group were comparable with those in the LDG group (0.1% vs. 0.0%, p = 1.000, and 8.7% vs. 8.2%, p = 0.693, respectively). RDG was associated with a longer duration of anesthesia (325 vs. 262 min, p < 0.001), similar time to diet resumption (3 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative LOS (10 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001) compared with LDG.

CONCLUSIONS

RDG was performed safely and provided shorter postoperative LOS, since it became covered by insurance in Japan.

Short- and long-term comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients with BMI≥30 kg/m2: A propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric patients has gained popularity in recent decades, reports on the comparison of short and long clinical outcomes between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer patients with BMI≥30 kg/m2 are still limited.

METHODS

A total of 226 obese gastric cancer patients who underwent either RG (n = 81) or LG (n = 145) were enrolled in this study between October 2014 and September 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) was performed to reduce confounding bias. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared between the RG and LG groups.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics of 156 patients in the RG group (n = 79) and LG group (n = 79) were well balanced after PSM. Compared with the LG group, the RG group had a significantly shorter operation time, less estimated blood loss, more harvested lymph nodes, a faster postoperative recovery course, reduced surgical morbidity, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay. The long-term outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RG is a safe and feasible approach for gastric cancer with a BMI≥30 kg/m2 and has better short-term clinical outcomes than LG. However, RG is similar to LG in terms of long-term prognosis.

Feasibility of articulating laparoscopic instruments in laparoscopic gastrectomy using propensity score matching

Advancements in minimally invasive surgery has led to the development of several surgical instruments, including the ArtiSential®. This new instrument provides a greater range of motion and improved dexterity to laparoscopic procedures, making it an alternative option to traditional straight instruments, and the Da Vinci robot system. The purpose of this study is to compare the postoperative outcomes of a prospective cohort of patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy using articulating instruments with those of a historical cohort of patients who underwent the same procedure using straight instruments. The study was designed as a prospective observational cohort study matched to a retrospective historical cohort using propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the rate of early complications within 90 days of surgery. Other outcomes included the operation time, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus, time to first soft fluid diet, hospital stay, and mortality. After propensity score matching, 41 patients were enrolled in both groups. The mean age was 62.4 ± 12.3 years in the conventional group and 63.5 ± 9.6 years in the artisential group (p = 0.647). Mean operative time was significantly shorter in the artisential group compared to the conventional group (136.1 min vs. 163.9 min, p = 0.032). The time to first soft fluid diet was also significantly shorter in the artisential group (2.2 days vs. 2.8 days, p = 0.030), but there was no significant difference in the time to first flatus and overall hospital stay. The incidence of early complications was lower in the artisential group, but the difference was not significant (24.4% vs 7.3%, p = 0.070). There was no mortality in either group. The use of articulating instruments for laparoscopic gastrectomy did not increase postoperative morbidity compared to straight laparoscopic instruments. The use of articulating instruments may be associated with faster bowel recovery and less early complications.

The 5-factor modified frailty index is a novel predictive marker of death from other diseases after curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM

The 5-factor modified frailty index (MFI-5) is a stratification tool to evaluate a patient's frailty. This study determined whether the MFI-5 is associated with short- and long-term outcomes after curative gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 447 consecutive patients who underwent curative gastrectomy, and evaluated their overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

A total of 75 patients (16.8%) had high MFI-5 scores (MFI-5 ≥3). A high MFI-5 score was significantly associated with advanced age, male sex and severe postoperative complications. Patients with high MFI-5 scores had significantly poorer OS and RFS than those with low MFI-5 scores (5-year OS, 80.3% vs 59.7%, P < 0.01; 5-year RFS, 77.4% vs 54.9%, P < 0.01). Additionally, a high MFI-5 score was an independent predictor for OS (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.09-2.61; P = 0.02) and RFS (hazard ratio, 1.80, 95% CI 1.19-2.74; P = 0.01). However, cancer-specific survival was not significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The MFI-5 score can be predictive of postoperative morbidity and deaths from other disease after curative gastrectomy after curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2023; 23: 750-756.

Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a prospective trial-based economic evaluation

IMPORTANCE

It is largely unclear whether robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) is cost-effective for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG), and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with LAGC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, LDG, and ODG.

EXPOSURES

RDG, LDG, and ODG.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

This pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials included 449 patients: 117, 254, and 78 patients in the RDG, LDG, and ODG groups, respectively. After IPTW, RDG demonstrated its priority in terms of less blood loss, postoperative length, and complication rate (all P < 0.05). RDG also showed higher QOL with more cost, representing an ICER of $85,739.73 per QALY and $42,189.53 per QALY compared to LDG and ODG, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RDG achieved the best cost-effectiveness for patients with LAGC only when the willingness-to-pay threshold was > $85,739.73 per QALY, which significantly exceeded 3 times Chinese per capita GDP. Furthermore, one of the most important factors was the indirect costs of robotic surgery in terms of the cost-effectiveness of RDG compared to that of LDG or ODG.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although improved short-term outcomes and QOL were seen in patients underwent RDG, the economic burden should be considered in the clinical decision-making regarding robotic surgery use for patients with LAGC. Our findings may vary in different health care settings and affordability. Trial registration CLASS-01 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, CT01609309) and FUGES-011 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03313700).

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

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

Short-term outcomes of different esophagojejunal anastomotic techniques during laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different techniques have been described for esophagojejunostomy (EJ) during laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer. Linear stapled techniques include overlap (OL) and functional end-to-end anastomosis (FEEA) while single staple technique (SST), hemi-double staple technique (HDST), and OrVil® are circular stapled approaches. Nowadays, the choice among techniques for EJ depends on operating surgeon personal preference.

PURPOSE

To compare short-term outcomes of different EJ techniques during LTG.

METHODS

Systematic review and network meta-analysis. OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® were compared. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stenosis (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used to measure relative inference.

RESULTS

Overall, 3177 patients (20 studies) were included. The technique for EJ was SST (n = 1026; 32.9%), OL (n = 826; 26.5%), FEEA (n = 752; 24.1%), OrVil® (n = 317; 10.1%), and HDST (n = 196; 6.4%). AL was comparable for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.82; 95% CrI 0.47-1.49), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.55; 95% CrI 0.27-1.21), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.54; 95% CrI 0.32-1.22), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.65; 95% CrI 0.28-1.63). Similarly, AS was similar for OL vs. FEEA (RR = 0.46; 95% CrI 0.18-1.28), OL vs. SST (RR = 0.89; 95% CrI 0.39-2.15), OL vs. OrVil® (RR = 0.36; 95% CrI 0.14-1.02), and OL vs. HDST (RR = 0.61; 95% CrI 0.31-1.21). Anastomotic bleeding, time to soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay, and mortality were comparable while operative time was reduced for FEEA.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis shows similar postoperative AL and AS risk when comparing OL, FEEA, SST, HDST, and OrVil® techniques. Similarly, no differences were found for anastomotic bleeding, operative time, soft diet resumption, pulmonary complications, hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality.

Solo surgery in robot-assisted gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer is still not well standardized. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and effectiveness of solo surgery in robot-assisted gastrectomy (SRG) for gastric cancer compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG).

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective comparative study between SRG and conventional LG. Between April 2015 and December 2022, 510 patients underwent gastrectomy, and data from a prospectively collected database were analyzed. We identified 372 patients who underwent LG (n = 267) and SRG (n = 105) and the remaining 138 patients were excluded because of remnant gastric cancer, esophagogastric junction cancer, open gastrectomy, concurrent surgery for concomitant malignancies, RG before starting SRG, or cases in which the author was unable to perform or supervise gastrectomy. Propensity score matching was performed at a ratio of 1:1 to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables, and short-term outcomes were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 90 pairs of patients who underwent LG and SRG were selected. In the propensity-matched cohort, the operation time was significantly shorter in the SRG group than that in the LG group (SRG = 305.7 ± 74.0 min vs. LG = 340.3 ± 91.65 min, p < 0.0058), less estimated blood loss was observed in the SRG group than that in the LG group (SRG = 25.6 ± 50.6 mL vs. LG = 76.1 ± 104.2 mL, p < 0.0001) and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the SRG group than that in the LG group (SRG = 7.1 ± 0.8 days vs. LG = 9.1 ± 7.7 days, p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

We found that SRG for gastric cancer was technically feasible and effective with favorable short-term outcomes, including shorter operative time, less estimated blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and lower postoperative morbidity than those in LG.

The Role of Surgery in the Management of Gastric Cancer: State of the Art

Surgery still represents the mainstay of treatment of all stages of gastric cancer (GC). Surgical resections represent potentially curative options in the case of early GC with a low risk of node metastasis. Sentinel lymph node biopsy and indocyanine green fluorescence are novel techniques which may improve the employment of stomach-sparing procedures, ameliorating quality of life without compromising oncological radicality. Nonetheless, the diffusion of these techniques is limited in Western countries. Conversely, radical gastrectomy with extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodal treatment represents a valid option in the case of advanced GC. Differences between Eastern and Western recommendations still exist, and the optimal multimodal strategy is still a matter of investigation. Recent chemotherapy protocols have made surgery available for patients with oligometastatic disease. In this context, intraperitoneal administration of chemotherapy via HIPEC or PIPAC has emerged as an alternative weapon for patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In conclusion, the surgical management of GC is still evolving together with the multimodal strategy. It is mandatory for surgeons to be conscious of the current evolution of the surgical management of GC in the era of multidisciplinary and tailored medicine.

Efficacy of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided lymphadenectomy in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Indocyanine green (ICG) imaging-guided lymphadenectomy has been introduced in gastric cancer (GC) surgery and its clinical value remains controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of ICG fluorescence imaging-guided lymphadenectomy in radical gastrectomy for GC.

Methods

Studies comparing lymphadenectomy in radical gastrectomy between use and non-use of ICG fluorescence imaging up to July 2022 were systematically searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane Library. A pooled analysis was performed for the available data regarding the baseline features, the number of retrieved lymph nodes (LNs), the number of metastatic LNs and surgical outcomes as well as oncological outcomes. RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform the statistical analysis. Quality evaluation and publication bias were also conducted.

Results

17 studies with a total of 2274 patients (1186 in the ICG group and 1088 in the control group) undergoing radical gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy were included. In the pooled analysis, the baseline features were basically comparable. However, the number of retrieved LNs in the ICG group was significantly more than that in the control group (MD = 7.41, 95% CI = 5.44 to 9.37, P < 0.00001). No significant difference was found between the ICG and control groups in terms of metastatic LNs (MD = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.25 to 0.16, P = 0.65). In addition, the use of ICG could reduce intraoperative blood loss (MD = -17.96, 95% CI = -27.89 to -8.04, P = 0.0004) without increasing operative time (P = 0.14) and overall complications (P = 0.10). In terms of oncological outcomes, the use of ICG could reduce the overall recurrence rate (OR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.28-0.89; P = 0.02) but could not increase the 2-year overall survival rate (OR = 1.25; 95% CI 0.72-2.18; P = 0.43).

Conclusions

ICG imaging-guided lymphadenectomy is valuable for complete LNs dissection in radical gastrectomy for GC. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this benefit.