Assessment of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Risk factors and prevention of pancreatic fistula after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Following laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), one of the critical complications that can arise is a pancreatic fistula (PF). The inability to promptly prevent, diagnose, and manage this condition can lead to severe complications and potentially be life-threatening for the patient. The incidence of PF post-LG in gastric cancer treatment is related to factors such as surgical approach, surgical instruments, characteristics of the pancreas itself, tumor stage, and the surgeon’s experience. Currently, the diagnosis of postoperative PF is mainly based on the definition and diagnostic criteria consensus established by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery. Gastrointestinal surgeons should be aware of the risk factors for PF, perform LG for gastric cancer with great care and precision, avoid pancreatic injury, and actively work to reduce the risk of postoperative PF.

Current clinical trials on gastric cancer surgery in China

Gastric cancer (GC) is the leading diagnosed malignancy worldwide, especially in China. Radical surgery is the cornerstone of GC treatment. We reviewed previous clinical trials and aimed to provide an update on the factors related to the surgical treatment of GC. The number of registered clinical trials in the field of GC surgery is rapidly increasing. With the development and popularization of endoscopic, laparoscopic, and robotic techniques, GC surgery has gradually entered a new era of precise minimally invasive surgery. Postoperative quality of life has become a major issue in addition to surgical oncological safety. Although great progress has been made in clinical research on GC in China, there are still deficiencies. Many studies enrolled large numbers of patients, but the research data were not of high quality. The characteristics of GC in China include a high incidence, large population, and large proportion of patients with advanced GC, which provides sufficient reason for studying this disease. There is still a need for well-designed, large, randomized clinical trials to improve our knowledge of the surgical treatment of GC.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: The Largest Systematic Reviews of 68,755 Patients and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer (GC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search across PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science identified 86 eligible studies, including 68,755 patients (20,894 in the RG group and 47,861 in the LG group).

RESULTS

The analysis revealed that RG was associated with superior outcomes in several areas: more lymph nodes were harvested, intraoperative blood loss was reduced, postoperative hospital stays were shorter, and the time to first flatus and oral intake was shortened (all p < 0.001). Additionally, RG resulted in lower incidences of conversion to open surgery (OR = 0.62, p = 0.004), reoperation (OR = 0.68, p = 0.010), overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.82, p < 0.001), severe complications (OR = 0.65, p < 0.001), and pancreatic complications (OR = 0.60, p = 0.004). However, RG had longer operative times and higher costs (both p < 0.001). No significant differences were found between RG and LG in terms of resection margin distance, mortality, anastomotic leakage, or recurrence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

RG is a safe and effective surgical option for patients of GC, but further improvements in operative duration and costs are needed.

Body image and quality of life undergoing totally robotic versus robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy: a retrospective propensity score matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

With the improvement of anastomotic techniques and the iteration of anastomotic instruments, robotic intracorporeal suturing has become increasingly proficient. The era of fully intracorporeal anastomosis in robotic gastric cancer resection is emerging. This study aims to explore the impact of totally robotic distal gastrectomy (TRDG) and robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) on patients' quality of life.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study is a comparative retrospective study of propensity score matching. This study included 306 patients who underwent robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer between June 2016 and December 2023 at our center. Covariates used in the propensity score included sex, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumour diameter, degree of histological differentiation, Pathological TNM stage, Pathological T stage, Pathological N stage, and Lauren classification. Outcome measures included operative time, intraoperative bleeding, time to first venting, time to first fluid intake, postoperative hospital stay, total hospitalization cost, total length of abdominal incision, postoperative complications, inflammatory response, body image, and quality of life.

RESULTS

According to the results of the study, compared with the RADG group, the TRDG group had a faster recovery time for gastrointestinal function (P = 0.025), shorter length of abdominal incision (P < 0.001), fewer days in the hospital (P = 0.006) less pain (P < 0.001), less need for additional analgesia (P = 0.013), and a postoperative white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content indexes were lower (P<0.001). In addition, the TRDG group had significantly better body imagery and cosmetic scores (P = 0.015), physical function (P = 0.039), role function (P = 0.046), and global function (P = 0.021) than the RARS group. Meanwhile, the TRDG group had milder symptoms of fatigue (P = 0.037) and pain (P < 0.001). The PASQ Total Subscale Score (P < 0.001) and Global Subscale Score (P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the TRDG group than in the RADG group at postoperative 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Totally robotic distal gastrectomy has a smaller incision, faster gastrointestinal recovery time, fewer days of postoperative hospitalization, and lower inflammatory markers than robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy. At the same time, postoperative cosmetic and quality of life outcomes were satisfactory. Clinically, these benefits translate to enhanced patient recovery, reduced surgical trauma, and better postoperative outcomes. These findings could guide surgeons in selecting more effective surgical approaches for patients undergoing gastrectomy, leading to better overall patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Impact of robotic gastrectomy in patients with primary T3 or more advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The use of robotic surgery (RS) for gastric cancer (GC) has been rapidly increasing. However, the utility of RS for advanced GC (AGC), especially T3 or more AGC, is unclear.

METHODS

Ninety patients who underwent curative upfront minimally invasive surgery (MIS) (D2 lymph node dissection) for fStage II or III GC were enrolled in this study. Among these patients, 68 underwent MIS for T3 or more AGC. Thirty-six patients underwent RS, and 32 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery (LS). The short-term and long-term surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In the T3 or more AGC cohort, there were no significant intergroup differences in the operative time or blood loss volume. The number of retrieved lymph nodes tended to be higher in the RS than LS group (38.5 vs. 33.0, p = .11). The drain amylase content on postoperative day 1 was significantly lower in the RS than LS group (243.5 vs. 521.0 IU/L, p < .01). The morbidity rate (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥2) was similar between the groups. There were no significant differences between the LS and RS groups in the 3-year overall survival rate (80.7% vs. 74.5%, respectively; p = .95) or 3-year disease-free survival rate (75.0% vs. 69.7%, respectively; p = .95).

CONCLUSIONS

RS for primary T3 or more AGC was safe and contributed to similar short-term and long-term outcomes compared with LS.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) is increasingly used as a surgical approach for gastric cancer. This study assessed the effectiveness of RAMIG and studied which stages of the IDEAL-framework (1 = Idea, 2A = Development, 2B = Exploration, 3 = Assessment, 4 = Long-term follow-up) were followed.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, Embase, Pubmed, and Web of Science were searched for studies on RAMIG up to January 2023. Data collection included the IDEAL-stage, demographics, number of participants, and study design. For randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and long-term studies, data on intra-, postoperative, and oncologic outcomes, survival, and costs of RAMIG were collected and summarized.

RESULTS

Of the 114 included studies, none reported the IDEAL-stage. After full-text reading, 18 (16%) studies were considered IDEAL-2A, 75 (66%) IDEAL-2B, 4 (4%) IDEAL-3, and 17 (15%) IDEAL-4. The IDEAL-stages were followed sequentially (2A-4), with IDEAL-2A studies still ongoing. IDEAL-3 RCTs showed lower overall complications (8.5-9.2% RAMIG versus 17.6-19.3% laparoscopic total/subtotal gastrectomy), equal 30-day mortality (0%), and equal length of hospital stay for RAMIG (mean 5.7-8.5 days RAMIG versus 6.4-8.2 days open/laparoscopic total/subtotal gastrectomy). Lymph node yield was similar across techniques, but RAMIG incurred significantly higher costs than laparoscopic total/subtotal gastrectomy ($13,423-15,262 versus $10,165-10,945). IDEAL-4 studies showed similar or improved overall/disease-free survival for RAMIG.

CONCLUSION

During worldwide RAMIG implementation, the IDEAL-framework was followed in sequential order. IDEAL-3 and 4 long-term studies showed that RAMIG is similar or even better to conventional surgery in terms of hospital stay, lymph node yield, and overall/disease-free survival. In addition, RAMIG showed reduced postoperative complication rates, despite higher costs.

Enlightenment of robotic gastrectomy from 527 patients with gastric cancer in the minimally invasive era: 5 years of optimizing surgical performance in a high-volume center - a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Learning curves have been used in the field of robotic gastrectomy (RG). However, it should be noted that the previous study did not comprehensively investigate all changes related to the learning curve. This study aims to establish a learning curve for radical RG and evaluate its effect on the short-term outcomes of patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

The clinicopathological data of 527 patients who underwent RG between August 2016 and June 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Learning curves related to the operation time and postoperative hospital stay were determined separately using cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. Then, the impact of the learning curve on surgical efficacy was analyzed.

RESULTS

Combining the CUSUM curve break points and technical optimization time points, the entire cohort was divided into three phases (patients 1-100, 101-250, and 251-527). The postoperative complication rate and postoperative recovery time tended to decrease significantly with phase advancement ( P <0.05). More extraperigastric examined lymph nodes (LN) were retrieved in phase III than in phase I (I vs. III, 15.12±6.90 vs. 17.40±7.05, P =0.005). The rate of LN noncompliance decreased with phase advancement. Textbook outcome (TO) analysis showed that the learning phase was an independent factor in TO attainment ( P <0.05).

CONCLUSION

With learning phase advancement, the short-term outcomes were significantly improved. It is possible that our optimization of surgical procedures could have contributed to this improvement. The findings of this study facilitate the safe dissemination of RG in the minimally invasive era.

Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes after Robotic Surgery for Gastric Cancer in Elderly and Younger Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Robot-assisted surgery has recently been introduced to overcome some drawbacks and technical limitations in performing laparoscopic gastrectomy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic gastrectomy in elderly patients. The study enrolled 143 patients who underwent robotic gastrectomy in a single high-volume centre. All patients were divided into two groups based on age: elderly group ≥ 75 years old (EG; n = 64) and non-elderly group < 75 years old (NEG; n = 79). Comorbidities were significantly more frequent in the EG (95.3%) than in the NEG (81%) (p = 0.011). Similarly, the percentage of ASA 3 patients was significantly higher in the EG than in the NEG (43.8% vs. 24.0%, respectively; p = 0.048). Nevertheless, the incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade III and IV complications did not differ significantly between the two groups (10.9% in the EG and 6.3% in the NEG; p = 0.852). Moreover, operative time, re-operation rate, mean number of harvested lymph nodes, 30-day mortality, and median hospital stay were similar within the two groups. Our study suggests that robotic gastrectomy can be performed safely for elderly patients. In particular, chronological age does not seem to affect either the clinical or oncological short-term outcomes after robotic gastrectomy.

Establishment of a 24/7 robotic acute care surgery program at a large academic medical center

BACKGROUND

For many years, robotic surgery has been an option for various elective surgical procedures. Though robotic surgery has not traditionally been the first choice for acute surgical patients, recent work has shown promise in broader applications. However, there are limited data regarding how to establish an institutional robotics program for higher acuity patients. This project aimed to map a pathway for the creation of an acute care surgery robotic program at a large academic medical center.

METHODS

Various stakeholders were gathered jointly with our surgical faculty: anesthesia, operating room leadership, surgical technologists, circulating nurses, Central Sterile Supply, and Intuitive Surgical Inc. representatives. Staff underwent robotics training, and surgical technologists were trained as bedside first assistants. Nontraditional robotic operating rooms were allocated for coordinated placement of appropriate cases, and pre-made case carts were arranged with staff to be available at all hours. A workflow was created between surgical faculty and staff to streamline add-on robotic cases to the daily schedule.

RESULTS

Six faculty and two fellows are now credentialed in robotics surgery, and additional surgeons are undergoing training. Numerous staff have completed training to perform operative assistant duties. The operating capacity of robotic acute care surgeries has more than doubled in just one year, from 77 to 172 cases between 2022 and 2023, respectively. Two add-on cases can be accommodated per day. Select patients are being offered robotic surgeries in the acute surgical setting, and ongoing efforts are being made to create guidelines for which patients would best benefit from robotic procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Launching a successful robotic surgery program requires a coordinated, multidisciplinary effort to ensure seamless integration into daily operations. Additional assistance from outside technology representatives can help to ensure comfort with procedures. Further studies are needed to determine the acute patient population that may benefit most from robotic surgery.

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.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

What defines the "value" of robotic surgery for patients with gastrointestinal cancers? Perspectives from a U.S. Cancer Center

The use of robotic surgery has experienced rapid growth across diverse medical conditions, with a notable emphasis on gastrointestinal cancers. The advanced technologies incorporated into robotic surgery platforms have played a pivotal role in enabling the safe performance of complex procedures, including gastrectomy and pancreatectomy, through a minimally invasive approach. However, there exists a noteworthy gap in high-level evidence demonstrating that robotic surgery for gastric and pancreatic cancers has substantial benefits compared to traditional open or laparoscopic methods. The primary impediment hindering the broader implementation of robotic surgery is its cost. The escalating healthcare expenses in the United States have prompted healthcare providers and payors to explore patient-centered, value-based healthcare models and reimbursement systems that embrace cost-effectiveness. Thus, it is important to determine what defines the value of robotic surgery. It must either maintain or enhance oncological quality and improve complication rates compared to open procedures. Moreover, its true value should be apparent in patients' expedited recovery and improved quality of life. Another essential aspect of robotic surgery's value lies in minimizing or even eliminating opioid use, even after major operations, offering considerable benefits to the broader public health landscape. A quicker return to oncological therapy has the potential to improve overall oncological outcomes, while a speedier return to work not only alleviates individual financial distress but also positively impacts societal productivity. In this article, we comprehensively review and summarize the current landscape of health economics and value-based care, with a focus on robotic surgery for gastrointestinal cancers.

Long-term survival outcomes of robotic total gastrectomy for locally advanced proximal gastric cancer: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Robotic gastrectomy is a safe and feasible approach for gastric cancer (GC); however, its long-term oncological efficacy remains unclear. The authors evaluated the long-term survival outcomes and recurrence patterns of patients with locally advanced proximal GC who underwent robotic total gastrectomy (RTG).

METHODS

This prospective study (FUGES-014 study) enrolled 48 patients with locally advanced proximal GC who underwent RTG between March 2018 and February 2020 at a tertiary referral teaching hospital. Patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) in the FUGES-002 study were enrolled in a 2:1 ratio to compare the survival outcomes between RTG and LTG. The primary endpoint of the FUGES-014 study was postoperative 30-day morbidity and has been previously reported. Here, the authors reported the results of 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), 3-year overall survival (OS), and recurrence patterns.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 48 patients in the RTG and 96 patients in the LTG groups were included. The 3-year DFS rates were 77.1% (95% CI: 66.1-89.9%) for the RTG and 68.8% (95% CI: 60.1-78.7%) for the LTG groups ( P =0.261). The 3-year OS rates were not significantly different between the groups (85.4 vs. 74.0%, P =0.122). Recurrence occurred in nine patients (18.8%) in the RTG and 27 (28.1%) patients in the LTG groups ( P =0.234). Recurrence patterns and causes of death were similar between the groups ( P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The oncological outcome of RTG was noninferior to that of LTG. Thus, RTG might be an alternative surgical treatment for locally advanced proximal GC.

Robotic 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.

Impact of preoperative sarcopenia on postoperative complications and prognosis in patients undergoing robotic gastric cancer surgery: A propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia, defined as decreased muscle mass and function, correlates with postoperative morbidity and mortality in cancer surgery. However, sarcopenia's impact specifically following robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer has not been clearly defined. This study aimed to determine the influence of sarcopenia on short- and long-term clinical outcomes after robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 381 gastric cancer patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. Sarcopenia was diagnosed by preoperative computed tomography (CT) body composition analysis. Propensity score matching created 147 pairs of sarcopenia and nonsarcopenia patients for comparison. Outcomes included postoperative complications, survival, inflammatory markers, length of stay, intensive care unit (ICU) transfer, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Sarcopenia patients exhibited significantly higher rates of overall (53.7% versus 21.1%, P < 0.001), serious (12.9% versus 4.1%, P = 0.007), and grade III-IV complications compared to nonsarcopenia pairs after matching. Sarcopenia independently predicted reduced 3-years overall (HR = 2.53, 95% CI: 1.19-5.40, P = 0.016) and disease-free survival (HR = 1.99, 95% CI: 1.09-3.66, P = 0.026). Sarcopenia patients also showed heightened postoperative leukocyte, neutrophil, platelet, platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), and monocyte to lymphocyte ratio (MLR) levels alongside suppressed lymphocytes, monocytes, and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative sarcopenia is correlated with increased postoperative complications and poorer long-term survival in gastric cancer patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. Sarcopenia assessment can optimize preoperative risk stratification and perioperative management in this population.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Distal gastrectomy (DG) with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer is routinely performed. In this meta-analysis, we present an updated overview of the perioperative and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic DG (LDG) and robotic DG (RDG) to compare their safety and overall outcomes in patients undergoing DG. An extensive search was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from the establishment of the database to June 2023 for randomized clinical trials comparing RDG and LDG. The primary outcome was operative results, postoperative recovery, complications, adequacy of resection, and long-term survival. We identified twenty studies, evaluating 5,447 patients (1,968 and 3,479 patients treated with RDG and LDG, respectively). We observed no significant differences between the two groups in terms of the proximal resection margin, number of dissected lymph nodes, major complications, anastomosis site leakage, time to first flatus, and length of hospital stay. The RDG group had a longer operative time (P < 0.00001), lesser bleeding (P = 0.0001), longer distal resection margin (P = 0.02), earlier time to oral intake (P = 0.02), fewer overall complications (P = 0.004), and higher costs (P < 0.0001) than the LDG group. RDG is a promising approach for improving LDG owing to acceptable complications and the possibility of radical resection. Longer operative times and higher costs should not prevent researchers from exploring new applications of robotic surgery.

Comparison of totally robotic and totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

With the improvements in laparoscopic or robotic surgical techniques and instruments, a growing number of surgeons have attempted to complete all digestive tract reconstruction intracorporeally; these procedures include totally robotic gastrectomy (TRG) and totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG). This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the TRG and compare the short-term outcomes of the TRG and TLG in patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2018 and June 2023, 346 consecutive patients who underwent TRG or TLG at a high-volume academic gastric cancer specialty center were included. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce confounding bias. The surgical outcomes, postoperative morbidity, and surgical burden were compared in PSM cohort.

RESULTS

After PSM, a well-balanced cohort of 194 patients (97 in each group) was included in the analysis. The total operation time of the TRG group was significantly longer than that of the TLG group (244.9 vs. 213.0 min, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the effective operation time between the 2 groups (217.8 vs. 207.2 min, P = 0.059). The digestive tract reconstruction time of the TRG group was significantly shorter than that of the TLG group (39.4 vs. 46.7 min, P < 0.001). The mean blood loss in the TRG group was less than that in the TLG group (101.1 vs. 126.8 mL, P = 0.014). The TRG group had more retrieved lymph nodes in the suprapancreatic area than that in the TLG group (16.6 vs 14.2, P = 0.002). The TRG group had a lower surgery task load index (38.9 vs. 43.1, P < 0.001) than the TLG group. No significant difference was found in terms of postoperative morbidity between the 2 groups (14.4% vs. 16.5%, P = 0.691).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that TRG is a safe and feasible procedure, and is preferable to TLG in terms of invasion and ergonomics. The TRG may maximize the superiority of robotic surgical systems and embodies the theory of minimally invasive surgery.

Laparoscopic vs robotic inguinal hernia repair: a comparison of learning curves and skill transference in general surgery residents

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on whether laparoscopic experience should be a prerequisite for robotic training. Further, there is limited information on skill transference between laparoscopic and robotic techniques. This study focused on the general surgery residents' learning curve and skill transference within the two minimally invasive platforms.

METHODS

General surgery residents were observed during the performance of laparoscopic and robotic inguinal hernia repairs. The recorded data included objective measures (operative time, resident participation indicated by percent active time on console or laparoscopy relative to total case time, number of handoffs between the resident and attending), and subjective evaluations (preceptor and trainee assessments of operative performance) while controlling for case complexity, patient comorbidities, and residents' prior operative experience. Wilcoxon two-sample tests and Pearson Correlation coefficients were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty laparoscopic and forty-four robotic cases were observed. Mean operative times were 90 min for robotic and 95 min for laparoscopic cases (P = 0.4590). Residents' active participation time was 66% on the robotic platform and 37% for laparoscopic (P =  < 0.0001). On average, hand-offs occurred 9.7 times during robotic cases and 6.3 times during laparoscopic cases (P = 0.0131). The mean number of cases per resident was 5.86 robotic and 1.67 laparoscopic (P = 0.0312). For robotic cases, there was a strong correlation between percent active resident participation and their prior robotic experience (r = 0.78) while there was a weaker correlation with prior laparoscopic experience (r = 0.47). On the other hand, prior robotic experience had minimal correlation with the percent active resident participation in laparoscopic cases (r = 0.12) and a weak correlation with prior laparoscopic experience (r = 0.37).

CONCLUSION

The robotic platform may be a more effective teaching tool with a higher degree of entrustability indicated by the higher mean resident participation. We observed a greater degree of skill transference from laparoscopy to the robot, indicated by a higher degree of correlation between the resident's prior laparoscopic experience and the percent console time in robotic cases. There was minimal correlation between residents' prior robotic experience and their participation in laparoscopic cases. Our findings suggest that the learning curve for the robot may be shorter as prior robotic experience had a much stronger association with future robotic performance compared to the association observed in laparoscopy.

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.

Advances in Gastric Cancer Surgical Management

The goal of a gastric cancer operation is a microscopically negative resection margin and D2 lymphadenectomy. Minimally invasive techniques (laparoscopic and robotic) have been proven to be equivalent for oncologic care, yet with faster recovery. Endoscopic mucosal resection can be used for T1a N0 tumor resection. Better understanding of hereditary gastric cancer and molecular subtypes has led to specialized recommendations for MSI-high tumors and patients with pathogenic CDH1 mutations. In the future, surgical management will support minimally invasive approaches and personalized cancer care based on subtype.

Robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: a randomized phase 2 trial

Robotic surgery may be an alternative to laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer (GC). However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the differences in survival between these two approaches are currently lacking. From September 2017 to January 2020, 300 patients with cT1-4a and N0/+ were enrolled and randomized to either the robotic (RDG) or laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) group (NCT03313700). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS); secondary endpoints reported here are the 3-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence patterns. The remaining secondary outcomes include intraoperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, quality of lymphadenectomy, and cost differences, which have previously been reported. There were 283 patients in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (RDG group: n = 141; LDG group: n = 142). The trial has met pre-specified endpoints. The 3-year DFS rates were 85.8% and 73.2% in the RDG and LDG groups, respectively (p = 0.011). Multivariable Cox regression model including age, tumor size, sex, ECOG PS, lymphovascular invasion, histology, pT stage, and pN stage showed that RDG was associated with better 3-year DFS (HR: 0.541; 95% CI: 0.314-0.932). The RDG also improved the 3-year cumulative recurrence rate (RDG vs. LDG: 12.1% vs. 21.1%; HR: 0.546, 95% CI: 0.302-0.990). Compared to LDG, RDG demonstrated non-inferiority in 3-year DFS rate.

Robotic distal gastrectomy using a novel pre-emptive supra-pancreatic approach without duodenal transection in the dissection of D2 lymph nodes for gastric cancer

Background

Robot-assisted surgery has shown remarkable progress as a minimally invasive procedure for gastric cancer. This study aimed to compare the pre-emptive suprapancreatic approach without duodenal transection and the conventional approach in terms of perioperative feasibility and short-term surgical outcomes.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed all patients who underwent robotic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection using the da Vinci Xi robotic system between December 2021 and April 2023 and categorized them into two groups for comparison. Patients treated using the pre-emptive suprapancreatic approach (observation group) were compared with those who received the conventional approach (control group). Employing one-to-one propensity score matching, we evaluated the postoperative morbidity and short-term outcomes in these two distinct groups to assess the efficacy and safety of the novel surgical technique.

Results

This study enrolled 131 patients: 70 in the observation group and 61 in the control group. After propensity score matching, the operative times were significantly longer in the control group than in the observation group (229.10 ± 33.96 vs. 174.84 ± 18.37, p <0.001). The mean blood loss was lower in the observation group than in the control group (25.20 ± 11.18 vs. 85.00 ± 38.78, p <0.001). Additionally, the observation group exhibited a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes, including suprapyloric, perigastric, and superior pancreatic lymph nodes (28.69 ± 5.48 vs. 19.21 ± 2.89, p <0.001; 4.98 ± 1.27 vs. 4.29 ± 1.21, p = 0.012; 10.52 ± 2.39 vs. 5.50 ± 1.62, p <0.001; 6.26 ± 2.64 vs. 5.00 ± 1.72, p = 0.029). Drain amylase levels in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group (30.08 ± 33.74 vs. 69.14 ± 66.81, p <0.001).

Conclusion

This study revealed that using the pre-emptive suprapancreatic approach without duodenal transection in the dissection of D2 lymph nodes for gastric cancer is a safe and feasible procedure in terms of surgical outcomes.

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy among malnourished patients with gastric cancer based on textbook outcome

BACKGROUND

Textbook outcome (TO) has been widely employed as a comprehensive indicator to assess the short-term prognosis of patients with cancer. Preoperative malnutrition is a potential risk factor for adverse surgical outcomes in patients with gastric cancer (GC). This study aimed to compare the TO between robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) and laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) in malnourished patients with GC.

METHODS

According to the diagnostic consensus of malnutrition proposed by Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) and Nutrition Risk Index (NRI), 895 malnourished patients with GC who underwent RAG (n = 115) or LAG (n = 780) at a tertiary referral hospital between January 2016 and May 2021 were included in the propensity score matching (PSM, 1:2) analysis.

RESULTS

After PSM, no significant differences in clinicopathological characteristics were observed between the RAG (n = 97) and LAG (n = 194) groups. The RAG group had significantly higher operative time and lymph nodes harvested, as well as significantly lower blood loss and hospital stay time compared to the LAG group. More patients in the RAG achieved TO. Logistic regression analysis revealed that RAG was an independent protective factor for achieving TO. There were more adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) cycles in the RAG group than in the LAG group. After one year of surgery, a higher percentage of patients (36.7% vs. 22.8%; P < 0.05) in the RAG group recovered from malnutrition compared to the LAG group.

CONCLUSIONS

For malnourished patients with GC, RAG performed by experienced surgeons can achieved a higher rate of TO than those of LAG, which directly contributed to better AC compliance and a faster restoration of nutritional status.

Comparison of Short-term and Three-year Oncological Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for gastric cancer.

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes of RG over LG have not yet been effectively demonstrated.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 3599 patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy at eight high-volume hospitals in China from January 2015 to June 2019. Propensity score matching was performed between patients who received RG and LG. The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity score matching, 1034 pairs of patients were enrolled in a balanced cohort for further analysis. The 3-year DFS in the RG and LG was 83.7% and 83.1% ( P =0.745), respectively, and the 3-year overall survival was 85.2% and 84.4%, respectively ( P =0.647). During 3 years of follow-up, 154 patients in the RG and LG groups relapsed (cumulative incidence of recurrence: 15.0% vs 15.0%, P =0.988). There was no significant difference in the recurrence sites between the 2 groups (all P >0.05). Sensitivity analysis showed that RG had comparable 3-year DFS (77.4% vs 76.7%, P =0.745) and overall survival (79.7% vs 78.4%, P =0.577) to LG in patients with advanced (pathologic T2-4a) disease, and the recurrence pattern within 3 years was also similar between the 2 groups (all P >0.05). RG had less intraoperative blood loss, lower conversion rate, and shorter hospital stays than LG (all P >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For resectable gastric cancer, including advanced cases, RG is a safe approach with comparable 3-year oncological outcomes to LG when performed by experienced surgeons.

Gastric Cancer Surgery: Balancing Oncological Efficacy against Postoperative Morbidity and Function Detriment

Significant progress has been made in the surgical management of gastric cancer over the years, and previous discrepancies in surgical practice between different parts of the world have gradually lessened. A transition from the earlier period of progressively more extensive surgery to the current trend of a more tailored and evidence-based approach is clear. Prophylactic resection of adjacent anatomical structures or neighboring organs and extensive lymph node dissections that were once assumed to increase the chances of long-term survival are now performed selectively. Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely adopted and its indications have steadily expanded, from early cancers located in the distal part of the stomach, to locally advanced tumors where total gastrectomy is required. In parallel, function-preserving surgery has also evolved and now constitutes a valid option for early gastric cancer. Pylorus-preserving and proximal gastrectomy have improved the postoperative quality of life of patients, and sentinel node navigation surgery is being explored as the next step in the process of further refining the minimally invasive concept. Moreover, innovative techniques such as indocyanine green fluorescence imaging and robot-assisted gastrectomy are being introduced in clinical practice. These technologies hold promise for enhancing surgical precision, ultimately improving the oncological and functional outcomes.

Short-Term Outcomes Analysis Comparing Open, Laparoscopic, Laparoscopic-Assisted, and Robotic Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Trials Network Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is debated. The aim of this study was to execute a comprehensive assessment of principal surgical treatments for resectable distal gastric cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) network meta-analysis. Open (Op-DG), laparoscopic-assisted (LapAs-DG), totally laparoscopic (Lap-DG), and robotic distal gastrectomy (Rob-DG) were compared. Pooled effect-size measures were the risk ratio (RR), the weighted mean difference (WMD), and the 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

RESULTS

Ten RCTs (3823 patients) were included. Overall, 1012 (26.5%) underwent Lap-DG, 902 (23.6%) LapAs-DG, 1768 (46.2%) Op-DG, and 141 (3.7%) Rob-DG. Anastomotic leak, severe complications (Clavien-Dindo > 3), and in-hospital mortality were comparable. No differences were observed for reoperation rate, pulmonary complications, postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion, surgical-site infection, cardiovascular complications, number of harvested lymph nodes, and tumor-free resection margins. Compared to Op-DG, Lap-DG and LapAs-DG showed a significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss with a trend toward shorter time to first flatus and reduced length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

LapAs-DG, Lap-DG, and Rob-DG performed in referral centers by dedicated surgeons have comparable short-term outcomes to Op-DG for locally AGC.

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.

Quality of life after robotic versus conventional minimally invasive cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Optimizing postoperative quality of life (QoL) is an essential aspect of surgical oncology. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) decreases surgical morbidity and improves QoL outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to compare post-operative QoL after oncologic resections using different MIS modalities. The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched for articles that compared post-operative QoL in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) or laparoscopic surgery (LS) versus robotic surgery (RS) for malignancy. Quality assessment was performed using the ROBINS-I and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB-2) tools. Meta-analysis was performed using an inverse-variance random effects model. 27 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). 15 studies had a low risk of bias, while 11 had a moderate risk of bias and 1 had serious risk of bias. 8330 patients (RS: 5090, LS/VATS: 3240) from across 25 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Global QoL was significantly better after robotic surgery in the pooled analysis overall (SMD: - 0.28 [95% CI: - 0.49, - 0.08]), as well as in the prostatectomy and gastrectomy subgroups. GRADE certainty of evidence was low. Analysis of EPIC-26 subdomains also suggested greater sexual function after robotic versus laparoscopic prostatectomy. Robotic and conventional MIS approaches produce similar postoperative QoL after oncologic surgery for various tumor types, although advantages may emerge in some patient populations. Our results may assist surgeons in counseling patients who are undergoing oncologic surgery.

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.

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.

First clinical experiences of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using the hinotori™ surgical robot system

BACKGROUND

Although the da Vinci™ Surgical System is the most predominantly used surgical robot worldwide, other surgical robots are being developed. The Japanese surgical robot hinotori™ Surgical Robot System was launched and approved for clinical use in Japan in November 2022. We performed the first robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using hinotori in the world. Here, we report our initial experience and evaluation of the feasibility and safety of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using hinotori.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective study was conducted. Between November 2022 and October 2023, 24 patients with gastric cancer underwent robotic gastrectomy with hinotori. Five ports, including one for an assistant, were placed in the upper abdomen, and gastric resection with standard lymphadenectomy and intracorporeal reconstruction were performed. The primary endpoint was the postoperative complication rate within 30 days after surgery. The secondary outcomes were surgical outcomes, including intraoperative adverse events, operative time, blood loss, and the number of dissected nodes.

RESULTS

Of the 24 patients, 16 (66.7%) were male. The median age and body mass index were 73.5 years and 22.9 kg/m2, respectively. Twenty-three patients (95.8%) had tumors in the middle to lower stomach. Sixteen (66.7%) and seven (29.2%) patients had clinical stage I and II diseases, respectively. Twenty-three (95.8%) patients underwent distal gastrectomy. No patient had postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo classification IIIa or higher, whereas two (8.3%) had the grade II complications (enteritis and pneumonia). No intraoperative adverse events, including conversion to other approaches, were observed. All patients received R0 resection. The median operative and console times were 400 and 305 min, respectively. The median blood loss was 14.5 mL, and the number of lymph nodes dissected was 51.5.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that robotic gastrectomy with standard lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer using hinotori can be safely performed.

Impact of a robotic system on intra-abdominal infectious complications after minimally invasive gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: A propensity score matching analysis regarding visceral obesity

Background

The efficacy of robotic gastrectomy (RG) on postoperative complications in patients with gastric cancer (GC) is unclear in terms of the volume of intra-abdominal fat tissue.

Patients and Methods

We enrolled 403 patients with GC who had minimally invasive surgery between January 2015 and July 2022. During this time, 197 RG and 206 laparoscopic gastrectomies (LG) were performed on the study participants. According to the computed tomography scan, patients were defined as having or not having visceral obesity based on the visceral fatty area (VFA). In each high and low VFA group, we compared short-term outcomes between the RG group and LG group.

Results

After PS matching for patients with high VFA, the two groups were well matched, with 71 cases in both the RG and LG groups. The median surgical time in the RG group was significantly longer (420 vs. 365 min, p < 0.001). However, the RG group had a significantly lower rate of severe intra-abdominal infectious complications (IAIC), such as anastomotic leakage, pancreatic fistula, and intra-abdominal abscess (1.4% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.004). However, among the 77 patients with low VFA values, we found no significant difference in the rate of severe IAIC between the two groups (1.1% in the RG group vs. 2.6% in the LG group, p = 1.00).

Conclusion

RG may be a viable alternative to LG because of the lower postoperative IAIC for patients with visceral obesity and GC. However, RG may not benefit non-obese patients.

Cost Analysis for Robotic and Open Gastrectomy

Objective

To determine the magnitude of the perioperative costs associated with robotic gastrectomy (RG).

Background

A robotic surgery platform has a high implementation cost and requires maintenance costs; however, whether the overall cost of RG, including all perioperative costs, is higher than conventional open gastrectomy (OG) remains unknown.

Methods

Patients who underwent a major gastrectomy during February 2018 through December 2021 were retrospectively identified. We calculated the perioperative costs of RG and OG and compared them overall as well as in different phases, including intraoperative costs and 30-day postsurgery inpatient and outpatient costs. We investigated factors potentially associated with high cost and estimated the likelihood of RG to reduce overall cost under a Bayesian framework. All cost data were converted to ratios to the average cost of all operations performed at our center in year FY2021.

Results

We identified 119 patients who underwent gastrectomy. The incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo >IIIa; RG, 10% vs OG, 13%) did not significantly differ between approaches. The median length of stay was 3 days shorter for RG versus OG (4 vs 7 days, P < 0.001). Intraoperative cost ratios were significantly higher for RG (RG, 2.6 vs OG, 1.7; P < 0.001). However, postoperative hospitalization cost ratios were significantly lower for RG (RG, 2.8 vs OG, 3.9; P < 0.001). Total perioperative cost ratios were similar between groups (RG, 6.1 vs OG, 6.4; P = 0.534). The multiple Bayesian generalized linear analysis showed RG had 76.5% posterior probability of overall perioperative cost reduction (adjusted risk ratio of 0.95; 95% credible interval, 0.85-1.07).

Conclusions

Despite increased intraoperative costs, total perioperative costs in the RG group were similar to those in the OG group because of reduced postoperative hospitalization costs.

Robot-assisted surgery in thoracic and visceral indications: an updated systematic review

BACKGROUND

In surgical advancements, robot-assisted surgery (RAS) holds several promises like shorter hospital stays, reduced complications, and improved technical capabilities over standard care. Despite extensive evidence, the actual patient benefits of RAS remain unclear. Thus, our systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of RAS in visceral and thoracic surgery compared to laparoscopic or open surgery.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search in two databases (Medline via Ovid and The Cochrane Library) in April 2023. The search was restricted to 14 predefined thoracic and visceral procedures and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Synthesis of data on critical outcomes followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's Tool Version 1.

RESULTS

For five out of 14 procedures, no evidence could be identified. A total of 20 RCTs and five follow-up publications met the inclusion criteria. Overall, most studies had either not reported or measured patient-relevant endpoints. The majority of outcomes showed comparable results between study groups. However, RAS demonstrated potential advantages in specific endpoints (e.g., blood loss), yet these findings relied on a limited number of low-quality studies. Statistically significant RAS benefits were also noted in some outcomes for certain indications-recurrence, quality of life, transfusions, and hospitalisation. Safety outcomes were improved for patients undergoing robot-assisted gastrectomy, as well as rectal and liver resection. Regarding operation time, results were contradicting.

CONCLUSION

In summary, conclusive assertions on RAS superiority are impeded by inconsistent and insufficient low-quality evidence across various outcomes and procedures. While RAS may offer potential advantages in some surgical areas, healthcare decisions should also take into account the limited quality of evidence, financial implications, and environmental factors. Furthermore, considerations should extend to the ergonomic aspects for maintaining a healthy surgical environment.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic liver resection: a meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to compare short-term outcomes between robotic liver resection (RLR) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) using data collected from propensity score-matched studies.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to collect propensity score-matched studies comparing RLR and LLR. Relevant data were extracted and analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effect models. Meta-regression analysis was performed for primary outcome measures. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were performed for outcomes exhibiting high heterogeneity. Quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Twenty-two propensity score-matched studies were included to comprise 5272 patients (RLR group, 2422 cases; LLR group, 2850 cases). Intraoperative blood loss (SMD=-0.31 ml, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.14; P =0.0005), open conversion (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.37-0.58; P <0.0001), and severe complications (OR=0.76, 95% CI 0.61-0.95; P =0.02) were significantly lower in the RLR group. Operation time, odds of use, and duration of Pringle maneuver, length of hospital stay, and odds of intraoperative blood transfusion, overall complications, R0 resection, reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, and 90-day mortality did not significantly differ between the groups. Further subgroup and sensitivity analyses suggested that the results were stable. Meta-regression analysis did not suggest a correlation between primary outcomes and study characteristics. The quality of evidence for the primary outcomes was medium or low, while that for the secondary outcomes was medium, low, or very low.

CONCLUSION

Although some short-term outcomes are similar between RLR and LLR, RLR is superior in terms of less blood loss and lower odds of open conversion and severe complications. In the future, RLR may become a safe and effective replacement for LLR.

Long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this multicentre cohort study was to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical gastrectomy by robotic or laparoscopic approaches from 1 March 2010 to 31 December 2018 at 10 high-volume centres in China were selected from institutional databases. Patients receiving RG were matched 1 : 1 by propensity score with patients undergoing LG. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes were overall survival and disease recurrence.

RESULTS

Some 2055 patients who underwent RG and 4309 patients who had LG were included. The propensity score-matched cohort comprised 2026 RGs and 2026 LGs. Median follow-up was 41 (i.q.r. 39-58) months for the RG group and 39 (38-56) months for the LG group. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 80.8% in the RG group and 79.5% in the LG group (log rank P = 0.240; HR 0.92, 95% c.i. 0.80 to 1.06; P = 0.242). Three-year OS rates were 83.9 and 81.8% respectively (log rank P = 0.068; HR 0.87, 0.75 to 1.01; P = 0.068) and the cumulative incidence of recurrence over 3 years was 19.3% versus 20.8% (HR 0.95, 0.88 to 1.03; P = 0.219), with no difference between groups.

CONCLUSION

RG and LG in patients with gastric cancer are associated with comparable disease-free and overall survival.

Recent advances for treatment of upper gastrointestinal malignancy

Recent prospective trials for esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) are encouraging. This manuscript reviews selected recently published studies. Not surprisingly, immunotherapy dominates the current clinical trial landscape. However, targeted biologic therapies and standard chemotherapy remain critical to the treatment of gastric and esophageal cancer while imatinib remains the backbone for advanced or metastatic GISTs. For all three cancers, surgical resection remains important when intent of treatment is potential cure.

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.

Prince and princesses: The current status of robotic surgery in surgical oncology

Robotic surgery has experienced a dramatic increase in utilization across general surgery over the last two decades, including in surgical oncology. Although urologists and gynecologists were the first to show that this technology could be utilized in cancer surgery, the robot is now a powerful tool in the treatment of gastrointestinal, hepato-pancreatico-biliary, colorectal, endocrine, and soft tissue malignancies. While long-term outcomes are still pending, short-term outcomes have showed promise for this technologic advancement of cancer surgery.

The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): Clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastric cancer, 2023

The 2023 update of the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) Clinical Guidelines for Gastric Cancer focuses on standardizing cancer diagnosis and treatment in China, reflecting the latest advancements in evidence-based medicine, healthcare resource availability, and precision medicine. These updates address the differences in epidemiological characteristics, clinicopathological features, tumor biology, treatment patterns, and drug selections between Eastern and Western gastric cancer patients. Key revisions include a structured template for imaging diagnosis reports, updated standards for molecular marker testing in pathological diagnosis, and an elevated recommendation for neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage III gastric cancer. For advanced metastatic gastric cancer, the guidelines introduce new recommendations for immunotherapy, anti-angiogenic therapy and targeted drugs, along with updated management strategies for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive and deficient DNA mismatch repair (dMMR)/microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) patients. Additionally, the guidelines offer detailed screening recommendations for hereditary gastric cancer and an appendix listing drug treatment regimens for various stages of gastric cancer. The 2023 CSCO Clinical Guidelines for Gastric Cancer updates are based on both Chinese and international clinical research and expert consensus to enhance their applicability and relevance in clinical practice, particularly in the heterogeneous healthcare landscape of China, while maintaining a commitment to scientific rigor, impartiality, and timely revisions.

Comparison of the effects of open and laparoscopic approach on body composition in gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A propensity score-matched study

Aim

To compare the effects of open (OG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) on body composition and muscle strength.

Methods

This study performed a propensity score matching analysis using cases from a large-scale, multicenter, phase III randomized controlled trial concerning oral nutritional supplements after gastrectomy and analyzed both the whole and matched cohorts. Measurements of body composition and hand grip strength (HGS) were performed at baseline (preoperatively) and at 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months after gastrectomy.

Results

Of 835 patients, 275 and 560 underwent OG and LG, respectively. Skeletal muscle mass (SMM) and HGS loss were significantly lesser in the LG group than in the OG group. The propensity score-matched analysis, including 120 pairs of patients, confirmed that the % SMM loss values at 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 POM were -4.5%, -4.0%, -4.7%, -4.6%, and -5.8% in the OG group and -3.0%, -1.9%, -2.4%, -2.2%, and -2.7% in the LG group, respectively. The % SMM loss was significantly lesser in the LG group than in the OG group (repeated measures ANOVA p < 0.001). The HGS loss was non-significantly smaller in the LG group than in the OG group.

Conclusion

Skeletal muscle mass loss was significantly lesser in the LG group than in the OG group in both cohorts, indicating that LG may be more effective than OG for maintaining muscle mass.

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma in the US: a propensity score-matching analysis of 11,173 patients on oncological adequacy

INTRODUCTION

Surgery remains the cornerstone treatment for gastric cancer. Previous studies have reported better lymphadenectomy with minimally invasive approaches. There is a paucity of data comparing robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy in the US. Herein, we examined whether oncological adequacy differs between laparoscopic and robotic approaches.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was utilized to identify patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019. A propensity score-matching analysis between robotic gastrectomy (RG) versus laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) was performed. The primary outcomes were lymphadenectomy ≥ 16 nodes and surgical margins.

RESULTS

A total of 11,173 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2019. Of those 8320 underwent LG and 2853 RG. Comparing the unmatched cohorts, RG was associated with a higher rate of adequate lymphadenectomy (63.5% vs 57.1%, p < .0.0001), higher rate of negative margins (93.8% vs 91.9%, p < 0.001), lower rate of prolonged length of stay (26.0% vs 29.6%, p < .0.001), lower 90-day mortality (3.7% vs 5.0%, p < 0.0001), and a better 5-year overall survival (OS) (56% vs 54%, p = 0.03). A propensity score-matching cohort with a 1:1 ratio was created utilizing the variables associated with lymphadenectomy ≥ 16 nodes. The matched analysis revealed that the rate of adequate lymphadenectomy was significantly higher for RG compared to LG, 63.5% vs 60.4% (p = 0.01), respectively. There was no longer a significant difference between RG and LG regarding the rate of negative margins, prolonged length of stay, 90-day mortality, rate of receipt of postoperative chemotherapy, and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

This propensity score-matching analysis with a large US cohort shows that RG was associated with a higher rate of adequate lymphadenectomy compared to LR. RG and LG had a similar rate of negative margins, prolonged length of stay, receipt of postoperative chemotherapy, 90-day mortality, and OS, suggesting that RG is a comparable surgical approach, if not superior to LG.

The Evolving Surgical Landscape: A Comprehensive Review of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for the Treatment of Gastric Cancer

Robotic gastrectomy has been gaining ground in the past 20 years. This study aims to (a) provide an updated and all-encompassing comprehensive review including post-operative outcomes, rate of complications, surgical efficiency and costs, pathology, overall survival, mortality and recurrence, and disease-free survival of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy, (b) report research gaps, and (c) identify ongoing or forthcoming clinical trials that could potentially shed light on underreported findings within the existing literature. Regarding the methodology, PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published between January 2012 and October 2023. ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for related clinical trials currently underway or recruiting. Robotic gastrectomy, when compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy, for the treatment of gastric cancer, performs equally well or shows superiority in terms of the length of hospitalization, overall complications rates, rate of conversion to open surgery, surgical complications, anastomotic leakage, pancreatic complications, blood loss, mortality rates, time to first flatus, time to oral intake, distal and proximal resection margins, recurrence rate, reoperation rates, and overall survival. However, it is associated with higher costs and longer operative time. Parameters such as duodenal stump leakage, anastomosis stenosis, intestinal obstruction, ileus, delayed gastric emptying, wound complications, acute pancreatitis, pancreatic fistula, direct costs, time to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy, postoperative morbidity, recurrence, and disease-free survival are currently underreported in the literature and necessitate for further research. Lastly, four clinical trials are currently underway or recruiting that could possibly bridge the research gap.

Impact of Hospital Volume on Utilization of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer is increasingly performed. The purpose of this study is to evaluate trends in utilization of laparoscopic and robotic techniques compared to open surgery as well as utilization based on hospital volume.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database to query patients who underwent gastrectomy from 2010 to 2017 for adenocarcinoma. Regression analyses were used to determine associations between MIS and clinical factors, the trend of MIS over time, and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 18,380 patients met inclusion criteria. The annual rates of MIS increased for all hospital volumes, though lower volume centers were less likely to undergo MIS. MIS was associated with a shorter length of stay compared to open, and robotic gastrectomy had a higher rate of obtaining at least 15 lymph nodes and lower rate of having a positive margin.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS utilization for resection of gastric cancer increased over time, with robotic surgery increasing at a higher rate than laparoscopic surgery. Importantly, this occurred without increased in mortality or sacrificing adequate oncologic outcomes.

Advantages of robotic gastrectomy for overweight patients with gastric cancer: a comparison study of robotic gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy

PURPOSE

A high body mass index (BMI) generally increases the risk of postoperative complications because of the intraperitoneal adipose tissue. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) decreases the surgical difficulty of conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for these patients. We conducted the present study to identify the advantages of RG over LG for overweight patients.

METHODS

We reviewed clinical data on patients who underwent either LG or RG at the National Cancer Center Hospital East between January, 2014 and May, 2022.

RESULTS

The 1298 patients eligible patients were divided into a non-overweight cohort (n = 996) (LG, n = 818; RG, n = 178) and an overweight cohort (n = 302) (LG, n = 250; RG, n = 52) according to a BMI cut-off of 25 kg/m2. In the overweight cohort, the RG group had a lower incidence of grade ≥ III postoperative complications (0.0 vs. 8.8%, p = 0.01) and grade ≥ II postoperative complications (11.5 vs. 22.0%, p = 0.12) than the LG group. Multivariate analysis identified that RG was significantly associated with a lower incidence of grade ≥ II postoperative complications in the overweight cohort (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.87; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

RG may reduce the risk of postoperative complications, compared with conventional LG, in overweight patients.

Randomized controlled trial in gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma undergoing systemic therapy over two decades

INTRODUCTION

The number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the systemic treatment of gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (GA-RCTs) is increasing. We aimed to describe the characteristics and evaluate the clinical benefit of GA-RCTs over the past 20 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched for RCTs of systemic treatment in GA published in eight major journals between 2001 and 2020 in PubMed. From the included studies, the characteristics and results of GA-RCTs were extracted. Clinical benefit was assessed using the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).

RESULTS

About 93 RCTs with 38365 patients were included. Seventy-one (76.3%) studies received external funding, with an increase from 27.3% (2001-2005) to 94.1% (2016-2020). RCTs on targeted therapy and/or immunotherapy have also increased over time, but only 14 (41.2%) were restricted to specific biomarkers. Forty-four (47.3%) studies met their primary endpoint (defined as positive RCTs), but median overall survival has not improved over time. Moreover, only 16 (36.4%) studies met the ESMO-MCBS threshold. RCTs whose study design and results met the ESMO-MCBS thresholds has not increased over time (p = 0.827 and p = 0.733, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

GA-RCTs are increasingly focused on targeted therapy and/or immunotherapy, and are more likely to receive external funding. However, the effect size has not shown significant improvement in the past 20 years. Only a few RCTs with positive results met ESMO thresholds. Future RCTs should prioritize the clinical benefits and provide direct evidence to optimize and reform GA treatment practices.

Comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic approaches to gastrectomy: a National Cancer Database study

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is associated with significant mortality worldwide. Radical gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy is considered the only curative option. Traditionally, these operations are associated with significant morbidity. Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and more recently robotic gastrectomy (RG) techniques have been developed to potentially decrease the perioperative morbidity. We sought to compare oncologic outcomes with laparoscopic and robotic techniques for gastrectomy.

METHODS

Utilizing the National Cancer Database we identified patients who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma. Patients were stratified by open, robotic or laparoscopic surgical technique. Open gastrectomy patients were excluded.

RESULTS

We identified 1,301 patients who underwent RG and 4,892 LG with median ages of 65 (20-90) and 66 (18-90) respectively, p = 0.02. The mean number of positive lymph nodes were higher in the LG 2.2 ± 4.4 vs RG 1.9 ± 3.8, p = 0.01. The R0 resections were higher in the RG at 94.5% vs 91.9% in LG, p = 0.001. Conversions to open were 7.1% in the RG and 16% in the LG group, p < 0.001. The median length of hospitalization was 8 (6-11) in both groups. There was no difference in the 30-day readmission (p = 0.65), 30-day mortality (p = 0.85) and 90-day mortality (p = 0.34) between groups. The median and overall 5-year survival was 71.3 mo and 56% in the RG and 66.1 mo and 52% in the LG, p = 0.03. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores, location of gastric cancer, histology grade, pathologic T-stage, pathologic N-stage, surgical margins, and facility volume were all predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic and laparoscopic techniques are both acceptable approaches to gastrectomy. However, conversions to open are higher and R0 resections rates are lower in the laparoscopic group. Additionally, a survival benefit is demonstrated in those undergoing robotic gastrectomy.