Comparison of Reduced Port Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy (Duet TLDG) and Conventional Laparoscopic-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy

Identifying the best candidates for reduced port gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have focused on the non-inferiority of RPG compared with conventional port gastrectomy (CPG); however, we assumed that some candidates might derive more significant benefit from RPG over CPG.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological and perioperative parameters of 1442 patients with gastric cancer treated by gastrectomy between 2009 and 2022. The C-reactive protein level on postoperative day 3 (CRPD3) was used as a surrogate parameter for surgical trauma. Patients were grouped according to the extent of gastrectomy [subtotal gastrectomy (STG) or total gastrectomy (TG)] and lymph node dissection (D1+ or D2). The degree of surgical trauma, bowel recovery, and hospital stay between RPG and CPG was compared among those patient groups.

RESULTS

Of 1442 patients, 889, 354, 129, and 70 were grouped as STGD1+, STGD2, TGD1+, and TGD2, respectively. Compared with CPG, RPG significantly decreased CRPD3 only among patients in the STGD1+ group (CPG: n = 653, 84.49 mg/L, 95% CI 80.53-88.45 vs. RPG: n = 236, 70.01 mg/L, 95% CI 63.92-76.09, P < 0.001). In addition, the RPG method significantly shortens bowel recovery and hospital stay in the STGD1+ (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001), STGD2 (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001), and TGD1+ (P = 0.026 and P = 0.007), respectively. No difference was observed in the TGD2 group (P = 0.313 and P = 0.740).

CONCLUSIONS

The best candidates for RPG are patients who undergo STGD1+, followed by STGD2 and TG D1+, considering the reduction in CRPD3, bowel recovery, and hospital stay.

Current Issues in Reduced-Port Gastrectomy: A Comprehensive Review

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

Fluorescence-guided Two-port Robotic Gastrectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Gastrectomy: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

Objective

To compare the number of retrieved lymph nodes between conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy (CLG) and robotic gastrectomy integrated with fluorescence guidance and a two-port system (integrated robotic gastrectomy, IRG).

Background

The benefits of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer have not yet been established. Using built-in features of robotic system, further benefit can be provided to the patients with effective lymphadenectomy and enhanced recovery.

Methods

A nonrandomized controlled trial was performed by a single surgeon at single-center, tertiary referral hospital between January 2018 and October 2021. Overall, 140 patients scheduled to undergo minimally invasive subtotal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the number of retrieved lymph nodes. Secondary endpoints were complications, hospital stay, pain score, body image, and operative cost.

Results

This study analyzed 124 patients in the per-protocol group (IRG, 64; CLG, 60). The number of retrieved lymph nodes was higher in the IRG group than those in the CLG group (IRG vs CLG; 42.1 ± 17.9 vs 35.1 ± 14.6, P = 0.019). Moreover, other surgical parameters, such as hospital stay (4.1 ± 1.0 vs 5.2 ± 1.8, P < 0.001) and body image scale (better in 4 of the 10 questions), were significantly better in the IRG than in the CLG.

Conclusions

Robotic surgical procedures integrated with fluorescence guidance and a reduced-port system yielded more retrieved lymph nodes. In addition, the IRG group showed better perioperative surgical outcomes, particularly regarding the length of hospital stay and postoperative body image.

Trial registration

NCT03396354.

Intracorporeal modified delta-shaped gastroduodenostomy during 2-port distal gastrectomy: technical aspects and short-term outcomes

Purpose

Surgeons have become increasingly interested in reduced-port gastrectomy to minimize trauma while maintaining oncologic safety. Although gastroduodenostomy has the benefits of better nutritional outcomes and fewer postoperative complications than other types of reconstruction, gastroduodenostomy is not a preferred option for reduced-port distal gastrectomy because of technical difficulties. In this study, we describe our intracorporeal modified delta-shaped gastroduodenostomy technique, which is easily applicable during 2-port distal gastrectomy.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed our database of 30 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent 2-port distal gastrectomy with intracorporeal modified delta-shaped gastroduodenostomy from October 2016 to May 2021. In this reduced-port approach, we used a Tropian Single port (TROPIAN TECH) via a 25-mm transumbilical incision and a 12-mm port at the right flank. All anastomoses were performed using a 60-mm endolinear stapler. We used 3 additional sutures to provide proper traction and support for the anastomosis.

Results

Mean ± standard deviation of operation time was 148.9 ± 34.7 minutes; reconstruction time was 13.2 ± 4.6 minutes; estimated blood loss was 29.3 ± 44.4 mL; and length of hospital stay was 4.5 ± 1.2 postoperative days. A total of 11 patients (36.7%) had a Clavien-Dindo grade I or grade II complication, and there were no grade IIIa or higher complications.

Conclusion

Intracorporeal modified delta-shaped gastroduodenostomy was safely performed via a 2-port approach, resulting in acceptable surgical outcomes and no major complications.

Initial experience of single-incision plus one port total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The use of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (SILPD + 1) has been never reported, and its safety and efficacy remain unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of SILPD + 1 compared with those of conventional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (CLPD).

METHOD

Fifty-seven cases of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) were performed between November 2021, and March 2022. Among them, 10 cases of LPD were performed using a single-incision plus one-port device. Based on the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, 47 cases of LPD performed using traditional 5-trocar were included as a control group. The patient's demographic characteristics, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Three men and seven women were included in the SILPD + 1 group. All baseline parameters of both groups were comparable, except for age. Patients were younger in the SILPD + 1 group (47.2 ± 18.3 years vs. 60.6 ± 11.7 years, P = 0.05) than that in the CLPD group. Compared with the CLPD group, median operation time (222.5 (208.8-245.0) vs. 305.0 (256.0-37.0) min, P < 0.001) was shorter, median postoperative VAS scores on days 1-3 were lower, and median cosmetic score (21.0 (19.0-23.5) vs. 17.0 (16.0-20.0), P = 0.026) was higher one month after the surgery in the SILPD + 1 group. The estimated blood loss, conversion rate, blood-transfusion rate, exhaust time, time of drainage tube removal, postoperative hospital stays, and perioperative complications were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In a high-volume LPD center, SILPD + 1 is safe and feasible for well-selected patients without increasing the operation time and complications. It even has the advantages of reduced postoperative pain and improved cosmetic results.

Short-term outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for total gastrectomy: a single-institute experience

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RLS) for total gastrectomy remains unclear. This study focused on evaluating the short-term outcomes of RLS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for total gastrectomy.

METHODS

One hundred and ten patients who underwent completed laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer between September 2018 and June 2022 were retrospectively collected and classified into two groups (65 CLS and 45 RLS) according to different operation approach. Twenty-four RLS cases underwent single-incision plus two ports laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 2) and twenty-one underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Surgical outcomes, pain intensity, cosmetic and postoperative morbidity, and mortality were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the CLS group and the RLS group (16.9% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.270). It was also comparable in the Clavien-Dindo classification (P = 0.774). However, compared with the CLS group, the RLS group had a significantly shorter total length of incision (5.6 ± 1.0 cm vs. 7.1 ± 0.7 cm, P = 0.000); shorter time to first ambulation (24.9 ± 5.9 h vs. 27.6 ± 5.0 h, P = 0.009), flatus (3.0 ± 0.8 d vs. 3.5 ± 1.0 d, P = 0.022) and oral intake (4.0 ± 1.6 d vs. 6.1 ± 5.1 d, P = 0.011); lower white blood cell count on the third day after the operation (9.8 ± 4.0*10⁹/L vs. 11.6 ± 4.7*10⁹/L, P = 0.037); and lower visual analogue scale score on postoperative days 1 and 3(3.0 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.044 and 0.6 ± 0.7 vs. 1.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.000 respectively). On the other hand, it didn't find any difference in short-term outcomes between the SILS + 2 group and the SILS + 1 group (P > 0.05). But the proximal resection margin was longer in the SILS + 2 group than in the SILS + 1 group (2.6 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.5 ± 0.9 cm, P = 0.046) in patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG).

CONCLUSIONS

RLS for total gastrectomy is a feasible and safe technique when performed by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Moreover, compared with SILS + 1, SILS + 2 might have some advantages in AEG patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Safety and Efficacy of OGT-Assisted Overlap Oesophagojejunostomy Versus the Traditional Overlap Method in Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction (G/GEJ) Tumours

INTRODUCTION

Overlap guiding tube (OGT)-assisted overlap oesophagojejunostomy (EJS), which was first designed and reported by our team, has shown feasibility. However, its safety and efficiency have not yet been compared with the conventional overlap approach.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data of 155 gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy by conventional (conventional group, n = 83) or OGT-assisted (OGT group, n = 72) overlap methods at Nanfang Hospital. The anastomotic efficiency and surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The success rate of inserting an anvil fork into the oesophageal lumen at the first attempt in the OGT group was much higher than in the conventional group (86.7% vs. 97.2%, P = 0.019). Consistently, the duration of EJS (P < 0.001) in the OGT group was significantly shorter than that in the conventional group. Operatively, there was one case in which oesophageal pseudocanals developed; another case was converted to thoracoscopic surgery in the conventional group, but there were no such cases in the OGT group. In terms of postoperative recovery, the OGT group was superior to the conventional group. The incidence of postoperative complications (28.9% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.247) and the classification of complication severity (P = 0.450) were milder in the OGT group, although the difference was not statistically significant. Notably, the conventional group had four cases (4.8%) of oesophagojejunal anastomotic leakage (EJAL) and one case (1.2%) of anastomotic stenosis. In the OGT group, two patients (2.8%) developed EJAL, but none developed anastomotic stenosis or anastomotic bleeding. Neither group had any cases of unplanned secondary surgery or perioperative deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The OGT-assisted method reduced the surgical difficulty of overlap EJS with good safety. This study provides new perspectives for optimizing EJS.

The Impact of Overweight and Obesity on Reduced-Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of a Single-Institution Data

This study aimed to investigate the short-term postoperative outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and demonstrate its safety and feasibility in overweight and obese patients with gastric cancer. The medical records of 211 patients who underwent reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, between August 2014 and April 2020, were reviewed. After propensity score matching, they were divided into a non-overweight group (n = 68) and overweight group (n = 68). Operative details and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between two groups. Reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in overweight group showed statistically longer operation time (200.59 vs. 208.68 min, p = 0.044), higher estimated bleeding volume (40.96 vs. 58.01 mL, p = 0.001), and lesser number of harvested lymph nodes (36.81 vs. 32.13, p = 0.039). However, no significant differences were found in hospital course and other surgical outcomes. There was no mortality in either group, and the postoperative morbidity rate was not significantly different (14.7% vs. 16.2%). In the subgroup analysis, overweight and obesity did not significantly affect postoperative complication rates (16.2% vs. 16.2%, p = 1). We demonstrated comparable short-term surgical outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy between the two groups (p = 0.412~1). Reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy was safe in overweight and obese patients with gastric cancer.

Modern surgical therapy for gastric cancer-Robotics and beyond

The surgical paradigm for gastric cancer has been changed from extended surgery to minimally invasive surgery. Laparoscopic surgery is a practical method for minimally invasive surgery for early gastric cancer, and the indication is expanding to advanced gastric cancer. In recent years, robotic gastrectomy has been highlighted as a breakthrough to overcome the drawbacks of laparoscopic gastrectomy. Here, we discuss the recent updates of modern surgical therapy for gastric cancer-robotics and beyond.

Actual 3-Year Survival After Reduced-Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer (RpLDG): a Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

Total laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer has been widely accepted; however, reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy has not gained the same popularity because of technical difficulties and oncologic safety issues. This study aimed to analyze the oncologic safety and short-term surgical outcomes of patients who underwent reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (RpLDG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent surgical treatment between January 2016 and May 2018 were included in this study. Of the 833 patients enrolled, 158 underwent RpLDG and were propensity-matched with 158 patients who underwent conventional port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (CpLDG). The groups were compared in terms of short-term outcomes and disease-free and overall survival rates.

RESULTS

The RpLDG group had shorter operation times (161.8 min vs. 189.0 min, p < 0.00) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (7.6 days vs. 9.1 days, p = 0.04) compared to the CpLDG group. Estimated blood loss was lower in the RpLDG group than in the CpLDG group (52.6 mL vs. 73.7 mL, p < 0.00), while hospital costs incurred by the RpLDG group were lower than those of the CpLDG group (10,033.7 vs. 11,016.8 USD, p < 0.00). No statistical differences were found regarding overall morbidity and occurrence of surgical complications of grade III or higher, as defined by the Clavien-Dindo classification. Furthermore, no significant differences between RpLDG and CpLDG were found in 3-year disease-free (99.4% vs. 98.1%; p = 0.42) and 3-year overall survival rates (98.7% vs. 96.8%; p = 0.25).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent RpLDG had better short-term surgical outcomes than those who underwent CpLDG in terms of operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and hospital costs. The oncologic safety of RpLDG was satisfactory.

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and post-operative recovery between single-incision and multi-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

To summarise data from previous reports and perform a meta-analysis to compare the short-term surgical outcomes and post-operative recovery between single-incision and multi-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (MLDG) for gastric cancer.

Methods:

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase databases and relevant data were extracted. Short-term surgical outcomes and post-operative recovery of single-incision laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (SLDG) and MLDG for gastric cancer were compared using a fixed or random-effect model.

Results:

In total, we identified five relevant studies involving 983 participants for this systematic review and meta-analysis, and 45.8% (450/983) of patients underwent SLDG. The results demonstrated that mean operation time (weighted mean difference [WMD]:-3.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.64,8.19, P = 0.580; I² = 75.6%), intra-operative blood loss (WMD:-19.77, 95% CI: 40.20,0.65, P = 0.058; I² = 85.0%) and lymph node yield (WMD:-0.71, 95% CI: 1.47, 0.05, P = 0.068; I² = 0%) of SLDG were comparable to those of MLDG for gastric cancer. In addition, SLDG had a similar incidence of post-operative complications compared with MLDG (odds ratio: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.55-1.22, P = 0.326; I² = 0%). There was no significant difference between the two surgical procedures for the conversion to open surgery (OR: 0.32, 95%CI: 0.03-3.15, P = 0.331; I² = 0%), the length of hospital stay (WMD:-0.05, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.55, P = 0.876; I² = 44.1%), the time to first flatus (WMD:-0.24, 95% CI: 0.58, 0.10, P = 0.169; I² = 85.3%) and the time to oral intake (WMD:-0.05, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.10, P = 0.500; I² = 0%).

Conclusion:

Single-incision laparoscopic gastrectomy may be technically feasible and safe for gastric cancer. However, it did not show a more obvious advantage over MLDG.

Current Status and Trends of Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy in Korea

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

Reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in obese gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy is currently widely performed for patients with gastric cancer. However, its safety in obese patients has not yet been verified. This is the first study on reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (RpLDG) in obese patients with gastric cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term surgical outcomes and investigate the feasibility and safety of RpLDG in obese patients with gastric carcinoma.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 271 gastric cancer patients who underwent RpLDG at our institution were divided into two groups: non-obese [body mass index (BMI) <30 kg/m2, n = 251; NOG] and obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2, n = 20; OG). The mean age of the enrolled patients was 64.8 ± 11.4 years, with 72.0% being men and 28.0% women. Operative details and short-term surgical outcomes, including hospital course and postoperative complications, were compared by retrospectively reviewing the medical records.

RESULTS

No significant difference in operation time was found between the NOG and OG (205.9 ± 40.0 vs. 211.3 ± 37.3 minutes, P = 0.563). Other operative outcomes in the OG, including estimated blood loss (54.1 ± 86.1 vs. 54.0 ± 39.0 mL, P = 0.995) and retrieved lymph nodes (36.2 ± 16.4 vs. 35.5 ± 18.2, P = 0.875), were not inferior to those in the NOG. There were also no statistical differences in short-term surgical outcomes, including the incidence of surgical complications (13.9% vs. 10.0%, P = 1).

CONCLUSION

RpLDG can be performed safely in obese gastric cancer patients by an experienced surgeon. It should be considered a feasible alternative to conventional port distal gastrectomy.

Long-Term Oncological Outcomes of Reduced Three-Port Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Early-Stage Gastric Carcinoma: a Retrospective Large-Scale Multi-Institutional Study

Purpose

With advances in surgical techniques, reduced-port laparoscopic surgery is increasingly being performed for the treatment of gastric carcinoma. Many studies have reported satisfactory short-term outcomes after reduced 3-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term oncological outcomes of 3-port LG in patients with gastric carcinoma.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed the medical records of 1,117 patients who underwent LG for gastric carcinoma in three major institutions between 2012 and 2015. The data showed that 460 patients underwent 3-port LG without assistance, and 657 underwent conventional 5-port LG. We compared the overall and disease-free survival rates between the 2 groups.

Results

There were 642 male and 475 female patients with a mean age of 56.1 years. Among them, 1,028 (92.0%) underwent distal gastrectomy and 89 (8.0%) underwent total gastrectomy. In the final pathologic examination, 1,027 patients (91.9%) were stage I, 73 (6.5%) were stage II, and 17 (1.5%) were stage III, and there were no significant difference in the pathologic stage between groups. The 3- and 5-port LG groups showed no significant differences in the 5-year overall survival (94.3% vs. 96.7%, P=0.138) or disease-free survival (94.3% vs. 95.9%, P=0.231). Stratified analyses according to pT and pN stages also showed no significant differences in overall or disease-free survival between the two groups.

Conclusions

Long-term survival after 3- and 5-port LG was comparable in patients with early-stage gastric carcinoma. The 3-port technique requiring limited surgical assistance may be an appropriate surgical option for this patient population.

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

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

Duet laparoscopic repair with knotless barbed sutures for treatment of perforated peptic ulcer: reality in general surgery with lacking of manpower

Background

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a fatal complication of peptic ulcer disease, which requires emergency surgery. Laparoscopic repair is the widely accepted and effective method for the treatment of PPU. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of duet laparoscopic repair of PPU with knotless barbed sutures.

Methods

From January 2013 to May 2019, 40 patients with PPU underwent laparoscopic primary repair and omentopexy at the Dankook University Hospital. The operative outcomes and complications of patients undergoing surgery using continuous suturing with absorbable knotless barbed sutures (group A, n=15) were compared with those undergoing surgery with conventional interrupted sutures (group B, n=25).

Results

The mean operative time was significantly shorter in group A than group B (84.4±39.8 vs. 104.2±49.4 min, P<0.001). There were no differences in other operative outcomes or postoperative complications (group A vs. group B, 20.0% vs. 24.0%, respectively; P=0.249) between the two groups. The mean operation time spent for laparoscopic sutures and omentopexy was 22.7 minutes.

Conclusions

The findings of the current study, albeit performed retrospectively at a single institution, suggested that duet laparoscopic repair of PPU with knotless barbed sutures might be considered as an alternative option, especially in hospitals lacking manpower.

Effectiveness and safety of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery vs conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of gastric diseases: A meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) and conventional multi-port laparoscopic (CMPLS) surgery in the treatment of gastric diseases.The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case control studies on the use of RPLS vs conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery in treating gastric diseases from their inception until March 10, 2019. The evaluated outcomes were the operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, number of dissected lymph nodes, postoperative complications, and conversions. All of these were compared using Stata software version 12.0.A total of 18 studies were included, which involved 2938 patients. In studies referring to the comparison between RPLS and CMPLS in treating gastric diseases, the former showed significantly inferior in terms of operative time (P = .011) and number of dissected lymph nodes (P = .031); but superior results in terms of the estimated blood loss (P = .000) and length of hospital stay (P = .001) than the latter did; however, the rates of postoperative complications (P = .830) and conversions (P = .102) were not statistically significant between the 2 groups.RPLS and CMPLS showed comparable effectiveness and safety in the treatment of gastric diseases in our meta-analysis. Based on the current evidence, we believe that RPLS is an efficacious surgical alternative to CMPLS in the management of gastric diseases because of the shorter hospital stay and reduced blood loss. However, large-scale, well-designed, multicenter studies are needed to further confirm the results of this study.

Comparing the surgical outcomes of dual-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy and three-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Purpose

Many studies have demonstrated that single-incision or reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is a feasible method compared to conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Using rigid-type laparoscope and right-side approach, we could perform dual-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (DPLDG) for gastric cancer. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of DPLDG to those of 3-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TPLDG).

Methods

From March 2017 to December 2019, this retrospective study included 218 patients with gastric cancer who underwent DPLDG (106 patients) or TPLDG (112 patients) at SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center. Surgical outcomes were compared between 2 operation methods.

Results

Operation time was similar between DPLDG and TPLDG (158.9 ± 33.4 minutes vs. 154.0 ± 31.1 min, P = 0.787). The number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the 2 groups (35.3 ± 14.6 vs. 37.0 ± 13.5, P = 0.415). The complication rate in DPLDG and TPLDG groups was 10.4% and 8.9%, respectively (P = 0.894). The time to first flatus, time to first diet, and postoperative hospital stay were similar between the 2 groups. There were no reoperation or mortality cases. The cost of trocars was 359.9 US dollars (USD) in DPLDG and 291–391.4 USD in TPLDG.

Conclusion

The surgical outcomes of DPLDG and TPLDG did not differ. Regarding fewer incisions, DPLDG can be an alternative option for TPLDG.

Is the 5-port approach necessary in laparoscopic gastrectomy? Comparison of surgical effects of reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Reduced-port surgery, in which fewer ports are used than those in conventional laparoscopic surgery, is becoming increasingly popular for various procedures. However, the application of reduced-port surgery to the gastrectomy field is still underdeveloped. The aim of this study was to use meta-analysis to address the potentially important advantages of this surgical technique.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically reviewed (through October 2019) to identify studies that compared reduced-port (RPLG) and conventional laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (CLG) in patients with gastric carcinoma. The endpoints were postoperative time, length of in-hospital stay, blood loss, retrieved lymph nodes, postoperative complications, time to first flatus, and aesthetic outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies, which included 1743 patients (907 RPLG and 836 CLG), were ultimately included in this analysis. Better aesthetic results: were obtained with RPLG (risk ratio 1.578; 95%CI, 1.377-1.808; P = .000), although length of in-hospital stay (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.106; 95% CI, -0.222 to 0.010; P = .074), time to first flatus (SMD -0.006; 95%CI, -0.123 to 0.110; P = .913), and perioperative complications (risk ratio 0.255; 95%CI, 0.142-0.369; P = .478) were equivalent. However, operative time was significantly longer (SMD 0.301; 95%CI, 0.194-0.409; P = .00), blood loss was greater (SMD -0.31; 95%CI, -0.415 to 0.205; P = .000), and fewer lymph nodes were harvested (SMD 0.255; 95%CI, 0.142-0.369; P = .000) in the RPLG group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis showed that RPLG is as safe as the CLG approach and offers better aesthetic results for patients with gastric carcinoma. However, basing on current evidence, RPLG was not an efficacious surgical alternative to CLG, as operative time was significantly longer, blood loss was greater, and fewer lymph nodes were harvested in the RPLG group. Additional high-powered controlled randomized trials are required, to determine whether RPLG truly offers any advantages; these future studies should particularly focus on pain scores and aesthetic outcomes.

Reduced-port totally robotic distal subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: 100 consecutive cases in comparison with conventional robotic and laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy

By overcoming technical difficulties with limited access faced when performing reduced-port surgery for gastric cancer, reduced-port totally robotic gastrectomy (RPRDG) could be a safe alternative to conventional minimally invasive gastrectomy. An initial 100 consecutive cases of RPRDG for gastric cancer were performed from February 2016 to September 2018. Short-term outcomes for RPRDG with those for 261 conventional laparoscopic (CLDG) and for 241 robotic procedures (CRDG) over the same period were compared. Learning curve analysis for RPRDG was conducted to determine whether this procedure could be readily performed despite fewer access. During the first 100 cases of RPRDG, no surgeries were converted to open or laparoscopic surgery, and no additional ports were required. RPRDG showed longer operation time than CLDG (188.4 min vs. 166.2 min, p < 0.001) and similar operation time with CRDG (183.1 min, p = 0.315). The blood loss was 35.4 ml for RPRDG, 85.2 ml for CLDG (p < 0.001), and 41.2 ml for CRDG (p = 0.33). The numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were 50.5 for RPRDG, 43.9 for CLDG (p = 0.003), and 55.0 for CRDG (p = 0.055). Postoperative maximum C-reactive protein levels were 96.8 mg/L for RPRDG, 87.8 mg/L for CLDG (p = 0.454), and 81.9 mg/L for CRDG (p = 0.027). Learning curve analysis indicated that the overall operation time of RPRDG stabilized at 180 min after 21 cases. The incidence of major postoperative complications did not differ among groups. RPRDG for gastric cancer is a feasible and safe alternative to conventional minimally invasive surgery. Notwithstanding, this procedure failed to reduce postoperative inflammatory responses.

First experience of junior surgeons with laparoscopic distal gastrectomy: in view of comparison with experienced surgeons

Introduction

Laparoscopic surgery is not easily performed by junior surgeons who have limited experience.

Aim

To investigate the safety and feasibility of the first experience of junior surgeons with laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) who were trained in super high-volume centers.

Material and methods

Clinicopathological data from the first 85 LDG cases performed by three gastric cancer surgeons were collected. All three surgeons were trained for > 1 year in super high-volume centers. The surgical and postoperative outcomes of the first experiences of junior surgeons were compared with the short-term outcomes reported in a multicenter randomized controlled trial (Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study, KLASS-01 trial), conducted by the KLASS group, which is composed of experienced surgeons who practice in a high-volume center.

Results

A significantly greater number of older patients with longer operation times and lower estimated blood loss was observed for the junior surgeons than in the KLASS data. Although junior surgeons performed significantly more Billroth II anastomoses with D1+ lymph node dissection, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of hospital stay, number of retrieved lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity.

Conclusions

The surgical outcomes of early gastric cancer managed by laparoscopic surgery performed by well-trained beginners were similar to the outcomes reported in the large-scale trial. Therefore, with regard to the surgical training system, training at super high-volume centers may be considered to provide some assurance in terms of surgical technique-related safety.

Totally Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) has recently been accepted as a treatment strategy for gastric cancer (GC). Aim: In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of TLG compared with laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) in GC. Methods: Feasible studies comparing the TLG and LAG published up to March 2019 were searched online. The data showing short-term and complication outcomes were extracted to be pooled and analyzed. Results: Thirty-four studies, including 7974 patients were eventually eligible. There was no statistically significant difference on operation time between the two groups (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.16 to 9.02, P = .47). The time of anvil insertion time was shorter in the TLG group compared with the LAG group (WMD = -1.87, 95% CI: -2.60 to -1.15, P < .01). The TLG was significantly superior to LAG in the comparison of less trauma. In terms of radical resection, the number of lymph nodes obtained by TLG was significantly more than that obtained by LAG (WMD = 2.65, 95% CI: 1.54-3.76, P < .01). The pooled meta-analysis suggested that the patients undergoing TLG had a quicker recovery and less pain. In the advanced gastric cancer gastrectomy, the TLG could receive a longer proximal margin compared with the LAG (WMD = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.48-0.95, P < .01). Regardless of the reconstruction method, the TLG was superior to the LAG in terms of surgical parameters and postoperative recovery. Like the LAG, the TLG was safe and advantageous. A lower risk trend of conversion to open laparotomy was observed in the TLG (relative risk [RR] = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.12-4.38, P = .72). The body mass index >25 kg/m² patients undergoing totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLGA) had a lower risk of overall complications (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.48-1.63, P = .69). The patients with early gastric cancer or Billroth-I anastomosis were suitable to undergo the TLG (a lower risk of anastomotic leakage [RR = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.23, P < .01] and gastralgia [RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.08-0.88, P = .03], respectively). Conclusions: The TLG was a safe and reliable procedure compared with the LAG with reduced trauma, faster recovery, and not more complications.

Initial experience of single-incision plus one port left-side approach totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with uncut Roux-en-Y reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Single incision plus one port left-side approach (SILS+1/L) totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) is an emerging technique for the treatment of gastric cancer. Reduced port laparoscopic gastrectomy has a number of potential advantages for patients compared with conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy: relieving postoperative pain, shortening hospital stay and offering a better cosmetic outcome. Nevertheless, there are no previous reports on the use of SILS+1/L TLDG with uncut Roux-en-Y (uncut R-Y) reconstruction.

AIM

To investigate the initial feasibility of SILS+1/L TLDG with uncut Roux-en-Y digestive tract reconstruction (uncut R-Y reconstruction) to treat distal gastric cancer.

METHODS

A total of 21 patients who underwent SILS+1/L TLDG with uncut R-Y reconstruction for gastric cancer were enrolled. All patients were treated at The Second Hospital of Shandong University. Reconstructions were performed intracorporeally with 60 mm endoscopic linear stapler and 45 mm no-knife stapler. The clinicopathological characteristics, surgical details, postoperative short-term outcomes, postoperative follow-up upper gastrointestinal radiography findings and endoscopy results were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

All SILS+1/L operations were performed by SILS+1/L TLDG successfully. The patient population included 13 men and 8 women with a mean age of 48.2 years (ranged from 40 years to 70 years) and median body mass index of 22.8 kg/m². There were no conversions to open laparotomy, and no other port was placed. The mean operation time was 146 min (ranged 130-180 min), and the estimated mean blood loss was 54 mL (ranged 20-110 mL). The mean duration to flatus and discharge was 2.3 (ranged 1-3.5) and 7.3 (ranged 6-9) d, respectively. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 42 (ranged 30-47). Two patients experienced mild postoperative complications, including surgical site infection (wound at the navel incision) and mild postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade A). Follow-up upper gastrointestinal radiography and endoscopy were carried out at 3 mo postoperatively. No patients experienced moderate or severe food stasis, alkaline gastritis or bile reflux during the follow-up period. No recanalization of the biliopancreatic limb was found.

CONCLUSION

SILS+1/L TLDG with uncut R-Y reconstruction could be safely performed as a reduced port surgery.

Minimally invasive approaches for early gastric cancer in East Asia: current status and future perspective

East Asia is well known as a region with higher incidences of gastric cancer compared with the rest of the world. This region has also experienced a rise in the detection of early gastric cancer (EGC) for the past three decades. The success of nationwide screening programs conducted in Japan or South Korea, increasing public awareness of gastric cancer, improved diagnostic ability of gastroenterologists and the aging population of modern societies may all contribute to the increase in EGC detection rates. Along with the increasing diagnosis of EGC, several key advances in the minimally invasive approach to EGC treatment have been made. Endoscopic resection is an ideal procedure for lesions without lymph node involvement, and its indications have expanded based on the results of prospective studies. Laparoscopic surgery with lymph node dissection has been becoming a standard treatment for EGC patients. Additionally, robot-assisted surgery is penetrating the field of gastric cancer surgery as surgeons pursue a more accurate minimally invasive approach with reduced morbidity rates. However, prolonged operation time and high cost remain problems to be solved for robot-assisted surgery. In this context, function-preserving surgery has become ever more important and should be considered as a method to enhance patients' quality of life after a gastrectomy for EGC. Pylorus-preserving gastrectomy or proximal gastrectomy is more frequently employed in East Asia and strategies that employ sentinel node (SN) navigation to personalize function-preserving surgery in clinical practice are emerging as several prospective studies investigate its efficacy.

The Safety and Feasibility of Single-Port Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Single-port laparoscopic surgery maximizes the advantages of laparoscopic surgery by reducing damage of the abdominal wall. However, no comparative studies have addressed its application to gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). We therefore aimed to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of single-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (SLG) for the treatment of AGC by comparing it with conventional multi-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (MLG).

METHODS

We searched the prospective gastric cancer database of our institute for patients with AGC who underwent SLG or MLG between October 2007 and December 2013. Cases of R2 resection with distant metastasis or concurrent surgery for comorbid malignant lesions were excluded. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables, and the short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

We identified 216 patients who underwent SLG (n = 100) or MLG (n = 116). After propensity score matching, we selected 73 pairs of patients who underwent SLG (distal gastrectomy, 49; total gastrectomy, 24) or MLG (distal gastrectomy, 45; total gastrectomy, 28). While the mean operative times were comparable between the groups, the SLG group had less blood loss, a lower postoperative morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stays. The 5-year survival rates were 74.2% in the SLG group and 60.2% in the MLG group (P = 0.081 by log-rank test).

CONCLUSIONS

SLG is shown to be safe and feasible for the treatment of AGC, with better short-term results and acceptable oncologic outcomes and may be applicable for AGC treatment.

Lymphadenectomy using two instrument arms during robotic surgery for gastric cancer: A strategy to facilitate reduced-port robotic gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Three instrument arms are used in the current form of reduced-port robotic gastrectomy (RPRG) for gastric cancer. Based on our experience in performing reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (RPLG), we have recently performed RPRG using two instrument arms.

METHODS

From February 2018 to January 2019, we performed RPRG using two instrument arms for gastric cancer. One endoscope arm and two instrument arms of da Vinci® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) were applied in robotic lymphadenectomy. A commercial multi-lumen single-port trocar was used for the endoscopy port.

RESULTS

A total of 18 patients underwent the planned robotic surgery using two instrument arms. Median operation time was 288.5 (213.0-446.0) minutes, and median hospital stay was 11.0 (7-18) days. Four patients experienced postoperative complications: one Clavien-Dindo grade IIIa, and the other three grade II. No mortality was reported. The number of retrieved lymph nodes did not differ between patients who underwent RPRG and RPLG (p = 0.412).

CONCLUSION

Gastric cancer surgery using two instrument arms of a robotic surgical system can be performed by surgeons with expertise of RPLG. If this technique is successfully introduced in robotic surgery, it is expected to shorten the path to pure single-port robotic gastrectomy.

Surgical Outcomes of Reduced-Port Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Propensity-Matched Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The technical feasibility and oncologic efficacy of reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (RPG) for gastric cancer remain unclear.

METHODS

A series of 767 patients with gastric cancer who underwent R0 laparoscopic gastrectomy were retrospectively matched for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiology score, body mass index, surgeon, lymph node dissection, and pathologic stages by propensity scoring. Finally, data from 274 patients (74 conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy [CLDG] cases, 74 reduced-port distal gastrectomy [RPDG] cases, 63 conventional laparoscopic total gastrectomy [CLTG] cases, and 63, reduced-port total gastrectomy [RPTG] cases) were selected for analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with the conventional group, the reduced-port group had significantly longer operation times (RPDG 265 min vs CLDG 239 min; p = 0.001 and RPTG 305 min vs CLTG 285 min; p = 0.012) and reduced blood loss (RPDG 48 ml vs CLDG 68 ml; p = 0.001 and RPTG 75 ml vs CLTG 110 ml; p = 0.026). The number of dissected lymph nodes was significantly higher in the CLDG group than in the RPDG group (38 vs 31; p = 0.002). Cosmetic satisfaction showed significant superiority in the reduced-port group compared with the conventional group. No significant difference was observed in overall survival (OS) (5-year OS: RPDG 100% vs CLDG 96.7%; p = 0.207 and RPTG 91.6% vs CLTG 91.8%; p = 0.615) or relapse-free survival (RFS) (5-year RFS: RPTG 92.3% vs CLTG 92.1%; p = 0.587).

CONCLUSIONS

The study results suggest that RPG for gastric cancer by an experienced surgeon is a feasible and safe technique. The RPG procedure can be presented to patients as one of the effective treatment options.

Three-Port Right-Side Approach-Duet Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Uncut Roux-en-Y Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

This study presents the initial feasibility of three-port right-side approach-duet totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (R-duet TLDG) with uncut Roux-en-Y (R-Y) reconstruction for the treatment of lower- or middle-third gastric cancer.

METHODS

A total of 30 patients who underwent R-duet TLDG with uncut R-Y reconstruction for gastric cancer were enrolled. All patients were treated at the Catholic Medical Center. Reconstructions were performed intracorporeally without special instruments. The clinicopathological characteristics, operative details, postoperative short-term outcomes, and postoperative follow-up endoscopy results were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

All operations were performed by three-port R-duet TLDG. There were no conversions to an open approach, and no additional ports were placed. The mean operating time was 170 minutes, and the mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 44. Three patients experienced mild postoperative complications, including small bowel ileus and pneumonia. Follow-up endoscopy was carried out at 3 months. No patients had experienced moderate-or-severe food stasis, alkaline gastritis, or bile reflux during the follow-up period. Recanalization of the biliopancreatic limb was not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

R-duet TLDG with uncut R-Y reconstruction could be safely performed as a reduced port surgery without special instruments.

Transition from Conventional to Reduced-Port Laparoscopic Gastrectomy to Treat Gastric Carcinoma: a Single Surgeon's Experience from a Small-Volume Center

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes and investigate the feasibility of reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy using learning curve analysis in a small-volume center.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed 269 patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for gastric carcinoma between 2012 and 2017. Among them, 159 patients underwent reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy. The cumulative sum technique was used for quantitative assessment of the learning curve.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in the baseline characteristics of patients who underwent conventional and reduced-port LDG, and the operative time did not significantly differ between the groups. However, the amount of intraoperative bleeding was significantly lower in the reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy group (56.3 vs. 48.2 mL; P<0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the first flatus time or length of hospital stay. Neither the incidence nor the severity of the complications significantly differed between the groups. The slope of the cumulative sum curve indicates the trend of learning performance. After 33 operations, the slope gently stabilized, which was regarded as the breakpoint of the learning curve.

Conclusions

The surgical outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy were comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, suggesting that transition from conventional to reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy is feasible and safe, with a relatively short learning curve, in a small-volume center.

Right-Side Approach-Duet Totally Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy (R-Duet TLDG) Using a Three-Port to Treat Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is commonly treated via minimally invasive surgery. The present study explored the feasibility of right-side approach-duet (R-duet) totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy using a three-port compared with a four- or five-port.

METHODS

A total of 251 patients who underwent curative totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer (72 R-duet, 74 four-port, and 105 five-port) at the Catholic Medical Center were enrolled. All operations were performed using conventional laparoscopic instruments. The clinicopathological characteristics, operative details, and postoperative short-term outcomes were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The clinicopathological characteristics did not differ significantly among the groups, except that the N stage was higher in the five-port group. The operating time was significantly longer in the four-port than the R-duet group (R-duet, four-port, and five-port 148.2 ± 30.7, 162.4 ± 30.6, and 159.9 ± 31.5 min, respectively; p = 0.024). The estimated blood loss did not differ significantly. Postoperatively, the times to flatus and to soft diet consumption and the hospital stay were significantly longer in the five-port group. The extent of postoperative complications did not differ among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

R-duet totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is a reliable form of reduced-port surgery when used to treat gastric cancer; no special instruments are required.

Totally laparoscopic verse laparoscopic assisted distal gastrostomy for gastric cancer: an update meta-analysis

Totally laparoscopic distal gastrostomy (TLDG) and laparoscopic- assisted distal gastrostomy (LADG) are the minimally invasive surgical technology for gastric cancer. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of these two methods. Relevant studies were selected through electronic searches of EMBASE, PubMed and Web of Science. In total, 21 non-randomized controlled studies containing 2475 patients in the totally laparoscopic distal gastrostomy and 1889 patients in the laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrostomy were included in this study. And operative time, operative blood loss, retrieved lymph nodes, time to liquid diet (days), postoperative hospital stay and overall complications were pooled and compared using meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between operative time (WMD = 0.38, 95% CI –10.43 –11.18, P = 0.95) and overall complications (RR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.91–1.30, P = 0.36). But totally laparoscopic distal gastrostomy had more advantages in aspects of intraoperative blood loss (WMD = 24.4, 95% CI 12.45–36.36, P < 0.0001), time to liquid diet (days) (WMD = 0.21, 95% CI 0.03–0.40, P = 0.03) and postoperative hospital stay (WMD = 0.72, 95% CI 0.31–1.13, P = 0.0006). Moreover, totally laparoscopic distal gastrostomy had more retrieved lymph nodes (WMD = –1.24, 95% CI–1.90 to–0.58, P = 0.0002). This meta-analysis indicates that totally laparoscopic distal gastrostomy may be a safe, feasible, and favorable surgical technology in terms of less blood loss, faster liquid diet, shorter postoperative hospital stay and more lymph nodes retrieved.

Postoperative Bleeding and Leakage After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy is being performed increasingly, mainly due to its low morbidity and mortality, but complications do occur. The aim of this study was to evaluate bleeding and leakage rates of primary and revisional sleeve gastrectomy in a personal series of 664 consecutive patients.

METHODS

Medical charts of all patients undergoing a primary or revisional sleeve gastrectomy between August 2008 and December 2014 were reviewed retrospectively. Subgroup analysis compared bleeding in patients after reduced port versus multiport technique and primary versus revisional sleeve gastrectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 664 sleeve gastrectomies (489 women and 175 men) were performed. Mean age and body mass index were 36.03 ± 11.4 years and 42.9 ± 8.3 kg/m², respectively. Mean operative time was 58.5 ± 20.0 min, with a 0.15 % conversion rate. Mean hospital stay was 2.1 ± 0.3 days. The overall 30-day complication rate was 7.5 %. Thirteen patients sustained postoperative bleeding (2 %), three of whom required reoperation (0.5 %). Staple line leakage and mortality were both nil in this series. No difference in postoperative complications was found between the subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-surgeon, single-center experience, sleeve gastrectomy was a safe and effective bariatric procedure with a low complication rate. Staple line reinforcement by oversewing was associated with low bleeding complications and no leakage. The majority of patients with postoperative bleeding could be managed conservatively. In our experience, reduced port technique and revisional sleeve gastrectomy had similar complication rates compared to multiport and primary sleeve gastrectomy.

Three-Port Versus Five-Port Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for Early Gastric Cancer Patients: A Propensity Score Matched Case-Control Study

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of three-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TP-LDG) as a reduced port laparoscopic gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified 146 patients preoperatively diagnosed with early gastric cancer who underwent five-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (FP-LDG) or TP-LDG between May 2013 and July 2016. A propensity score matching analysis was used to create patient groups (48 patients in each group) matched for sex, age, body mass index, previous abdominal surgery history, and American Society of Anesthesiologist score. The short-term surgical outcomes between TP-LDG and FP-LDG were compared.

RESULTS

The TP-LDG group had a statistically shorter umbilical wound length [3.4 (range, 3.0-4.0) cm vs. 3.9 (range, 3.7-4.0) cm, p = .000], shorter operative time [230 (range, 190-310) min vs. 250 (range, 180-320) min, p = .036], and lower estimated blood loss [68 (range, 20-180) mL vs. 80 (range, 40-150) mL, p = .005] compared to that in the FP-LDG group. However, there was no specific superiority regarding inflammatory profiles. Complication rates were also similar (8.4% TP-LDG vs. 12.6% FP-LDG, p = .504).

CONCLUSIONS

TP-LDG is a feasible and safe surgical procedure for the patients with early gastric cancer and provides the benefit of better cosmesis.

Comparison of Reduced Port Totally Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy (Duet TLTG) and Conventional Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes of patients with gastric cancer undergoing reduced port totally laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (duet TLTG) with those of patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2013 and 2015, 54 patients with gastric cancer underwent LATG at the Samsung Medical Center. Duet TLTG using 3 ports was performed in 30 patients, and conventional LATG using 5 ports was performed in 24 patients. Either extracorporeal or intracorporeal anastomosis was used for esophagojejunostomy. Surgical outcomes were compared between the operation methods.

RESULTS

The operating time was similar for duet TLTG and conventional LATG [222 min (range, 163 to 287 min) vs. 233 min (range, 170 to 310 min), respectively; P=0.807]. Blood loss during surgery was also similar between duet TLTG and conventional LATG groups [100 mL (range, 50 to 400 mL) vs. 175 mL (range, 50 to 400 mL), respectively; P=0.249]. The median number of nodes dissected [duet TLTG vs. conventional LATG, 47 (20 to 67) vs. 41 (22 to 70), P=0.338] was not different between groups. Pain scores were 3.9, 3.3, and 2.9, and 3.9, 3.4, and 2.8, at postoperative days 1, 3, and 5, respectively, in the duet TLTG and the conventional LATG groups (P=0.857, 0.659, and 0.427, respectively). Overall complication rates in the duet TLTG and conventional LATG groups were not significantly different (36.7% vs. 16.7%, P=0.103).

CONCLUSIONS

Duet TLTG is an acceptable procedure with quality of lymph node dissection, including the number of dissected lymph nodes and morbidity.

Reduced port laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

The use of reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPS) has become increasingly popular. The concept of RPS includes all procedures derived from various efforts minimizing the invasiveness of surgery, with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) being the ultimate reduced port technique. Reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (RPLG) for gastric cancer has not yet been fully established and still has issues such as feasibility, oncological validity, training, and education. The short-term results of reported studies are acceptable. However, long-term results that verify positive results or radical cure even in cases of cancer have not yet been published. Patients for whom RPLG is indicated should be selected carefully. Prospective multicenter studies should be conducted to establish RPS as a truly evidence-based practice that addresses not only cosmesis but also the appropriate balance between minimal invasiveness and radical cure.

Laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery: Current evidence and future perspectives

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely accepted as a standard alternative for the treatment of early-stage gastric adenocarcinoma because of its favorable short-term outcomes. Although controversies exist, such as establishing clear indications, proper preoperative staging, and oncologic safety, experienced surgeons and institutions have applied this approach, along with various types of function-preserving surgery, for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. With technical advancement and the advent of state-of-the-art instruments, indications for laparoscopic gastrectomy are expected to expand as far as locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic gastrectomy appears to be promising; however, scientific evidence necessary to generalize this approach to a standard treatment for all relevant patients and care providers remains to be gathered. Several multicenter, prospective randomized trials in high-incidence countries are ongoing, and results from these trials will highlight the short- and long-term outcomes of the approach. In this review, we describe up-to-date findings and critical issues regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Early experience of duet laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (duet-LDG) using three abdominal ports for gastric carcinoma: surgical technique and comparison with conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Reduced port laparoscopic surgery may lead to less pain and better cosmetic outcome than conventional surgery. Also, it requires fewer assistants and abdominal ports. Recently, some experts have reported operative techniques and outcomes of reduced port laparoscopic gastrectomy. In this study, we sought to introduce our techniques of duet laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (duet-LDG) using three abdominal ports and surgical outcomes of early experience of this procedure.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2014, 431 patients undergoing LDG for gastric carcinoma were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, 49 patients underwent duet-LDG. During duet-LDG, an operator performed all the procedures using two abdominal ports with an additional umbilical laparoscopy port. Short-term surgical outcomes of duet-LDG were compared with conventional LDG groups.

RESULTS

The mean age of the duet-LDG group was 61.1 years with 38 males and 11 females. Forty patients underwent Billroth II, and 9 patients underwent Roux-en-Y reconstruction. The mean operating time was 147 min, and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 49 ml. Duet-LDG was successfully completed without intraoperative complications or open conversion in all patients. After an operation, six patients (12.2 %) developed postoperative complications, and no mortality occurred. The mean hospital stay was 8.6 days. When compared with the conventional LDG groups, patients who underwent duet-LDG showed no significant differences in short-term surgical outcomes including morbidity, mortality, and the duration of hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Duet-LDG is a viable alternative to conventional LDG for treating early gastric carcinoma providing comparable surgical outcomes. Less operative pain and scar, reduced medical cost, and requiring fewer assistants may benefit patients as well as surgeons. Finally, the efficacy of duet-LDG needs to be evaluated in diverse clinical aspects.

Comparison of single-port and reduced-port totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for patients with early gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is a treatment method for patients with early gastric cancer; however, single- or reduced-port LADG for these patients has been rarely reported.

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgical outcomes of patients with gastric cancer undergoing single-port totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) to those of patients undergoing reduced-port (three ports) TLDG.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 94 patients with early gastric cancer who underwent single-port or reduced-port TLDG at Samsung Medical Center between May 2014 and December 2014. Surgical outcomes were compared between operation methods.

RESULTS

There are more female patients (54.2 vs. 19.6 %, p = 0.001) and less obese patients (21.1 ± 2.1 vs. 24.6 ± 3.2 kg/m(2), p = 0.001) in the single-port TLDG group. There were no significant differences in blood loss during surgery, the number of dissected lymph nodes, and the pain score at postoperative first day between two groups. The variance in operation time for the reduced-port TLDG was significantly greater than that for single-port TLDG (p = 0.01). Complication rates in the single-port and reduced-TLDG groups were similar (20.8 vs. 21.7 %, p = 1.000). No postoperative deaths occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-port TLDG might be considered as a treatment option for a limited subset, such as females or less obese patients with early gastric cancer.