Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma in the USA: Insights and Oncologic Outcomes in 220 Patients

Initiation of a robotic pancreatoduodenectomy program using virtual collaboration

BACKGROUND

Adoption of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) is growing, although there are challenges for safe introduction of this technique, including limitations in on-site expert proctoring. We developed and implemented a structured approach for safe introduction of a new RPD program using virtual collaboration.

METHODS

A structured framework for introducing a RPD program was designed; key steps included obtaining additional training, identifying required resources, establishing a dedicated team, and patient safety considerations. Virtual collaboration with a proctor for bidirectional communication was utilized for remote operative guidance. In the initial cohort, perioperative data and postoperative outcomes were extracted from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

From August 2020 to December 2023, 68 patients underwent RPD. The median operative time was 407 min with an estimated blood loss of 150 mL. Median length of stay was 8 days. Negative margins were obtained in 90% of resections. Operative time was significantly shorter in the second half of cases compared to the first (380min vs 441min, p < 0.01) and rate of conversion decreased (6% vs 21%).

CONCLUSION

The safe initiation of a structured RPD program is feasible through virtual expert collaboration. With careful consideration and an appropriate environment, excellent perioperative outcomes are achievable even for initial cases.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Trends of Oncological Quality of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer in the United States

Background

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has been increasingly used for treatment of gastric cancer in the United States. However, it is unknown if there has been a nationwide improvement of short-term safety outcomes and oncological quality metrics over time.

Methods

We used the National Cancer Database to identify patients who underwent major gastrectomy from 2010 through 2018. The short-term safety outcomes and oncological metrics were compared between cases of open gastrectomy (OG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), and RG. We also compared the indications and outcomes of RG between the three periods (2010 - 2012, 2013 - 2015, and 2016 - 2018).

Results

Of the 22,445 patients included, 1,867 (8%) underwent RG. Number of RG continued to increase from only 37 cases performed in 2010 to 412 cases performed in 2018. The number of lymph nodes (LNs) examined (OG, 16; LG, 17; and RG, 19) and the R0 rate (OG, 88%; LG, 92%; and RG 94%) were better for RG than for OG or LG (P < 0.001). In the RG group, the number of LNs examined (first period, 15; third period, 18; P < 0.001), R0 rate (first period, 88.6%; third period, 91.1%; P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (first period, 9 days; third period, 8 days; P < 0.001), 30-day readmission rate (first period, 10.1%; third period, 7.9%; P < 0.001), and 90-day mortality (first period, 7.3%; third period, 6.0%; P = 0.003) continued to improve cohort over time. The ratio of the robotic cases performed in academic institutions gradually increased (first period, 48.6%; third period, 54.3%; P < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, RG was associated with more than 15 LNs being examined (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34 - 1.65; P < 0.001). The indications for RG appeared expanding to include more advanced stage, high comorbidity, and patients who underwent preoperative therapy.

Conclusions

RG has been increasingly performed in the past decade. Although its indication was expanded to include more advanced tumors, we found that the oncological quality metrics and safety outcomes of RG have improved over time and were better than those of OG or LG.

Laparoscopic compared to open approach for distal gastrectomy may reduce pneumonia risk for patients with gastric cancer

Background

Whether laparoscopic approach to gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC) reduces the risk of pneumonia remains unknown. In this study, we compared pneumonia outcomes for patients with GC who underwent either laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) or open gastrectomy (OG).

Methods

The ACS NSQIP database was queried to identify patients with GC who underwent LG or OG between Jan 2012 - Dec 2018. Outcomes were compared using regression models. A post-hoc analysis was performed for elderly patients.

Results

The study cohort included 2661 patients, 23.4 % undergoing LG. Laparoscopic approach lowered pneumonia risk (OR 0.47, p = .028) and reduced hospital length of stay, (5.3 vs 7.1 days, p < .001). Elderly patients undergoing LG demonstrated similar benefits. Risk factors for pneumonia included advanced age, dyspnea and weight-loss, whereas laparoscopic approach reduced this risk.

Conclusions

LG in patients with GC has both statistically and clinically significant advantages over OG with respect to pneumonia. Further studies are needed to validate the relationship between postoperative pneumonia and surgical approach for gastrectomy.

Early stage gastric adenocarcinoma: clinical and molecular landscapes

Gastric adenocarcinoma, even when diagnosed at an early (localized) disease stage, poses a major health-care burden with cure rates that remain unsatisfactorily low, particularly in Western countries. This lack of progress reflects, among other aspects, the impracticality of early diagnosis, considerable variations in therapeutic approaches that is partly based on regional preferences, and the ingrained heterogeneity of gastric adenocarcinoma cells and their associated tumour microenvironment (TME). Clinical trials have long applied empirical interventions with the assumption that all early stage gastric adenocarcinomas are alike. Despite certain successes, the shortcomings of these approaches can potentially be overcome by targeting the specific molecular subsets of gastric adenocarcinomas identified by genomic and/or multi-omics analyses, including microsatellite instability-high, Epstein-Barr virus-induced, DNA damage repair-deficient, HER2-positive and PD-L1-high subtypes. Future approaches, including the availability of sophisticated vaccines, novel antibody technologies, agents targeting TME components (including fibroblasts, macrophages, cytokines or chemokines, and T cells) and novel immune checkpoint inhibitors, supported by improved tissue-based and blood-based diagnostic assays, seem promising. In this Review, we highlight current knowledge of the molecular and cellular biology of gastric adenocarcinomas, summarize the current approaches to clinical management of the disease, and consider the role of novel management and/or treatment strategies.

Intraoperative performance and outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A high-volume center retrospective propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Studies on robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) are currently limited. This study aimed to compare the intraoperative performance as well as short- and long-term outcomes of RTG and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG).

METHODS

A total of 969 patients underwent robotic (n = 161) or laparoscopic (n = 636) total gastrectomy between October 2014 and October 2021. The two groups of patients were matched 1:3 using the propensity score matching (PSM) method. The intraoperative performance as well as short- and long-term outcomes of the robotic (n = 147) and the laparoscopic (n = 371) groups were compared.

RESULTS

After matching, the estimated intraoperative blood loss was lower (80.51 ± 68.77 vs. 89.89 ± 66.12, p = 0.008), and the total number of lymph node dissections was higher (34.74 ± 12.44 vs. 29.83 ± 12.22, p < 0.001) in the RTG group compared with the LTG group. More lymph node dissections at the upper edge of the pancreas were performed in the RTG group than in the LTG (12.59 ± 4.18 vs. 10.33 ± 4.58, p = 0.001). Additionally, postoperative recovery indicators and laboratory data were greater in the RTG group than those in the LTG group, while postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups (19.0% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.962). For overweight or obese patients with body mass indexes (BMIs) ≥25, certain clinical outcomes of the RTG remained advantageous, and no significant differences in three-year overall survival (OS) or relapse-free survival (RFS) were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic total gastrectomy demonstrated better intraoperative performance, could improve the short-term clinical outcomes of patients, and was more conducive to patient recovery. However, the long-term efficacies of the two approaches were similar. Robotic surgical systems may reduce surgical stress responses in patients, allowing them to receive postoperative chemotherapy sooner.

Short-Term and Textbook Surgical Outcomes During the Implementation of a Robotic Gastrectomy Program

BACKGROUND

Whether gastric cancer patients derive greater benefit from robotic gastrectomy (RG), or open gastrectomy (OG) is unknown. We initiated a RG program in 2018, with prospective short-term outcome monitoring to ensure safety. We hypothesized that the RG program for gastric cancer can be safely implemented with equivalent safety and oncological textbook outcomes (TOs) to conventional open gastrectomy (OG).

METHODS

The study included patients who underwent curative-intent OG or RG for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2018 and December 2021. TO metrics were negative surgical margins, ≥ 15 lymph nodes examined, no severe (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa) postoperative complications, no reinterventions within 90 days after surgery, no ICU admission, no prolonged length of stay (LOS; > 10 days), no 90-day postoperative mortality, and no readmission within 90 days after surgery. Overall TO was achieved when all these metrics were met.

RESULTS

Of 161 patients, 120 underwent OG, and 41 underwent RG. The two groups' demographic and disease characteristics did not differ significantly. Compared with OG patients, RG patients had a longer median surgery time (348 vs. 282 min), smaller median blood loss volume (50 vs. 150 mL), lower mean prescribed opioid dose at discharge (12 vs. 45 mg), and shorter median LOS (4 vs. 7 days; all p < 0.001). The groups' postoperative complication rates (10% vs. 17%) did not differ significantly (p = 0.283). The overall TO rate of the RG group (73%) was higher than that of the OG group (60%), but the difference was not significant (p = 0.131).

CONCLUSION

We were able to implement the RG program safely, without compromising safety or oncological outcomes.

Extended Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer in the Neoadjuvant Era: Current Status, Clinical Implications and Contentious Issues

Despite its decreasing incidence, gastric cancer remains an important global healthcare problem due to its overall high prevalence and high mortality rate. Since the MAGIC and FNLCC/FFCD trials, the neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been recommended throughout Europe in gastric cancer. Potential benefits of preoperative treatments include a higher rate of R0 resection achieved by downstaging the primary tumor, a likely effect on micrometastases and isolated tumor cells in the lymph nodes, and, as a result, improved cancer-related survival. Nevertheless, distortion of anatomical planes of dissection, interstitial fibrosis, and sclerotic tissue changes may increase surgical difficulty. The collection of at least twenty-five lymph nodes after neoadjuvant therapy would seem to ensure removal of undetectable node metastasis and reduce the likelihood of locoregional recurrence. It is not what you take but what you leave behind that defines survival. Therefore, para-aortic lymph node dissection is safe and effective after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, in both therapeutic and prophylactic settings. In this review, the efficacy of adequate lymph node dissection, also in a neoadjuvant setting, has been investigated in the key studies conducted to date on the topic.

Management of Gastric Cancer

Gastric adenocarcinoma is a complex disease that requires a thorough multidisciplinary approach for appropriate management. Management strategies vary in different regions of the world and have changed over time. In spite of improvements in chemotherapy and surgical techniques and an improvement in outcomes over the last several decades, overall survival remains low. The best outcomes are likely related to early detection, preoperative reduction of tumor burden with immunochemotherapy, consistent surgical technique for resection, and postoperative eradication of tumor cells. We aim to describe the management for gastric cancer, from the specifics of staging and imaging workup to the tenets of surgical resection and reconstruction as well as the adjuvant treatment strategies in this broad review of gastric cancer management.

Fifty years of progress in gastric cancer

As with every human malignancy, the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of patients with gastric cancer have undergone enormous evidence-based change over the last 50 years, largely as a result of increasingly rapid developments in technology and science. Some of the changes in clinical practice have derived from prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs), whereas others have come from study of meticulously maintained prospective databases, which define the disease's natural history over time, and occasionally from in-depth analysis of a single patient with an unexpectedly good or poor outcome. Herein we summarize the more important changes in gastric cancer management and the data supporting those changes.

Predictors of Conversion During Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Malignancy

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) for malignancy is increasing. However, risk factors for conversion to open surgery during laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy are poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for, and impact of, conversion during oncologic resection.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-III gastric cancer from 2010 to 2017. Chi-squared test and t-test were used to compare the robotic versus laparoscopic groups. Propensity score weighted multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with conversion to open surgery.

RESULTS

Of 6990 patients identified, 5702 (81.6%) underwent a laparoscopic resection and 1288 (18.4%) underwent robotic-assisted resection. Conversion rates were 14.7% and 7.8% for laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy, respectively. The robotic approach was associated with lower likelihood of conversion compared to laparoscopic approach (odds ratio [OR] = 0.470, P < 0.001). Other factors predictive of conversion included tumor size >5 cm compared to <2 cm (OR 1.714, P = 0.010), total gastrectomy compared to partial gastrectomy (OR 2.019, P < 0.001), antrum/pylorus (OR 2.345, P < 0.001), and body (OR 2.152, P < 0.001) tumors compared to cardia tumors. Compared to those treated with laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy, patients who underwent conversion experienced significantly longer hospital length of stay and higher rates of positive surgical margins.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with a higher conversion rate compared to robotic gastrectomy. Conversion to open surgery was associated with a significantly longer length of stay and higher rates of positive margins. Identification of risk factors for conversion can aid in appropriate modality selection.

What is necessary to shorten the operative time in initial introduction of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer?

INTRODUCTION

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is a good alternative to laparoscopic gastrectomy, as it improves treatment outcomes and reduces the burden of technical difficulties; however, prolonged operative time may be a disadvantage. This study aimed to identify measures to shorten the operative time during the initial introduction of RG at an institution.

METHODS

We assessed 33 patients with gastric cancer who underwent radical distal gastrectomy with Billroth-I reconstruction and divided them into three groups: laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG), robotic distal gastrectomy in the early phase (RDG-E), and in the late phase (RDG-L). Operative time, six technical steps, and junk time, including the roll-in/roll-out, docking/undocking, and instrument exchange times, were compared among the groups.

RESULTS

The median (range) overall operative times of LDG, RDG-E, and RDG-L were 248 (179-323), 304 (249-383), and 263 (220-367) min, respectively, but no significant differences were observed. For each surgical step of RG, RDG-L in suprapancreatic lymph node dissection was significantly shorter than that in RDG-E. The median (range) junk times of LDG, RDG-E, and RDG-L were 16.7 (12.7-26.4), 48.3 (38.6-67.7), and 42.0 (35.4-49.2) min, respectively. Junk time was significantly longer in RDG-L than in LDG (p = 0.003), but not significant between RDG-E and RDG-L. The learning curve effect of overall, console, and junk times were achieved in four cases of RDG.

CONCLUSION

Junk time is a major factor in prolonging RDG operative time. However, to reduce the time after initial introduction, measures to promote robot-specific standardization and more effective use of robotic instruments are essential.

Can a single-port robot be safely used for robotic total gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer? First experience using the da Vinci SP platform

Background

Many studies have shown the operative feasibility and safety of robotic gastrectomy. Surgeons are pursuing single-port (SP) surgery to leverage the advantages of minimally invasive gastrectomy. The purpose of this study was to describe technical considerations and short-term outcomes from the first reported SP robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) using the da Vinci SP platform.

Methods

A 75-year-old patient with a body-mass index of 19.8 kg/m² and clinical stage III cancer (cT3N+M0) underwent SP RTG on 22 January 2022 at the Department of General Surgery, the Chinese PLA General Hospital. All procedures were performed successfully using the da Vinci SP robotic platform.

Results

The SP RTG was successfully performed with D2 lymphadenectomy including No. 10 lymph-nodes dissection and extracorporeal Roux-en-Y anastomosis. Except for subcutaneous emphysema, no severe adverse events occurred during the operation. According to a visual analogue scale (VAS), the subjective feeling of post-operative pain was given a VAS score of 3 of 10 on Post-Operative Day 1 (POD 1), 1 of 10 on POD 3, and 1 of 10 on POD 7. We removed the gastric tube on POD 2 and advised sipping water, a liquid diet, and a soft diet on PODs 2, 4, and 6, respectively. The patient was discharged without any complications on POD 8.

Conclusion

RTG is technically feasible and safe using the da Vinci SP robotic platform. To our knowledge, this is the first study using the da Vinci SP platform in RTG for advanced gastric cancer in elderly patients. To verify its superior operative outcomes, further clinical trials are needed.

Analysis of Opioid Use in Patients Undergoing Open Versus Robotic Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive, robotic gastrectomy is associated with better short-term outcomes and quicker functional recovery. However, the degree to which the robotic approach influences postoperative pain and opioid use after gastrectomy is unknown. Our primary aim was to determine whether the robotic approach to gastrectomy reduces postoperative opioid use compared with the open approach.

METHODS

Patients who underwent gastrectomy (November 2018 to September 2021) were identified retrospectively. Clinical characteristics, short-term surgical outcomes, oral morphine equivalent (OME) use, and pain scores were collected. Both groups were managed through an enhanced recovery program in the perioperative period.

RESULTS

Of 81 patients, 50 underwent open and 31 underwent robotic gastrectomy. Compared with open gastrectomy patients, robotic gastrectomy patients had longer surgery time (360 vs. 288 min), less blood loss (50 vs. 138 mL), and shorter hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days) (all medians, P < 0.001). Robotic gastrectomy patients used lower OMEs on postoperative days 0-4 (all P < 0.05) and in total for days 0-4 (total mean dose 65.0 vs. 169.5 mg; P < 0.001) than did open gastrectomy patients. The robotic gastrectomy patients were prescribed a lower mean OME dose than the open gastrectomy patients (19.0 vs. 29.0 mg, respectively; P = 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that robotic approach was associated with lower opioid use (odds ratio 3.70; 95% CI 1.01-14.3; P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy reduces opioid use in the early postoperative period and is associated with fewer OME discharge prescriptions and shorter hospital stay.

Early experience with total robotic D2 gastrectomy in a low incidence region: surgical perspectives

Background

Few European centers have reported on robotic gastrectomy for malignancy. We report our early experience with curative-intent total robotic gastrectomy.

Materials and methods

The Intuitive Surgery Da Vinci Surgical System Xi 4 armed robot was used. Routine D2 lymphadenectomy was applied.

Results

Some 27 patients with adenocarcinoma (n = 18), hereditary cancer susceptibility (n = 8) and premalignancy (n = 1) were allocated to robotic gastrectomy, three were excluded due to inoperability during surgery. Median (range) age was 66 (18–87) years, 14 (58.3%) were females and body mass index was 25.5 (22.1–33.5) kg/m². Total gastrectomy was performed in 19 (79.2%) and subtotal in five (20.8%) patients. One (4.2%) procedure was converted to laparotomy. Procedural time was 273 (195–427) minutes. Three (12.5%) patients were reoperated within 30 days, one (4.2%) died. Serious complications (Clavien Dindo IIIb or more) occurred in three (12.5%) patients. Postoperative hospital stay was 10 (6–43) days. Fourteen of 16 (87.5%) patients with adenocarcinoma/premalignancy received radical resections. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 20 (11–34). Eleven (73.3%) patients with adenocarcinoma had T3/T4 tumors and 6 (40%) had TNM stage III or more.

Conclusion

Total robotic D2 gastrectomy appears feasible and safe during early introduction in a low incidence region.

Surgical Management of Gastric Cancer: A Review

Importance

Surgery plays a critical role in the management of all stages of gastric cancer.

Observations

For patients with early gastric cancer and low risk of lymph node metastasis, endoscopic therapy or surgery alone is potentially curative. Novel techniques, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy, may allow for greater use of stomach-sparing procedures that could improve quality of life without compromising oncologic outcomes; however, experience with these techniques is rare outside of East Asia, and studies of long-term outcomes are still ongoing. Patients with later-stage localized gastric cancer benefit from more extensive lymphadenectomy and multimodality therapy, as they are at risk for nodal and distant metastases. There have been recent advances in chemotherapy that have led to improved survival, but the optimal sequencing of multimodality therapy is still being investigated. Better systemic therapy may also increase the role of surgery for patients with oligometastatic disease. There are ongoing studies examining the efficacy of peritoneal-directed therapies in both patients with low-volume peritoneal disease and patients at high risk of peritoneal recurrence.

Conclusions and Relevance

The management of gastric cancer continues to evolve. Surgeons should be aware of novel surgical approaches currently under investigation as well as how surgery fits into the contemporary multidisciplinary approach to this disease.

Trends in clinical outcomes and long-term survival after robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single high-volume center experience of consecutive 2000 patients

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is now a standard treatment for gastric cancer. Many retrospective studies have reported that robotic gastrectomy is safe and feasible, with similar short- and long-term outcomes as laparoscopic gastrectomy. However, no studies have reported the details of surgical and survival outcomes for robotic gastrectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical trends and techniques of robotic gastrectomy and analyze the surgical outcomes of 2000 consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent robotic gastrectomy over 14 years.

METHODS

Between July 2005 and January 2019, 2000 consecutive robotic gastrectomies were performed. We evaluated short- and long-term outcomes as well as surgical trends after robotic gastrectomy.

RESULTS

There were 1,560 subtotal gastrectomies (78%), 324 total gastrectomies (16.2%), 83 proximal gastrectomies (4.2%), and 33 completion total gastrectomies (1.7%). The rates of major complications and mortality were 3.1% and 0.3%, respectively. In a subgroup analysis, there were no significant differences in the rate of complications over time (P = 0.696). Five-year overall survival rates were 97.6% for stage I, 91.9% for stage II, and 69.2% for stage III, with a total recurrence rate of 5.3%. Since its adoption in 2005, the proportion of robotic gastrectomies, as well as technically demanding procedures have increased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our 14 years' experience of 2000 robotic gastrectomies has shown the proportion, as well as the number of robotic gastrectomies, have tended to increase and trends toward to technically demanding procedures. Outcomes of robotic gastrectomy appear safe and feasible with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes.

Robotic Surgery: At the Crossroads of a Data Explosion

BACKGROUND

For the last 20 years, controversies in robotic surgery focused on cost reduction, development of new platforms and technologies, creation and validation of curriculum and virtual simulators, and conduction of randomized clinical trials to determine the best applications of robotics [Leal Ghezzi and Campos in World J Surg 40:2550-2557, 2016].

METHODS

This review explores the robotic systems which are currently indicated for use or development in gastrointestinal/abdominal surgery. These systems are reviewed and analyzed for clinical impact in these areas. In a MEDLINE search of articles with the search terms abdominal, gastrointestinal, review and robotic surgery, a total of 4306 total articles as of 2021 were assessed. Publicly available information, highest cited articles and reviews were assessed by the authors to determine the most significant regarding clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Despite this increased number of articles related to robotic surgery, ongoing controversies have led to limitation in the use of current and future robotic surgery platforms [Connelly et al. in J Robotic Surg 14:155-165, 2020]. Newer robotic platforms have limited studies or analysis that would allow meaningful definite conclusions. A multitude of new scenarios are possible due to this limited information.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery is in evolution to a larger conceptual field of computationally enhanced surgery (CES). Various terms have been used in the literature including computer-assisted surgery or digital Surgery [Ranev and Teixeira in Surg Clin North Am 100:209-218, 2020]. With the growth of technological changes inherent in CES, the ability to validate these improvements in outcomes will require new metrics and analytic tools. This learning feedback and metric analysis will generate the new opportunities in simulation, training and application [Julian and Smith in Int J Med Robot 15:e2037, 2019].

Short-term Outcomes of Robotic Gastrectomy vs Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Patients With Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer may be associated with decreased incidence of intra-abdominal infectious complications, including pancreatic fistula, leakage, and abscess. Prospective randomized clinical trials comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and RG are thus required.

Objective

To compare the short-term surgical outcomes of RG with those of LG for patients with gastric cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this phase 3, prospective superiority randomized clinical trial of RG vs LG regarding reduction of complications, 241 patients with resectable gastric cancer (clinical stages I-III) were enrolled between April 1, 2018, and October 31, 2020.

Interventions

LG vs RG.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the incidence of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications. Secondary end points were incidence of any complications, surgical results, postoperative courses, and oncologic outcomes. The modified intention-to-treat population excluded patients who had been randomized and met the postrandomization exclusion criteria. There was also a per-protocol population for analysis of postoperative complications.

Results

This study enrolled 241 patients, with 236 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (150 men [63.6%]; mean [SD] age, 70.8 [10.7] years). There was no significant difference in the incidence of intra-abdominal infectious complications (per-protocol population: 10 of 117 [8.5%] in the LG group vs 7 of 113 [6.2%] in the RG group). Of 241 patients, 122 were randomly assigned to the LG group, and 119 patients were randomly assigned to the RG group. Two of the 122 patients (1.6%) in the LG group converted from LG to open surgery, and 4 of 119 patients (3.4%) in the RG group converted from RG to open or laparoscopic surgery, with no significant difference. Finally, 117 patients in the LG group completed the procedure, and 113 in the RG group completed the procedure; these populations were defined as the per-protocol population. The overall incidence of postoperative complications of grade II or higher was significantly higher in the LG group (23 [19.7%]) than in the RG group (10 [8.8%]) (P = .02). Even in analysis limited to grade IIIa or higher, the complication rate was still significantly higher in the LG group (19 [16.2%]) than in the RG group (6 [5.3%]) (P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found no reduction of intra-abdominal infectious complications with RG compared with LG for gastric cancer.

Trial Registration

umin.ac.jp/ctr Identifier: UMIN000031536.

Establishment of a Fast-Track Gastrectomy Pathway for Patients with Gastric Adenocarcinoma at a U.S. Academic Cancer Center

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of fast-track perioperative care pathways for gastric cancer patients in the U.S. has been challenging due to low disease incidence and limited safety and efficacy data. Our institution recently implemented such a pathway for gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy, and we sought to study its effects.

METHODS

We analyzed data from consecutive patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma from January 2014 to August 2020. Patients who had surgery for recurrence, urgent surgery for obstruction, bleeding, or perforation, or an intrathoracic anastomosis were excluded. The primary predictor was whether the patient had surgery before or after implementation of a perioperative fast-track gastrectomy pathway in July 2018, and the primary outcome was length of stay.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty patients were identified, 109 pre-pathway implementation and 51 post-pathway implementation. Following pathway implementation, length of stay was significantly shorter (median 6 days versus 9 days, p < 0.001), and there was no significant difference in 30-day complication rates (29% pre versus 24% post, P = 0.56) or readmission rates (18% pre versus 16% post, P = 0.85). Using linear segmented regression analysis adjusting for age, body mass index, tumor stage (early versus late), type of surgery (distal/subtotal versus total gastrectomy), and approach (open versus minimally invasive), pathway implementation was found to be associated with a 31% decreased length of stay (effect size 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.49 - 0.98, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Fast-track gastrectomy care pathways are safe and feasible for U.S. gastric cancer patients undergoing gastrectomy and are associated with decreased length of stay.

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes using da Vinci S, Si and Xi Surgical System for robotic gastric cancer surgery

When compared with the second/third generation da Vinci S/Si, the fourth generation Xi surgical system may allow for greater efficiency and result in shorter operation times during robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC). We directly compare surgical outcomes between the conventional S/Si and the newer Xi robotic platform for the treatment of GC. This is a single-center retrospective study of 148 consecutive patients with GC who underwent RG. Of these patients, 20 patients were treated with the S, 30 patients with the Si, and 98 patients with the Xi. The overall operation time was significantly longer in the S group (386.5 min) than in the other groups (Si group: 292 min; Xi group: 297 min) (S vs. Si: P = 0.010; S vs. Xi: P = 0.001). We observed no difference, however, between the newer Xi and Si systems in operation time. Intraoperative blood loss was similar across the three groups. The overall postoperative complication rate in the Xi group (8.2%) was lower than that of the S group (10%) and the Si group (13.3%), but the difference was not significant. The newer Xi system did not provide significant intraoperative or early postoperative advantages over the Si system.