Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a cohort study using the propensity score matching method

Oncological long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for cT3-4 gastric cancer at surgical staging: a propensity-score matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

The oncological efficacy of laparoscopic surgery for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has been evaluated by several randomized trials. However, the inclusion of earlier-stage disease was a limitation in previous studies.

METHODS

Patients with cT3-4 gastric cancer, determined by surgical staging to minimize migration of earlier stages, treated at a tertiary cancer center from 2009 to 2018 were included. Based on the surgical approach, the patients were divided into two groups: the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and the open gastrectomy (OG) and matched for age, sex, macroscopic appearance (type 4 or non-type 4), body mass index, estimated tumor size, clinical stage T3'T4, clinical N stage, pathologic T stage (T3 or T4), and type of surgery (total or distal gastrectomy).

RESULTS

588 patients (221 LG, 367 OG) were included in the analysis. After 1:1 propensity-score matching, 386 patients (193 LG, 193 OG) were assigned for analysis. In the LG group, operation time was longer with lower blood loss. The incidence of postoperative complications (≥ grade III) did not differ significantly between the groups (OG: 8.3%, vs. LG: 9.3%). Overall survival (OS) was longer in the LG group (5-year OS: 79.3 vs. 73% HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44-0.99, P = 0.0497). Relapse-free survival (RFS) did not show a statistical difference (5-year RFS: 69.5 vs. 68.7 HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.62-1.26, P = 0.487). Subgroup analysis for OS also demonstrated equivalent outcomes.

CONCLUSION

LG demonstrates comparable safety and efficacy to OG for advanced gastric cancer at surgical staging, with similar rates of severe complications and long-term oncological outcomes. Further research is needed to validate these findings, particularly for total gastrectomy and for patients from Western populations.

Short-Term Outcomes Analysis Comparing Open, Lap-Assisted, Totally Laparoscopic, and Robotic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Total gastrectomy (TG) is the cornerstone treatment for gastric cancer (GC). While open TG (OTG) with D2 lymphadenectomy remains the gold standard, alternative techniques such as lap-assisted TG (LATG), totally laparoscopic TG (TLTG), and robotic TG (RTG) have been reported with promising outcomes. The present analysis aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of different techniques for TG comprehensively in the setting of GC.

METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed. The primary outcomes were overall complications (OC), severe postoperative complications (SPCs), and anastomotic leak (AL). Pooled effect-size measures included risk ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

RESULTS

Sixty-eight studies (44,689 patients) were included. Overall, 52.4% underwent OTG, 6.5% LATG, 39.2% TLTG, and 1.9% RTG. Both TLTG (RR 0.82; 95% CrI 0.73-0.92) and RTG (RR 0.75; 95% CrI 0.59-0.95) showed a reduced rate of postoperative OC compared to OTG. SPCs and AL RR were comparable across all techniques. Despite the longer operative time, LATG, TLTG, and RTG showed reduced intraoperative blood loss, time to first flatus, ambulation, liquid diet resumption, and hospital stay compared to OTG.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive approaches seem to be associated with improved OC and functional outcomes compared to OTG.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy in patients with advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to investigate the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) versus open total gastrectomy (OTG) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

METHODS

Patients with AGC who received NACT before surgery were enrolled in either the LTG or OTG group. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:2) was performed between the two groups based on the propensity score using a 0.15 calliper width. Three-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between these two groups before and after PSM. OS and DFS rates were calculated by the Kaplan‒Meier method, and any differences in survival were evaluated with a log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses were used to estimate the simultaneous effects of prognostic factors on survival and the hazard ratio (HR) between LTG and OTG patients.

RESULTS

A total of 144 patients completed the follow-up, with 24 patients in the LTG group and 120 patients in the OTG group. After a mean follow-up of 64.40 months, there were no significant differences in the 3-year OS or DFS rates between the two groups before (P = 0.453 and P = 0.362, respectively) or after PSM (P = 0.972 and P = 0.884, respectively). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis indicated that ypN stage was an independent risk factor for worse OS (P = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that LTG with D2 lymphadenectomy performed by an experienced surgical team resulted in comparable 3-year OS and DFS compared with OTG in patients with AGC after NACT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is not registered.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A case-control study using a propensity score matching method

Background

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is increasingly becoming the recommended treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) with promising results. According to previous reports, few studies have evaluated the benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) after NACT.

Methods

135 patients from our center who underwent gastrectomy with NACT were available, including 41 patients of LG and 94 OG between July 2018 and July 2022. To reduce selection bias, we used the nearest neighbor method and set caliper = 0.2 for 3:1 matching between LG and OG groups for propensity score matching method (PSM). After PSM, the matched 41 patients with LG and 80 patients with OG formed the cohort, respectively. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were performed on all variables to determine independent risk factors associated with survival.

Results

LG had a longer operating time compared to OG [260.00 min (220.00 min, 300.00 min) vs. 200.00 min (160.00 min, 260 min), P < 0.001]. The estimated blood loss, metastatic lymph nodes (LN), total LN examined, postoperative hospital stays, blood transfusion (P>0.05) and the incidence of postoperative complications did not show statistical differences from the OG group (P = 0.084). The type of surgery (LG vs. OG) did not show a significant risk propensity in the univariate and multivariate Cox analysis (HR = 0.69, P = 0.36, 95 % CI: 0.31-1.53). Through the Kaplan-Meier curves, a certain trend showed that the LG group had a better long-term survival outcomes than the OG group, although there was no statistical difference between two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

LG is a promising treatment option for LAGC patients receiving NACT and had an acceptable safety and efficacy compared to OG.

Comparisons of perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: an updated pooled analysis of eighteen studies

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in advanced gastric cancer patients who received neoadjuvant therapy represent a controversial issue. We performed an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus conventional open gastrectomy (OG) in this subset of patients.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were comprehensively searched up to May 2023. The short-term and long-term outcomes of LG versus OG in advanced gastric cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy were evaluated. Effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals were always assessed using random-effects model. The prospective protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022359126).

RESULTS

Eighteen studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 16 cohort studies) involving 2096 patients were included. In total, 933 patients were treated with LG and 1163 patients were treated with OG. In perioperative outcomes, LG was associated with less estimated blood loss (MD = - 65.15; P < 0.0001), faster time to flatus (MD = - 0.56; P < 0.0001) and liquid intake (MD = - 0.42; P = 0.02), reduced hospital stay (MD = - 2.26; P < 0.0001), lower overall complication rate (OR = 0.70; P = 0.002) and lower minor complication rate (OR = 0.69; P = 0.006), while longer operative time (MD = 25.98; P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of proximal margin, distal margin, R1/R2 resection rate, retrieved lymph nodes, time to remove gastric tube and drainage tube, major complications and other specific complications. In survival outcomes, LG and OG were not significantly different in overall survival, disease-free survival and recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSION

LG can be a safe and feasible technique for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to further validate the results of our study.

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Gastrectomy for Patients With Gastric Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study Based on the Korean Gastric Cancer Association Nationwide Survey

PURPOSE

Despite scientific evidence regarding laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for advanced gastric cancer treatment, its application in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy remains uncertain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the 2019 Korean Gastric Cancer Association nationwide survey database to extract data from 489 patients with primary gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. After propensity score matching analysis, we compared the surgical outcomes of 97 patients who underwent LG and 97 patients who underwent open gastrectomy (OG). We investigated the risk factors for postoperative complications using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The operative time was significantly shorter in the OG group. Patients in the LG group had significantly less blood loss than those in the OG group. Hospital stay and overall postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications in the LG group was comparable with that in the OG group (1.03% vs. 4.12%, P=0.215). No statistically significant difference was observed in the number of harvested lymph nodes between the two groups (38.60 vs. 35.79, P=0.182). Multivariate analysis identified body mass index (odds ratio [OR], 1.824; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.029-3.234; P=0.040) and extent of resection (OR, 3.154; 95% CI, 1.084-9.174; P=0.035) as independent risk factors for overall postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Using a large nationwide multicenter survey database, we demonstrated that LG and OG had comparable short-term outcomes in patients with gastric cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Safety and short-term outcomes of gastrectomy after preoperative chemotherapy plus immunotherapy versus preoperative chemotherapy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The safety and short-term outcomes of gastrectomy after preoperative chemotherapy plus immunotherapy (PCIT) versus preoperative chemotherapy (PCT) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) remain unclear. This study was conducted to compare the safety and short-term efficacy of PCIT with those of PCT in patients with AGC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with AGC who received PCIT or PCT at Peking University Cancer Hospital and Institute Gastrointestinal Cancer Center I between January 2019 and June 2021. The clinical characteristics were recorded, and short-term oncological outcomes were compared. Independent t tests, Mann‒Whitney U tests, chi-square tests, and Fisher's exact tests were used to calculate differences. The correlation analyses were performed using Pearson correlation. All p values were two-sided, and a p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All the above statistical analyses were conducted by the SPSS version 24.0 software package (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

RESULTS

A total of 162 AGC patients were included in this study, including 25 patients who received PCIT and 137 patients who received PCT. There were no significant differences in preoperative treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) between the PCIT group and the PCT group (p = 0.088). Compared with the PCT group, the PCIT group had comparable postoperative functional recovery, with no significant differences in terms of time to first aerofluxus (p = 0.349), time to first defecation (p = 0.800), time to liquid diet (p = 0.233), or length of stay (p = 0.278). No significant differences were observed in terms of postoperative complications (p = 0.952), postoperative pain intensity at 24, 48, or 72 h (p = 0.375, p = 0.601, and p = 0.821, respectively), or postoperative supplementary analgesic use between the two groups (p = 0.881). In addition, the postoperative complication rate was 33.3% following laparoscopic approaches and 31.2% following open approaches in the PCIT group, with no significant difference (p = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

In patients with AGC, gastrectomy with D2 or D2 + lymphadenectomy after PCIT had comparable short-term oncological outcomes to PCT.

Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Three-Dimensional Visualized Medical Techniques Hepatectomy for Liver Cancer with and without the Treatment of Sorafenib

Background

The application of medical image three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction technology can provide intuitive 3D image data support for accurate preoperative evaluation, surgical planning, and operation safety. However, there is still a lack of high-quality evidence to support whether 3D reconstruction technology is more advantageous in liver resection. Therefore, this study systematically evaluated the clinical effects of 3D reconstruction and two-dimensional (2D) image-assisted hepatectomy.

Methods

Databases were searched to collect published clinical studies on 3D reconstruction technology and 2D image-assisted liver resection. Data were extracted from the database construction to March 2022 and the risk of bias in the included studies was evaluated. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.3 software.

Results

A total of 13 clinical studies were included, including 1616 patients, 795 in the 2D group and 819 in the 3D group. The meta-analysis showed that the incidence of postoperative complications was lower in the 3D group than in the 2D group (OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.49–0.83, P=0.001) and also reduced operation time (SMD = −0.51, 95% CI = −0.74∼−0.27, P < 0.0001), decreased intraoperative blood loss (SMD = −63.85, 95% CI = −98.66–29.04, P=0.0003), decreased incidence of postoperative liver failure (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 0.99–5.95, P=0.05), decreased postoperative recurrence rate (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.16–0.53, P < 0.0001), and increased postoperative survival rate (OR = 2.19, 95% CI = 1.49–3.23, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Current data suggest that 3D reconstruction-assisted hepatectomy can reduce intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, and recurrence, and improve postoperative survival. Therefore, the 3D reconstruction technique is worthy of application and promotion in assisted liver resection.

Effects of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Advanced Gastric Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of laparoscopy and laparotomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer by meta-analysis.

Methods

Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed were searched by computer until December 1, 2021. Literature was screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and relevant data were extracted for meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3.

Results

A total of 1027 patients from 11 literature studies were included in this study, including 413 patients in the laparoscopic group and 614 patients in the open group. Meta-analysis showed that the laparoscopic group had less intraoperative bleeding (SMD = -1.11; 95% CI: -1.75-0.47; P=0.0006), early postoperative exhaust (SMD = -0.45; 95% CI: -0.70-0.20; P=0.0004), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (SMD = 0.97; 95% CI: 1.69∼0.26; P=0.008), but had longer the operation time (SMD = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.52∼0.79; P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in the number of lymph nodes dissected during operation (SMD = -0.45; 95% CI: -0.42-0.19; P=0.45), the incidence of surgical complications 30 days after operation (OR = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.53∼1.13; P=0.19), time of first defecation (MD = 0.00; 95% CI: -0.10∼0.10; P=0.98), and time of first postoperative feeding (MD = -0.05; 95% CI: -0.22∼0.12; P=0.54) between the two groups. For long-term prognosis, there was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate after operation between the two groups (RR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.63-1.12; P=0.23).

Conclusion

Compared with the open stomach cancer surgery, laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery has less intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospitalization time, and advantages such as early rehabilitation, postoperative complications rate, and long-term survival, which confirmed the validity and security of the laparoscopic surgery.

Short and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open total gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) combined with surgery is regarded as an effective treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Laparoscopic surgery represents the mainstream of minimally invasive surgery. Currently, surgeons focus more on surgical safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy after NACT. Thus, we sought to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and open total gastrectomy (OTG) after NACT.

AIM

To compare the short and long-term outcomes between LTG and OTG for AGC after NACT.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected the clinicopathological data of 136 patients who accepted gastrectomy after NACT from June 2012 to June 2019, including 61 patients who underwent LTG and 75 who underwent OTG. Clinicopathological characteristics between the LTG and OTG groups showed no significant difference. SPSS 26.0, R software, and GraphPad PRISM 8.0 were used to perform statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 136 patients included, eight acquired pathological complete response, and the objective response rate was 47.8% (65/136). The LTG group had longer operation time (P = 0.015), less blood loss (P = 0.003), shorter days to first flatus (P < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospitalization days (P < 0.001). LTG spent more surgical cost than OTG (P < 0.001), while total hospitalized cost of LTG was less than OTG (P < 0.001). 21 (28.0%) patients in the OTG group and 14 (23.0%) in the LTG group had 30-d postoperative complications, but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.503). The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 60.6% and 64.6% in the LTG and OTG groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.859, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.522-1.412, P = 0.546], while the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 54.5% and 51.8% in the LTG and OTG group, respectively (HR = 0.947, 95%CI: 0.582-1.539, P = 0.823). Multivariate cox analysis showed that body mass index and pTNM stage were independent risk factors for OS while vascular invasion and pTNM stage were independent risk factors for DFS (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

After NACT, LTG shows comparable 30-d postoperative morbidity as well as 3-year OS and DFS rate to OTG. We recommend that experienced surgeons select LTG other than OTG for proper AGC patients after NACT.