Efficacy and Safety of Totally Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Compared with Laparoscopic-Assisted Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Weighting Analysis

Surgical outcomes and prognosis of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score-matching study

This study compared the surgical outcomes and long-term prognosis of intracorporeal and extracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer patients. In total 228 clinical stage I gastric cancer patients undergoing LTG were enrolled from January 2012 and December 2022. Each case in the totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) group was 1:1 propensity score-matched to control cases in the laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) group. In total, 95 and 93 LATG and TLTG patients were included after propensity score matching (PSM). Clinicopathological features, surgical outcomes, and survival variables were compared, and risk factors for postoperative complications were analyzed. Patient characteristics were well balanced between the LATG and TLTG groups after PSM. The TLTG group showed less blood loss, decreased frequency of analgesic use, and shorter duration of analgesic use. The TLTG group had significantly lower rates of intestinal obstruction and surgical site infection. Larger tumor size and advanced pTNM stage were independent risk factors for postoperative complications. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS). Compared with LATG, TLTG was associated with better surgical outcomes and fewer postoperative surgical complications in gastric cancer patients although there was no significant difference in OS.

Comparison efficacy and safety of total laparoscopic gastrectomy and laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy in treatment of gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The development of laparoscopic technology has provided a new choice for surgery of gastric cancer (GC), but the advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) in treatment effect and safety are still controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of the two methods in the treatment of GC, and to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of totally LTG (TLTG) and LATG in the context of radical gastrectomy for GC. Additionally, we investigated the safety and feasibility of the total laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy technique.

METHODS

Literature on comparative studies of the above two surgical methods for GC (TLTG group and LATG group) published before September 2022 were searched in the PubMed, Web of Science, Wanfang Database, CNKI, and other Chinese and English databases. In addition, the following search keywords were used: Gastric cancer, total gastrectomy, total laparoscopy, laparoscopy-assisted, esophagojejunal anastomosis, gastric/stomach cancer, total gastrectomy, totally/completely laparoscopic, laparoscopic assisted/laparoscopy assisted/laparoscopically assisted, and esophagojejunostomy/esophagojejunal anastomosis. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the risk of bias in the included studies.

RESULTS

After layer-by-layer screening, 258 pieces of literature were recovered, and 11 of those pieces were eventually included. This resulted in a sample size of 2421 instances, with 1115 cases falling into the TLTG group and 1306 cases into the LATG group. Age or sex differences between the two groups were not statistically significant, according to the meta-analysis, however the average body mass index of the TLTG group was considerably higher than that of the LATG group (P = 0.01). Compared with those in the LATG group, the incision length in the TLTG group was significantly shorter (P < 0.001), the amount of intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower (P = 0.003), the number of lymph nodes removed was significantly greater (P = 0.04), and the time of first postoperative feeding and postoperative hospitalization were also significantly shorter (P = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively). There were no significant differences in tumor size, length of proximal incisal margin, total operation time, anastomotic time, postoperative pain score, postoperative anal exhaust time, postoperative anastomosis-related complications (including anastomotic fistula, anastomotic stenosis, and anastomotic hemorrhage), or overall postoperative complication rate (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLTG and esophagojejunostomy are safe and feasible. Compared with LATG, TLTG has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, easier access to lymph nodes, and faster postoperative recovery, and TLTG is also suitable for obese patients.

Safety and effectiveness of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy vs laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For gastric cancer with total gastrectomy, the usual laparoscopic surgical approaches are totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG). Due to its difficult anastomotic technique, the adoption of TLTG is limited. Therefore, surgeons prefer using LATG, which also led to TLTG being somewhat overlooked, so there is no clear conclusion today as to which surgical procedure is more favorable to the patient's recovery. This article aimed to compare the safety and short-term outcomes of the two surgical approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studies comparing TLTG and LATG, published up to December 2022, were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases. The study outcomes, including operative time, blood loss, anastomosis time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, proximal and distal resection margins, time to first fluid and soft diet, hospitalization duration, time to first flatus, and postsurgical and anastomotic complications, were compared between these two different surgical procedures. Statistics were analyzed with RevMan 5.4 and Stata 13.1.

RESULTS

Fifteen publications were included in this study. The total sample included 3023 cases. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in overall postoperative complications between the two surgical approaches ( P >0.05). Compared with LATG, TLTG led to reduced intraoperative blood loss ( P <0.0001), an increased number of lymphatic node dissections ( P <0.0001), and decreased hospitalization duration ( P =0.002). However, operative time, anastomosis time, pulmonary infection, resection margins, time to first fluid and soft diet, time to first flatus and anastomosis-related complications were no significant difference between TLTG and LATG groups ( P >0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLTG did not lead to an increase in overall postoperative complications, which is a reliable surgical approach for treatment of gastric cancer. Moreover, it may reduce harm to patients and enable them to obtain better surgical outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in elderly patients: a propensity-score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Scarce research has reported the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in elderly patients. This retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer in elderly patients.

METHODS

A total of 303 elderly patients who underwent distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer from June 2017 to June 2021 were enrolled. Variables used to calculate propensity score matching included sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists, history of diabetes, and history of hypertension. The statistical significance of continuous variables was tested using an independent sample t test. chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test were used for the evaluation of 3-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

After performing 1:1 propensity score matching, 248 patients were included for analysis (laparoscopic = 124, open = 124). Compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group showed significant advantages in estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), pain scale on the first postoperative day (P = 0.002), time to first flatus (P = 0.004), time to first liquid diet (P = 0.005), hospital stays (P < 0.001), and total complications (P = 0.011), but devoted much more operation time (P < 0.001). No statistical difference was observed between the two groups in 3-year recurrence-free survival (P = 0.315) or overall survival (P = 0.159).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis demonstrated that laparoscopic surgery had the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and faster postoperative recovery in distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric, indicating that laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is safe and effective for treating elderly patients with distal gastric cancer.

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with Uncut Roux-en-Y for gastric cancer may improve prognosis: A propensity score matching comparative study

Background

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with Roux-en-Y (RY) is often accompanied by a series of complications. Uncut RY (URY) can effectively reduce Roux stasis syndrome (RSS) in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. To determine whether totally LTG (TLTG) with URY for gastric cancer (GC) can replace RY in short-term and long-term prognosis.

Methods

This comparative retrospective study selected GC patients from 2016 to 2022. The patients were divided into URY group and RY group. Cox multivariate proportional hazard regression analysis was used to explore the independent prognostic factors. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce bias.

Results

A total of 100 GC patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to RY group, URY group showed significant advantages in operation time and length of hospital stay. In addition, URY group can significantly reduce short-term and long-term complications, especially RSS. The 1-, 3- and 5-year progression free survival (PFS) of URY group and RY group were 90.4% vs. 67.8% (P=0.005), 76.6% vs. 52.6% (P=0.009) and 76.6% vs. 32.8% (P<0.001), respectively. After PSM, the advantage of URY in PFS was verified again, while there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) between the two groups. Cox multivariate analysis suggested that lower RSS was associated with better PFS.

Conclusions

TLTG with URY for GC helps control disease progression, speed up recovery and reduce short and long-term complications, especially RSS.