Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery

Effectiveness and safety of self-pulling and latter transected reconstruction in totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy: a comparison with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

In some earlier studies, self-pulling and later transection (SPLT) esophagojejunostomy (E-J) was incorporated into total laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) procedures. Its effectiveness and safety, however, remain unknown. This study compared (SPLT)-E-J in TLTG with conventional E-J in laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) in order to assess the short-term safety and efficacy of (SPLT)-E-J in TLTG.

METHODS

This research analyzed patients with gastric cancer who received SPLT-TLTG or LATG between January 2019 and December 2021 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. Baseline data and postoperative short-term surgical outcomes were obtained retrospectively and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 83 patients who underwent SPLT-TLTG (n = 40, 48.2%) or LATG (n = 43, 51.8%) were included in this study. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of patient demographics or tumor characteristics. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, postoperative complications, postoperative decrease in hemoglobin and albumin levels, or postoperative hospital stay. Five and seven patients experienced short-term postoperative complications in the SPLT-TLTG and LATG groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SPLT-TLTG is a dependable and safe surgical method for the treatment of gastric cancer. Its short-term outcomes were similar to those of conventional E-J in LATG and had advantages regarding surgical incision and simplification of reconstruction.

Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: the evolution of minimally invasive surgery-a narrative review

Background

Minimally invasive (MI) surgery has revolutionised surgery, becoming the standard of care in many countries around the globe. Observed benefits over traditional open surgery include reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, and decreased recovery time. Gastrointestinal surgery in particular was an early adaptor to both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Within this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery and a critical outlook on the evidence surrounding its effectiveness and safety.

Methods

A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for the topic of this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed. The methodology for evidence synthesis was in line with the four steps for narrative reviews outlined in current literature. The key words used were minimally invasive, robotic, laparoscopic colorectal, colon, rectal surgery.

Conclusion

The introduction of minimally surgery has revolutionised patient care. Despite the evidence supporting this technique in gastrointestinal surgery, several controversies remain. Here we discuss some of them; the lack of high level evidence regarding the oncological outcomes of TaTME and lack of supporting evidence for robotic colorectalrectal surgery and upper GI surgery. These controversies open pathways for future research opportunities with RCTs focusing on comparing robotic to laparoscopic with different primary outcomes including ergonomics and surgeon comfort.

Effectiveness and safety of self-pulling and latter transected Roux-en-Y reconstruction in totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Self-pulling and latter transection (SPLT) reconstruction has been applied in total laparoscopic total gastrectomy and BI reconstruction (known as Delta SPLT) in total laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) in some previous studies. This approach can reduce the technical difficulty of the surgery as well as the quantity of cartridges required, with manageable safety. Here, we used SPLT to complete Roux-en-Y reconstruction in TLDG and evaluated the safety and effectiveness of this novel method by comparing it with conventional Roux-en-Y reconstruction in laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG).

METHODS

Patients with gastric cancer who underwent SPLT-TLDG or LADG between June 2019 and September 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Baseline information and postoperative short-term surgical outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients with gastric cancer were included in the study. Patients underwent SPLT-TLDG (n = 73, 64.0%) or LADG (n = 41, 36.0%). No patient underwent open surgery. There were no differences in patient demographics or tumor characteristics between the two groups. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 47.1 ± 34.3 ml in the SPLT-TLDG group, which was significantly less than that in the LADG group (P = 0.022). There were no significant differences in operation time, harvested lymph nodes, time to first flatus, time to liquid intake, or postoperative hospital stay between the two groups. Nine and five patients had short-term postoperative complications in the SPLT-TLDG and LADG groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We introduced a self-pulling and latter transected Roux-en-Y reconstruction (SPLT-RY) for use in TLDG. We showed that SPLT-RY reconstruction in TLDG is a safe and feasible surgical method in terms of short-term surgical outcomes and has the advantages of simplifying the reconstruction.

Nomogram of intra-abdominal infection after surgery in patients with gastric cancer: A retrospective study

Background

Surgical resection is still the primary way to treat gastric cancer. Therefore, postoperative complications such as IAI (intra-abdominal infection) are major problems that front-line clinical workers should pay special attention to. This article was to build and validate IAI’s RF (regression function) model. Furthermore, it analyzed the prognosis in patients with IAI after surgery for stomach cancer. The above two points are our advantages, which were not involved in previous studies.

Methods

The data of this study was divided into two parts, the training data set and the validation data set. The training data for this article were from the patients treated surgically with gastric cancer in our center from December 2015 to February 2017. We examined IAI’s morbidity, etiological characteristics, and prognosis in the training data set. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to screen risk factors, establish an RF model and create a nomogram. Data from January to March 2021 were used to validate the accuracy of the RF model.

Results

The incidence of IAI was 7.2%. The independent risk factors for IAI were hypertension (Odds Ratio [OR] = 3.408, P = 0.001), history of abdominal surgery (OR = 2.609, P = 0.041), combined organ excision (OR = 4.123, P = 0.010), and operation time ≥240 min (OR = 3.091, P = 0.005). In the training data set and validation data set, the area under the ROC curve of IAI predicted by the RF model was 0.745 ± 0.048 (P<0.001) and 0.736 ± 0.069 (P=0.003), respectively. In addition, IAI significantly extended the length of hospital stay but had little impact on survival.

Conclusions

Patients with hypertension, combined organ excision, a history of abdominal surgery, and a surgical duration of 240 min or more are prone to IAI, and the RF model may help to identify them.

Comparison of postoperative pancreatic fistula between open and laparoscopic surgery in patients with gastric cancer: A meta-analysis

Background

Open gastrectomy"OG" compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy"LG" in patients with gastric cancer"GC" has been widely discussed over the past years. However, the lack of comparative analysis in postoperative pancreatic fistula "POPF" hinders its severity as surgical procedures developed rapidly. Therefore, there are still moot on whether one of these surgical options is superior in POPF.

Objective

To compare the incidence of POPF in patients undergoing OG and LG for gastric cancer "GC".

Methods

Articles from January 2011 to August 2021 that compared LG and OG for GC were reviewed. Cohort studies were included in our study. The quality of enrolled studies was evaluated. Outcomes regarding POPF complication and relative operation results were analyzed. Statistical analysis portrayed the Weighted mean difference"WMD"and the odds ratio"OR"with a 95% confidence interval "CI". The curative effect was analyzed using RevMan 5.4.1 software.

Results

Totally 7 articles met the inclusion criteria, including 3194 patients with treatment of gastrectomy surgeries for gastric cancer "GC". There was no significant difference observed in POPF incidence (OR, 95% CI = 1.04 [0.74,1.46], P = 0.81) between OG group and LG group in patients undergoing GC gastrectomy.

Conclusion

We stringently explored the current incidence of POPF after GC gastrectomy, comparing its incidence during LG and OG, there was no significant difference between OG and LG in the incidence of POPF, and surgeons should give more concern for improvement in surgical techniques. Further research is still needed to explore the risk of causes and surgical techniques should be considered cautiously in a clinical procedure.

Minimally invasive surgery in advanced gastric cancer

Since Dr. Kitano introduced laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer in 1994, there have been remarkable advances in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer, including robotic surgery. With the efforts of many clinical researchers and consenting patients, medical knowledge and evidence for laparoscopic surgery in gastric cancer have accumulated. Although many gastric surgeons are comfortable with the clinical application of laparoscopic surgery for early gastric cancer, the adoption of MISs for advanced gastric cancer remains controversial. In this review article, we describe the current status and evidence of MIS from an evidence‐based medicine viewpoint and explore the feasibility and effectiveness of MIS for advanced gastric cancer in the real world.

Advances in clinical immunotherapy for gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most malignant human cancers with increasing incidence worldwide, ranking among the top five malignant tumors worldwide in terms of incidence and mortality. The clinical efficacy of conventional therapies is limited, and the median overall survival (mOS) for advanced-stage gastric cancer is only about 8 months. Emerging as one of breakthroughs for cancer therapy, immunotherapy has become an effective treatment modality after surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy. In this review, we have summarized the progresses of clinical development of immunotherapies for gastric cancer. Major advances with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have started to change the clinical practice for gastric cancer treatment and prognosis. Additionally, combination therapies with other modalities, such as targeted therapies, are expected to push immunotherapies to front-line. In this review, the efficacy of ICIs and targeted therapy alone or combination with existing therapies gastric cancer treatment was described and the predictive value of biomarkers for immunotherapies in gastric cancer treatment is also discussed.

Laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: Current status and future direction

Gastric cancer is still a major cause of death worldwide. While laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) has gained evidence as a standard treatment for early gastric cancer in the distal stomach, there are still concerns regarding its application for gastric cancer in the upper stomach and advanced gastric cancer. Nevertheless, LG has shown to have faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, less pain, and less blood loss in many retrospective and prospective studies. The application of LG has now extended from conventional radical gastrectomy to novel approaches such as function-preserving gastrectomy and sentinel-node navigated surgery. Studies on the use of laparoscopy in treatment for stage IV gastric cancer are rare, but show that there may be some roles of LG in selected cases. With the development of new laparoscopic tools that augment human ability, the future of LG should move on from proving non-inferiority to demonstrating superiority compared to the traditional open gastrectomy.

Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for gastric cancer: big data analysis based on nationwide administrative claims data

Purpose

Accumulated evidence indicates laparoscopic surgery (LS) has the advantages of less wound pain, less blood loss, shorter hospitalization, and faster functional recovery than open surgery (OS). Previous studies have analyzed the advantages of LS based on hospital data. This study is the first to compare surgical outcomes and health economic data using nationwide administrative claims datasets for gastric cancer.

Methods

The claims datasets of the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service for patients that underwent gastrectomy from May 2012 to April 2017 were analyzed. A total of 76,445 cases (LS, 42,395 and OS, 34,050) were included. Postoperative complications and medical costs were included in the analysis.

Results

We analyzed 76,445 cases of gastrectomy. Analysis showed LS was associated with fewer surgical wound infections (2,114 [6.21%] vs. 1,057 [2.49%], P < 0.001), minor abdominal infections and abscesses (826 [2.43%] vs. 390 [0.92%], P < 0.001), cases of surgery-related peritonitis (50 [0.15%] vs. 31 [0.07%], P = 0.0019), repair surgeries (28 [0.08%] vs. 3 [0.01%], P < 0.001), reoperations (504 [1.48%] vs. 343 [0.81%], P < 0.001), less antibiotic use (1,717 [5.04%] vs. 1,268 [2.99%], P < 0.001), and shorter hospital stays (13.61 days vs. 9.97 days, P < 0.001). However, average medical cost was 510,734 Korean Won (444 US dollar) higher for LS than OS.

Conclusion

The study confirms the clinical benefits of LS over OS for gastrectomy in terms of fewer postoperative complications and shorter hospital stays. However, the average medical cost of LS was higher than that of OS.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background: Few studies have compared perioperative and oncological outcomes between minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Methods: A retrospective review of patients undergoing MIPD and OPD for PDAC from January 2011 to December 2017 was performed. Perioperative, oncological, and survival outcomes were analyzed before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Results: Data from 1048 patients were evaluated (76 MIPD, 972 OPD). After PSM, 73 patients undergoing MIPD were matched with 219 patients undergoing OPD. Operation times were longer for MIPD than OPD (392 vs. 327 min, p < 0.001). Postoperative hospital stays were shorter for MIPD patients than OPD patients (12.4 vs. 14.2 days, p = 0.040). The rate of overall complications and postoperative pancreatic fistula did not differ between the two groups. Adjuvant treatment rates were higher following MIPD (80.8% vs. 59.8%, p = 0.002). With the exception of perineural invasion, no differences were seen between the two groups in pathological outcomes. The median overall survival and disease-free survival rates did not differ between the groups. Conclusions: MIPD showed shorter postoperative hospital stays and comparable perioperative and oncological outcomes to OPD for selected PDAC patients. Future randomized studies will be required to validate these findings.

Comparison of the short-term outcomes between totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) are two common surgical approaches for upper and middle gastric cancer. Which surgical approach offers more advantages is still controversial due to a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the short-term outcomes between the two surgical approaches.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to evaluate short-term outcomes between TLTG and LATG, including overall postoperative complications, anastomosis-related complications, time for anastomosis, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, proximal margin, distal margin, time to first flatus, time to first diet, and postoperative hospital stay. Short-term outcomes were pooled and compared by meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3. Mean differences (MDs) or risk ratios (RRs) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 9 cohort studies fulfilled the selection criteria. The total sample included 1671 cases. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the two surgical approaches in overall postoperative complications (RR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.82 to 1.26, P = .87),anastomosis-related complications (RR = 0.64, 95%CI = 0.39 to 1.03, P = .06),time for anastomosis (MD = -5.13, 95% CI = -10.54 to 0.27, P = .06),operation time (MD = -10.68, 95% CI = -23.62 to 2.26, P = .11), intraoperative blood loss (MD = -25.58, 95% CI = -61.71 to 10.54, P = .17), harvested lymph nodes (MD = 1.61, 95% CI = -2.09 to 5.31, P = .39), proximal margin (MD = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.78 to 0.05, P = .09), distal margin (MD = 0.79, 95% CI = -0.57 to 2.14, P = .25), time to first flatus (MD = 0.01, 95% CI = -0.13 to 0.15, P = .87), time to first diet (MD = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.45 to 0.02, P = .07), and postoperative hospital stay (MD = -0.51, 95% CI = -1.10 to 0.07, P = .09).

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG is a safe and feasible surgical approach for upper and middle gastric cancer, with short-term outcomes that are similar to LATG. Nevertheless, high-quality, large-sample and multicenter RCTs are still required to further verify our conclusions.

Robotic vs open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis on short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was compare short- and long-term outcomes between robotic (RG) and standard open gastrectomy (OG).

METHODS

This is a single-center propensity score-matched study including patients who underwent RG or OG for gastric cancer between 2008 and 2018.

RESULTS

In total, 191 patients could be included for analysis. Of 60 RG patients, 49 could be matched. After matching, significant differences in baseline characteristics were no longer present. Operative time was significantly longer (451 min, IQR: 392-513) in the RG group than in the OG (262 min, IQR: 225-330) (P < .0001). No significant differences in postoperative complications between RG (n = 15, 30.6%) and OG (n = 15, 30.6%) were seen (P = 1.000). Overall survival was comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RG is feasible and safe. With regard to long-term oncologic outcomes, survivals in the RG group were similar to those in OG group.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy and laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) has been extensively employed for the removal of gastric tumors, although it has several limitations. Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) is a new technique that has rapidly been gaining popularity, and may help overcome the limitations of LATG; however, its safety and therapeutic effect remain controversial. In the present study, we aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of TLTG, and compare the short-term outcomes of TLTG and LATG.

METHODS

We searched for studies comparing TLTG and LATG published up to April 2018 from databases such as PubMed and Embase. The study results, including time of surgery, blood loss, anastomosis time, retrieved lymphatic nodes, proximal and distal resection edges, incision length, time to first fluid and soft diet, hospitalization duration, time to first flatus, and postsurgical and anastomotic complications, were compared between the procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included. TLTG led to reduced intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.01), greater number of retrieved lymphatic nodes (P < 0.01), decreased hospitalization duration (P < 0.01), reduced incision length (P = 0.05), and shorter time to first fluid diet (P < 0.05), as compared to LATG. The surgery and anastomosis times, time to first soft diet, resection edge, time to first flatus, overall postsurgical complications, and anastomosis-related complications were similar between TLTG and LATG (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

TLTG is a safe procedure that yields better cosmesis lower invasiveness, and faster recovery as compared to LATG.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic and open approach in total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy - systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Gastric cancer is a worldwide health concern, being one of the five most common malignant neoplasms worldwide. Currently, an open approach is the gold standard for surgical treatment. Incorporation of laparoscopy as a method of choice for gastric resections remains controversial because of limited evidence of eligibility. To date, there are no high-quality randomized quality trials on totally laparoscopic D2 total gastrectomies.

Aim

The aim of this study was to assess currently available literature and provide meta-analysis on acquired data regarding short-term outcomes with a subgroup analysis of western and eastern studies.

Materials and methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes of interest were morbidity and short-term complications.

Results

An initial reference search yielded 3,073 articles. Finally, we chose eight studies covering 1,582 patients that we included in the quantitative analysis. We did not find statistical differences regarding operative time, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, cardiac complications, pulmonary complications, or number of harvested lymph nodes. We found significant differences regarding length of hospital stay and morbidity in the Asian population.

Conclusion

This systematic review indicates that a laparoscopic approach for D2 total gastrectomy does not increase morbidity. Furthermore, it allows for a shorter hospital stay. However, more randomized controlled trials are required to fully assess this approach because available data are of limited quality.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection of Small Bowel Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection (LAP) for small bowel gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) is not as common as for stomach. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LAP for small bowel GISTs with systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases before December 2016 were comprehensively searched to retrieve comparative trials of LAP and conventional open resection (OPEN) for GISTs of small bowel with a relevance of review object. These researches reported intraoperative and postoperative clinical course (operation time, blood loss, time to first flatus and oral intake, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality), oncologic outcomes, and long-term survival status.

RESULTS

Six studies involving 391 patients were identified. Compared to OPEN, LAP had associated with a shorter operation time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -27.97 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -49.40--6.54, P < 0.01); less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -0.72 ml; 95% CI: -1.30--0.13, P = 0.02); earlier time to flatus (WMD = -0.83 day; 95% CI: -1.44--0.22, P < 0.01); earlier time to restart oral intake (WMD = -1.95 days; 95% CI: -3.31--0.60, P < 0.01); shorter hospital stay (WMD = -3.00 days; 95% CI: -4.87--1.13, P < 0.01); and a decrease in overall complications (risk ratio = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.33-0.97, P = 0.04). In addition, the tumor recurrence and long-term survival rate showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

LAP for small bowel GISTs is a safe and feasible procedure with shorter operation time, less blood loss, less overall complications, and quicker recovery. Besides, tumor recurrence and the long-term survival rate are similar to open approach. Because of the limitations of this study, methodologically high-quality studies are needed for certain appraisal.

Association between institutional procedural preference and in-hospital outcomes in laparoscopic surgeries; Insights from a retrospective cohort analysis of a nationwide surgical database in Japan

OBJECTIVE

To assess the use of laparoscopic surgeries (LS) and the association between its performance and hospitals' preference for LS over open surgeries.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

LS is increasingly used in many abdominal surgeries, albeit both with and without solid guideline recommendations. To date, the hospitals' preference (LS vs. open surgeries) and its association with in-hospital outcomes has not been evaluated.

METHODS

We enrolled patients undergoing 8 types of gastrointestinal surgeries in 2011-2013 in the Japanese National Clinical Database. We assessed the use of LS and the occurrences of surgery-related morbidity and mortality during the study period. Further, for 4 typical LS procedures, we assessed the hospitals' preference for LS by modeling the propensity to perform LS (over open surgeries) from patient-level factors, and estimating each institution's observed/expected (O/E) ratio for LS use. Institutions with O/E>2 were defined as LS-dominant. Using hierarchical logistic regression models, we assessed the association between LS preference and in-hospital outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 1,377,118 patients undergoing gastrointestinal procedures in 2,336 participating hospitals, use of LS increased in all 8 procedures (35.1% to 44.7% for distal gastrectomy (DG), and 27.5% to 43.2% for right hemi colectomy (RHC)). Those operated at LS-dominant hospitals were at an increased risk of operative death (OR 1.83 [95%CI, 1.37-2.45] for DG, 1.79 [95%CI, 1.43-2.25] for RHC) compared to standard O/E level hospitals (0.5≤O/E<2.0).

CONCLUSIONS

LS use widely increased during 2011-2013 in Japan. Facilities with higher than expected LS use had higher mortality compared to other hospitals, suggesting a need for careful patient selection and dissemination of the procedure.

Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler in patients with gastric cancer: A single-center experience

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) with esophagojejunostomy using a linear stapler compared with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) using a circular stapler in gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 687 patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer at a single institution from August 2008 to August 2014. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of operation: 421 patients underwent TLTG and 266 underwent LATG. Clinicopathologic characteristics and surgical outcomes in the two groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

The TLTG group had higher mean ages at the time of operation (57.78 ± 11.20 years and 55.69 ± 11.96 years, P = 0.020) and more histories of abdominal surgery (20.2% and 12.4%, P = 0.008) compared with the LATG group. Surgical outcomes such as intraoperative and postoperative transfusions, combined operations, pain scores and administration of analgesics, and complications were similar between the two groups. However, compared with the LATG group, the TLTG group required a shorter operation time (149 min vs 170 min, P < 0.001), had lower postoperative hematocrit change (3.49% vs 4.04%, P = 0.002), less intraoperative events (3.1% vs 10.2%, P < 0.001), less intraoperative anastomosis events (2.4% vs 7.1%, P = 0.003), faster postoperative recovery such as median time to first flatus (3.30 d vs 3.60 d, P < 0.001), faster median commencement of soft diet (4.30 d vs 4.60 d, P < 0.001) and shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (6.75 d vs 7.02 d, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The intracorporeal method for reconstruction of esophagojejunostomy using a linear stapler may be considered a feasible procedure comparing with extracorporeal anastomosis using circular stapler because TLTG is simpler and more straightforward than LATG. Therefore, TLTG can be recommended as an appropriate procedure for gastric cancer.

Application of Laparoscopic Gastrectomy in Obese Patients (BMI≥30 kg/m2) with Gastric Cancer: A Comparison With Open Gastrectomy Regarding Short-term Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Few studies have compared the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic (LG) and open (OG) gastrectomy in obese patients (BMI≥30 kg/m) with gastric cancer. The current study aimed to investigate the short-term outcomes of LG in this group of patients.

METHODS

A total of 33 LG cases and 23 OG cases (BMI≥30 kg/m) were identified from our gastric cancer database. Clinicopathologic features, operative details, laboratory examination, and postoperative outcomes were compared between both groups. Regression analysis was used to determine the effects of BMI on intraoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

The 2 groups had comparable clinicopathologic characteristics. LG was associated with significantly lesser blood loss, whereas both also groups had a similar operative time, and number of harvested lymph nodes. However, regression analysis indicated that increased BMI affected the operative time and blood loss in patients that underwent OG but had little effect on patients who received LG. The elevation of inflammatory factors (WBC, CRP) was lower in LG than in OG, postoperatively. Postoperative hepatic (alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin, albumin) and renal (creatinine, blood urea nitrogen) functions in the LG group were not worse than in the OG group. The time to first flatus, initiation of diet, hospitalization, and postoperative complications seemed superior in LG than in OG, but these differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

LG can be safely performed in obese gastric cancer patients. Compared with conventional OG, LG is less invasive and is characterized by less blood loss and milder surgical trauma. LG is also less adversely affected by increased BMI.

Totally laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A case-matched study about short-term outcomes

Although surgical outcomes of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy (TLTG) have been reported from several centers, the effectiveness of this technique has not been conclusively established. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of TLTG for gastric cancer.A prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed data were used by comparing the short-term surgical outcomes of 124 patients who underwent TLTG with those of 124 patients who underwent open total gastrectomy (OTG) between March 2007 and March 2016.The 2 groups were well matched with respect to age, sex, body mass index, ASA score, and tumor stage. There was no significant difference with regard to the operation time but TLTG showed significantly less intraoperative blood loss (115.5 ± 70.2 vs 210.5 ± 146.7 mL, P < .01). Total numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were similar in the 2 groups. Postoperatively, no significant differences were found for morbidity or mortality. The time to first flatus, initiate oral intake, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the TLTG group than in the OTG group (3.2 ± 1.0 vs 4.1 ± 1.2 days; 4.4 ± 1.2 vs 5.6 ± 2.0 days; and 8.9 ± 3.1 vs 11.3 ± 4.5 days, respectively; P < .01).TLTG for gastric cancer is technically safe, feasible, and minimally invasive compared with OTG. A prospective randomized trial is needed to establish the value of TLTG.

Survey on laparoscopic total gastrectomy at the 11th China-Korea-Japan Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Joint Seminar

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) has been widely performed for gastric cancer in China, Korea, and Japan. The current status of this surgical approach needs to be investigated.

METHODS

During the 11th China-Korea-Japan Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Joint Seminar in Shanghai, China, on 5 March 2016, a questionnaire was completed by 65 experts in LTG. The survey included questions on surgical indication, operation team, laparoscopic instruments, and operative procedures.

RESULTS

Of the 65 respondents, 35 (53.8%) were from China, 18 (27.7%) were from Korea, and 12 (18.5%) were from Japan. Surgeons have various indications for LTG. Among respondents, stage II gastric cancer (42.9%) was the most acceptable indication, but Japanese surgeons were more cautious on this issue (P = 0.005). Using a flexible scope was more popular with Japanese surgeons than with others (P = 0.003). A goose-neck curved grasper was used more often in China and Korea than in Japan (P = 0.006). Chinese surgeons preferred vertical subxiphoid mini-laparotomy rather than vertical transumbilical laparotomy. Intracorporeal reconstruction (73.0%) was most frequently adopted for LTG. Linear staplers (53.8%) and circular staplers (42.1%) were both popular for esophagojejunostomy. However, jejunojejunostomy was more often conducted extracorporeally (67.7%), in which case a linear stapler (86.4%) was usually selected. Significant differences were observed between the three countries with regard to reinforcement of the duodenal stump (P = 0.018) and closure of Peterson's space (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This survey on LTG involving surgeons from China, Korea, and Japan clearly informed the current practice of this surgical approach and will likely aid future research studies as well as clinical treatment for gastric cancer.

Laparoscopic Gastrectomy with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol: Single-Center Experience

Background

Surgery remains the mainstay of gastric cancer treatment. It is, however, associated with a relatively high risk of perioperative complications. The use of laparoscopy and the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol allows clinicians to limit surgically induced trauma, thus improving recovery and reducing the number of complications. The aim of the study is to present clinical outcomes of patients with gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy combined with the ERAS protocol.

Material/Methods

Fifty-three (21 female/32 male) patients who underwent elective laparoscopic total gastrectomy due to cancer were prospectively analyzed. Demographic and surgical parameters were assessed, as well as the compliance with ERAS protocol elements, length of hospital stay, number of complications, and readmissions.

Results

Mean operative time was 296.4±98.9 min, and mean blood loss was 293.3±213.8 mL. In 3 (5.7%) cases, conversion was required. Median length of hospital stay was 5 days. Compliance with ERAS protocol was 79.6±14.5%. Thirty (56.6%) patients tolerated an early oral diet well within 24 h postoperatively; in 48 (90.6%) patients, mobilization in the first 24 hours was successful. In 17 (32.1%) patients, postoperative complications occurred, with 7 of them (13.2%) being serious (Clavien-Dindo 3-5). The 30-day readmission rate was 9.4%.

Conclusions

The combination of laparoscopy and the ERAS protocol in patients with gastric cancer is feasible and allows achieving good clinical outcomes.

Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy and Side-to-Side Stapled Esophagojejunostomy

INTRODUCTION

An optimal method has yet to be established for laparoscopic total gastrectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis.

METHODS

We aim to describe a simple technique for intracorporeal anastomoses. Technique of laparoscopic total gastrectomy with side-to-side stapled intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy anastomosis and Roux-en-Y jejunojejunostomy is performed on patients with gastric malignancy in an academic community tertiary care center.

RESULTS

The anastomotic technique of laparoscopic total gastrectomy with side-to-side stapled esophagojejunostomy is described.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy and side-to-side esophagojejunostomy is safe to perform and has the advantage of a wide lumen with low chance for stricture. A laparoscopic total gastrectomy with stapled side-to-side esophagojejunostomy is feasible and safe in advanced gastric cancer.

A Step-Wise Approach to Total Laparoscopic Gastrectomy with Jejunal Pouch Reconstruction: How and Why We Do It

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is a safe alternative compared to open gastrectomy for cancer. To increase the uptake of minimally invasive approaches and facilitate their analysis and improvement a stepwise approach is warranted. This study describes our technique and experiences total laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) with jejunal pouch reconstruction for gastric cancer. Technical modifications throughout the years were described. In patients with anastomotic leakage, the CT-scan and reoperation report were reviewed to identify the location and cause of the leak. A total of 47 patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy with extracorporeal jejunal pouch reconstruction and stapled circular esophagojejunostomy from May 2007 to August 2015 were prospectively analyzed. A stepwise approach of 10 steps was designed based on video and case analysis. Median operation time was 301 (148-454) minutes and median blood loss was 300 (30-900) milliliters. Anastomotic leakage occurred in six (12.8 %) patients; additionally, one (2.12 %) jejunal-pouch staple line leak was identified. An important modification in our technique was a purse-string suture around the anvil of the circular stapler to prevent esophageal mucosa to slip away. After this modification, the leakage rate was reduced to 7 % in the last 15 procedures. In conclusion, TLG with jejunal pouch reconstruction is a feasible procedure in a selected group of patients. Our stepwise approach and technique may help surgeons to introduce jejunal pouch reconstruction during laparoscopic gastrectomy in their center.