Cargando…

Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Additional studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) have been published, and it is necessary to update the systematic review of this subject. OBJECTIVE: We conducted the meta-analysis to find some proof for the use of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Zhipeng, Li, Lulu, Xu, Jiuhua, Ye, Weipeng, Zeng, Junjie, Chen, Borong, Huang, Zhengjie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32534587
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01888-7
_version_ 1783546360675434496
author Zhu, Zhipeng
Li, Lulu
Xu, Jiuhua
Ye, Weipeng
Zeng, Junjie
Chen, Borong
Huang, Zhengjie
author_facet Zhu, Zhipeng
Li, Lulu
Xu, Jiuhua
Ye, Weipeng
Zeng, Junjie
Chen, Borong
Huang, Zhengjie
author_sort Zhu, Zhipeng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Additional studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) have been published, and it is necessary to update the systematic review of this subject. OBJECTIVE: We conducted the meta-analysis to find some proof for the use of LG in AGC and evaluate whether LG is an alternative treatment for AGC. METHOD: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and high-quality retrospective studies (NRCT) compared LG and OG for AGC, which were published in English between January 2010 and May 2019, were search in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge by three authors independently and thoroughly. Some primary endpoints were compared between the two groups, including intraoperative time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, first flatus, first oral intake, first out of bed, post-operative hospital stay, postoperative morbidity and mortality, rate of disease recurrence, and 5-year over survival (5-y OS). Besides, considering for this 10-year dramatical surgical material development between 2010 and 2019, we furtherly make the same analysis based on recent studies published between 2016 and 2019. RESULT: Thirty-six studies were enrolled in this systematic review and meta-analysis, including 5714 cases in LAG and 6094 cases in OG. LG showed longer intraoperative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and quicker recovery after operations. The number of harvested lymph nodes, hospital mortality, and tumor recurrence were similar. Postoperative morbidity and 5-y OS favored LG. Furthermore, the systemic analysis of recent studies published between 2016 and 2019 revealed similar result. CONCLUSION: A positive trend was indicated towards LG. LG can be performed as an alternative to OG for AGC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7293787
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72937872020-06-15 Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review Zhu, Zhipeng Li, Lulu Xu, Jiuhua Ye, Weipeng Zeng, Junjie Chen, Borong Huang, Zhengjie World J Surg Oncol Review BACKGROUND: Additional studies comparing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) have been published, and it is necessary to update the systematic review of this subject. OBJECTIVE: We conducted the meta-analysis to find some proof for the use of LG in AGC and evaluate whether LG is an alternative treatment for AGC. METHOD: Randomized controlled trials (RCT) and high-quality retrospective studies (NRCT) compared LG and OG for AGC, which were published in English between January 2010 and May 2019, were search in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge by three authors independently and thoroughly. Some primary endpoints were compared between the two groups, including intraoperative time, intraoperative blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, first flatus, first oral intake, first out of bed, post-operative hospital stay, postoperative morbidity and mortality, rate of disease recurrence, and 5-year over survival (5-y OS). Besides, considering for this 10-year dramatical surgical material development between 2010 and 2019, we furtherly make the same analysis based on recent studies published between 2016 and 2019. RESULT: Thirty-six studies were enrolled in this systematic review and meta-analysis, including 5714 cases in LAG and 6094 cases in OG. LG showed longer intraoperative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and quicker recovery after operations. The number of harvested lymph nodes, hospital mortality, and tumor recurrence were similar. Postoperative morbidity and 5-y OS favored LG. Furthermore, the systemic analysis of recent studies published between 2016 and 2019 revealed similar result. CONCLUSION: A positive trend was indicated towards LG. LG can be performed as an alternative to OG for AGC. BioMed Central 2020-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7293787/ /pubmed/32534587 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01888-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Review
Zhu, Zhipeng
Li, Lulu
Xu, Jiuhua
Ye, Weipeng
Zeng, Junjie
Chen, Borong
Huang, Zhengjie
Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
title Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
title_full Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
title_fullStr Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
title_short Laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
title_sort laparoscopic versus open approach in gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293787/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32534587
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01888-7
work_keys_str_mv AT zhuzhipeng laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview
AT lilulu laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview
AT xujiuhua laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview
AT yeweipeng laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview
AT zengjunjie laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview
AT chenborong laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview
AT huangzhengjie laparoscopicversusopenapproachingastrectomyforadvancedgastriccancerasystematicreview