Cargando…

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for elderly gastric-cancer patients: comparisons with laparoscopic gastrectomy in non-elderly patients and open gastrectomy in the elderly

BACKGROUND: The benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in elderly gastric-cancer patients still remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LG in elderly gastric-cancer patients. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent LG or open ga...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Zheng-Yan, Chen, Jie, Bai, Bin, Xu, Shuai, Song, Dan, Lian, Bo, Li, Ji-Peng, Ji, Gang, Zhao, Qing-Chuan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8128003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34026222
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goaa041
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in elderly gastric-cancer patients still remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LG in elderly gastric-cancer patients. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent LG or open gastrectomy (OG) between June 2009 and July 2015 in a single high-volume center. We compared surgical, short-term, and long-term survival outcomes among an elderly (≥70 years old) LG (ELG) group (n = 114), a non-elderly (<70 years old) LG (NLG) group (n = 740), and an elderly OG (EOG) group (n = 383). RESULTS: Except for extended time to first flatus, the surgical and short-term outcomes of the ELG group were similar to those of the NLG group. The ELG group revealed comparable disease-specific survival (DSS) rates to the NLG group (64.9% vs 66.2%, P = 0.476), although the overall survival (OS) rate was lower (57.0% vs 65.5%, P < 0.001) in the ELG group than in the NLG group. The ELG group showed longer operation time than the EOG group (236.4 ± 77.3 vs 179 ± 52.2 min, P < 0.001). The ELG group had less estimated blood loss (174.0 ± 88.4 vs 209.3 ± 133.8, P = 0.008) and shorter post-operative hospital stay (8.3 ± 2.5 vs 9.2 ± 4.5, P = 0.048) than the EOG group. The severity of complications was similar between the ELG and NLG groups. Multivariate analysis confirmed that LG was not a risk factor for post-operative complications. CONCLUSIONS: LG is a feasible and safe procedure for elderly patients with acceptable short- and long-term survival outcomes.