Cargando…
Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: The technical safety and efficacy of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS+1) for distal gastric cancer remain unclear. This study was performed to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with distal gastric cancer undergoing SILS+1 versus conventional laparoscopic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8904954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35281417 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tcr-21-1916 |
_version_ | 1784665074494865408 |
---|---|
author | Teng, Wenhao Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Wei, Cheng Chong, Choon Seng Zang, Weidong |
author_facet | Teng, Wenhao Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Wei, Cheng Chong, Choon Seng Zang, Weidong |
author_sort | Teng, Wenhao |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The technical safety and efficacy of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS+1) for distal gastric cancer remain unclear. This study was performed to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with distal gastric cancer undergoing SILS+1 versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). METHODS: This randomized controlled trial involved patients with clinical stage cT1b-3N0-2M0 distal gastric cancer. The patients were randomized to the CLS group or SILS+1 group. The surgical and pathologic outcomes, postoperative mortality, and pain intensity were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: From January 2019 to April 2021, 117 patients were enrolled and assigned to either the CLS group (n=59) or SILS+1 group (n=58). The clinical characteristics, including blood loss, tumor diameter, pathologic stage, number of lymph nodes harvested, and postoperative recovery, were similar between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the overall postoperative complication rates between the CLS group and SILS+1 group (10.2% vs. 6.9%, respectively; P=0.743). The Clavien-Dindo classification was also comparable (P=0.435). However, the operating time was significantly longer in the CLS group than SILS+1 group (207.0±41.2 vs. 185.1±40.7 min, respectively; P=0.005), and the total incision length was significantly shorter in the SILS+1 group than CLS group (6.1±0.6 vs. 7.6±0.7 cm, respectively; P=0.000). Moreover, on the third day after surgery, the visual analog scale (VAS) score was significantly higher in the CLS group than SILS+1 group (1.6±0.6 vs. 0.6±0.7, respectively; P=0.000). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that SILS+1 for distal gastric cancer performed by an experienced surgeon might be a feasible and safe technique with better cosmetic results and less pain in strictly selected patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100051491). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8904954 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89049542022-03-10 Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial Teng, Wenhao Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Wei, Cheng Chong, Choon Seng Zang, Weidong Transl Cancer Res Original Article BACKGROUND: The technical safety and efficacy of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS+1) for distal gastric cancer remain unclear. This study was performed to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with distal gastric cancer undergoing SILS+1 versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). METHODS: This randomized controlled trial involved patients with clinical stage cT1b-3N0-2M0 distal gastric cancer. The patients were randomized to the CLS group or SILS+1 group. The surgical and pathologic outcomes, postoperative mortality, and pain intensity were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: From January 2019 to April 2021, 117 patients were enrolled and assigned to either the CLS group (n=59) or SILS+1 group (n=58). The clinical characteristics, including blood loss, tumor diameter, pathologic stage, number of lymph nodes harvested, and postoperative recovery, were similar between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the overall postoperative complication rates between the CLS group and SILS+1 group (10.2% vs. 6.9%, respectively; P=0.743). The Clavien-Dindo classification was also comparable (P=0.435). However, the operating time was significantly longer in the CLS group than SILS+1 group (207.0±41.2 vs. 185.1±40.7 min, respectively; P=0.005), and the total incision length was significantly shorter in the SILS+1 group than CLS group (6.1±0.6 vs. 7.6±0.7 cm, respectively; P=0.000). Moreover, on the third day after surgery, the visual analog scale (VAS) score was significantly higher in the CLS group than SILS+1 group (1.6±0.6 vs. 0.6±0.7, respectively; P=0.000). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that SILS+1 for distal gastric cancer performed by an experienced surgeon might be a feasible and safe technique with better cosmetic results and less pain in strictly selected patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100051491). AME Publishing Company 2022-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8904954/ /pubmed/35281417 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tcr-21-1916 Text en 2022 Translational Cancer Research. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Teng, Wenhao Liu, Jingfu Liu, Wenju Jiang, Jianping Chen, Meimei Wei, Cheng Chong, Choon Seng Zang, Weidong Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
title | Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8904954/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35281417 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tcr-21-1916 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tengwenhao comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT liujingfu comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT liuwenju comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT jiangjianping comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT chenmeimei comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT weicheng comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT chongchoonseng comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial AT zangweidong comparisonofshorttermoutcomesbetweensingleincisionplusoneportlaparoscopicsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryfordistalgastriccancerarandomizedcontrolledtrial |