Cargando…

Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients

BACKGROUND: Studies on surgical outcomes after robotic surgery are increasing; however, long-term oncological results of studies comparing robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are still limited. This study...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gao, Gengmei, Liao, Hualin, Jiang, Qunguang, Liu, Dongning, Li, Taiyuan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9520837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36171631
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-022-02778-w
_version_ 1784799715365224448
author Gao, Gengmei
Liao, Hualin
Jiang, Qunguang
Liu, Dongning
Li, Taiyuan
author_facet Gao, Gengmei
Liao, Hualin
Jiang, Qunguang
Liu, Dongning
Li, Taiyuan
author_sort Gao, Gengmei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Studies on surgical outcomes after robotic surgery are increasing; however, long-term oncological results of studies comparing robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are still limited. This study aimed to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes of RADG and LADG for the treatment of AGC. METHODS: A total of 1164 consecutive AGC patients undergoing RADG or LADG were enrolled between January 2015 and October 2021. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize selection bias. The perioperative and oncological outcomes between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: Patient’s characteristics were comparable between the two groups after PSM. RADG group represented a longer operative time (205.2 ± 43.1 vs 185.3 ± 42.8 min, P < 0.001), less operative blood loss (139.3 ± 97.8 vs 167.3 ± 134.2 ml, P < 0.001), greater retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) number (31.4 ± 12.1 vs 29.4 ± 12.3, P = 0.015), more retrieved LNs in the supra-pancreatic areas (13.4 ± 5.0 vs 11.4 ± 5.1, P < 0.001), and higher medical costs (13,608 ± 4326 vs 10,925 ± US $3925, P < 0.001) than LADG group. The overall complication rate was 13.7% in the RADG group and 16.6% in the LADG group, respectively; the difference was not significantly different (P = 0.242). In the subgroup analysis, the benefits of RADG were more evident in high BMI patients. Moreover, the 3-year overall survival (75.5% vs 73.1%, P = 0.471) and 3-year disease-free survival (72.9% vs 71.4%, P = 0.763) were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: RADG appears to be a safe and feasible procedure and could serve as an alternative treatment for AGC in experienced centers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9520837
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95208372022-09-30 Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients Gao, Gengmei Liao, Hualin Jiang, Qunguang Liu, Dongning Li, Taiyuan World J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Studies on surgical outcomes after robotic surgery are increasing; however, long-term oncological results of studies comparing robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are still limited. This study aimed to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes of RADG and LADG for the treatment of AGC. METHODS: A total of 1164 consecutive AGC patients undergoing RADG or LADG were enrolled between January 2015 and October 2021. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis was performed to minimize selection bias. The perioperative and oncological outcomes between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: Patient’s characteristics were comparable between the two groups after PSM. RADG group represented a longer operative time (205.2 ± 43.1 vs 185.3 ± 42.8 min, P < 0.001), less operative blood loss (139.3 ± 97.8 vs 167.3 ± 134.2 ml, P < 0.001), greater retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) number (31.4 ± 12.1 vs 29.4 ± 12.3, P = 0.015), more retrieved LNs in the supra-pancreatic areas (13.4 ± 5.0 vs 11.4 ± 5.1, P < 0.001), and higher medical costs (13,608 ± 4326 vs 10,925 ± US $3925, P < 0.001) than LADG group. The overall complication rate was 13.7% in the RADG group and 16.6% in the LADG group, respectively; the difference was not significantly different (P = 0.242). In the subgroup analysis, the benefits of RADG were more evident in high BMI patients. Moreover, the 3-year overall survival (75.5% vs 73.1%, P = 0.471) and 3-year disease-free survival (72.9% vs 71.4%, P = 0.763) were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: RADG appears to be a safe and feasible procedure and could serve as an alternative treatment for AGC in experienced centers. BioMed Central 2022-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9520837/ /pubmed/36171631 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-022-02778-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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 Research
Gao, Gengmei
Liao, Hualin
Jiang, Qunguang
Liu, Dongning
Li, Taiyuan
Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
title Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
title_full Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
title_fullStr Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
title_full_unstemmed Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
title_short Surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
title_sort surgical and oncological outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with d2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a propensity score‑matched analysis of 1164 patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9520837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36171631
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-022-02778-w
work_keys_str_mv AT gaogengmei surgicalandoncologicaloutcomesofroboticversuslaparoscopicassisteddistalgastrectomywithd2lymphadenectomyforadvancedgastriccancerapropensityscorematchedanalysisof1164patients
AT liaohualin surgicalandoncologicaloutcomesofroboticversuslaparoscopicassisteddistalgastrectomywithd2lymphadenectomyforadvancedgastriccancerapropensityscorematchedanalysisof1164patients
AT jiangqunguang surgicalandoncologicaloutcomesofroboticversuslaparoscopicassisteddistalgastrectomywithd2lymphadenectomyforadvancedgastriccancerapropensityscorematchedanalysisof1164patients
AT liudongning surgicalandoncologicaloutcomesofroboticversuslaparoscopicassisteddistalgastrectomywithd2lymphadenectomyforadvancedgastriccancerapropensityscorematchedanalysisof1164patients
AT litaiyuan surgicalandoncologicaloutcomesofroboticversuslaparoscopicassisteddistalgastrectomywithd2lymphadenectomyforadvancedgastriccancerapropensityscorematchedanalysisof1164patients