Journal
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES
Volume 30, Issue 2, Pages 574-580Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4241-7
Keywords
Gastric neoplasm; Robot-assisted gastrectomy; Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy
Categories
Funding
- Special Scientific Research Foundation of Health Sector from the National Health and Family Planning Commission of China [201302016]
- PLA Medical Technology key project of scientific research in the 12th Research Projects in 12th 5-Year-Plan [BWS12J049]
- National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2012AA02A504]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) is a new minimally invasive surgical technique for gastric cancer. This study was designed to compare RAG with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) in short-term surgical outcomes. Between October 2011 and August 2014, 423 patients underwent robotic or laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: 93 RAG and 330 LAG. We performed a comparative analysis between RAG group and LAG group for clinicopathological characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes. RAG was associated with a longer operative time (P < 0.001), lower blood loss (P = 0.001), and more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.047). Only three patients in LAG group had positive margins, and R0 resection rate for RAG and LAG was similar (P = 0.823). The RAG group had postoperative complications of 9.8 %, comparable with those of the LAG group (P = 0.927). Proximal margin, distal margin, hospital stay, days of first flatus, and days of eating liquid diet for RAG and LAG were similar. In the subgroup of serosa-negative patients, RAG had a longer operation time (P = 0.003), less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.005), and more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.04). However, in the subgroup of serosa-positive patients, RAG had a longer operation time (P = 0.001), but no less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.139) and no more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.139). Similarly, in the subgroup of total gastrectomy patients, RAG had a longer operation time (P = 0.018), but no less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.173). The comparative study demonstrates that RAG is as acceptable as LAG in terms of surgical and oncologic outcomes. With lower estimated blood loss, acceptable complications, and radical resection, RAG is a promising approach for the treatment of gastric cancer. However, the indication of patients for RAG is critical.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available