Abstract
ObjectiveTo expand the current knowledge on the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer in comparison with open total gastrectomy (OTG).BackgroundAdditional studies comparing laparoscopic versus open total gastric resection have been published, and it is necessary to update the meta-analysis of this subject.MethodsOriginal articles compared LTG and OTG for gastric cancer, which published in English from January 1990 to July 2013 were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Knowledge by two reviewers independently. Operative time, blood loss, harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, analgesic medication, first flatus day, first oral intake, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, hospital mortality, 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared using STATA version 10.1.Results17 studies were selected in this analysis, which included a total of 2313 patients (955 in LTG and 1358 in OTG). LTG showed longer operative time, less blood loss, fewer analgesic uses, earlier passage of flatus, quicker resumption of oral intake, earlier hospital discharge, and reduced postoperative morbidity. The number of harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, hospital mortality, 5-year OS and DFS were similar.ConclusionLTG had the benefits of less blood loss, less postoperative pain, quicker bowel function recovery, shorter hospital stay and lower postoperative morbidity, at the price of longer operative time. There were no statistical differences in lymph node dissection, resection margin, hospital mortality, and long-term outcomes, which indicated the similar oncological safety with OTG. A positive trend was indicated towards LTG. So LTG can be performed as an alternative to OTG by the experienced surgeons in high-volume centers. Whereas, due to the relative small sample size of long-term outcomes and lack of randomized control trials, more studies are required.
Highlights
17 studies were selected in this analysis, which included a total of 2313 patients (955 in laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and 1358 in open total gastrectomy (OTG))
LTG had the benefits of less blood loss, less postoperative pain, quicker bowel function recovery, shorter hospital stay and lower postoperative morbidity, at the price of longer operative time
LTG can be performed as an alternative to OTG by the experienced surgeons in high-volume centers
Summary
Since the first laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric caner was performed by Japanese surgeons in 1991 [1], laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for early gastric cancer has gained widely acceptance for its minimal invasion compared with open distal gastrectomy (ODG). The indications for LDG even extended from early gastric cancer to advanced gastric cancer [7,8,9,10]. A meta-analysis published by Haverkamp et al demonstrated the better short-term outcomes of LTG compared with OTG [13]. Because seven additional studies which contain more cases of advanced gastric cancer and more survival data, have been published, we thought to perform an updated meta-analysis to broaden the current knowledge on the feasibility and safety of LTG for gastric cancer. Additional studies comparing laparoscopic versus open total gastric resection have been published, and it is necessary to update the meta-analysis of this subject
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
