Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy Research Articles

Comparison of short-term surgical outcome between 3D and 2D laparoscopy surgery for gastrointestinal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic surgery is becoming more popular with the development of laparoscopic devices. The objective of this study was to explore whether the 3D imaging system could improve surgical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for gastrointestinal cancer compared with the 2D imaging system. Systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase databases and relevant data were extracted. Surgical quality, postoperative complications, and postoperative recovery between 3D and 2D laparoscopic surgery groups were compared using a fixed or random effect model. A total of 12 studies involving 1456 patients (3D group 683 patients and 2D group 773 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that mean operation time was significantly shorter in 3D group than in 2D group (WMD, - 9.08; 95% CI, - 14.77, - 3.40; P = 0.002; I2= 70.3%), especially for gastric cancer patients (WMD, - 14.61; 95% CI, - 26.00, - 3.23, P = 0.012; I2= 74.1%). In addition, 3D laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer had an advantage than 2D group in reducing the amount of intraoperative blood loss (WMD, - 13.60, 95% CI, - 21.48, - 5.72; P = 0.001; I2= 0%). The number of retrieved lymph nodes in 3D group was not significantly different from that in 2D group, regardless of laparoscopic gastrectomy (WMD, 1.10; 95% CI, - 0.67, 2.88; P = 0.222; I2= 18.8%) and laparoscopic colorectal surgery (WMD, 0.55, 95% CI; - 1.99, 3.09; P = 0.671; I2= 76.9%). In addition, there was no significant difference between 3D and 2D laparoscopic surgery for postoperative complications and postoperative recovery. Main advantages of 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer were that it could shorten the operation time and reduce the amount of intraoperative blood loss. However, 3D laparoscopic surgery had no obvious advantage over 2D laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer patients.

Value of enhanced recovery after surgery in D2 radical resection of distal gastric cancer under total laparoscopy and its effect on inflammatory factors

Objective To investigate the value of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in D2 radical resection of distal gastric cancer under total laparoscopy and its effect on inflammatory factors. Methods The clinical data of 50 patients with distal gastric cancer at Hanzhong Central Hospital from March 2016 to October 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into the observation group (25 cases) and the control group (25 cases). The observation group received totally laparoscopic radical D2 gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer under the guideline of ERAS; the control group received totally laparoscopic radical D2 gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer under the guideline of the traditional method. The changes of perioperative related indexes, postoperative recovery and postoperative inflammatory indexes were compared between the two groups. Results All 50 patients successfully completed the operation. The operation time was (287.2±52.3) min and (296.8±57.9) min, respectively of the observation group and the control group; the number of lymph node dissection was (34.0±11.0) and (34.6±14.3), respectively of the observation group and the control group. There were no significant differences in the above indexes between the two groups (all P > 0.05). The hospitalization time, the hospitalization cost, the postoperative time of getting out of bed of the observation group was (22.0±2.8) d, (61 044.4±4 692.7) yuan, (12.8±1.8) h. The hospitalization time, the hospitalization cost, the postoperative time of getting out of bed of the control group was (23.9±1.9) d, (63 875.81±4 392.6) yuan, (23.7±8.2) h. And there were statistically significant differences between the two groups (all P 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in the tumor necrosis factor α, interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein and procalcitonin on the day before the operation of both groups (all P > 0.05); the levels of above four factors in the observation group were lower than those in the control group on the 1st, 4th and 7th day after the operation, and the differences were statistically significant (all P < 0.05). Conclusion The application of ERAS in totally laparoscopic radical resection of gastric cancer can improve the postoperative condition, significantly reduce the inflammatory reaction of patients, which has a certain value of improving the quality of life of patients. Key words: Gastric neoplasms; Laparoscopy, D2 radical resection; Inflammation; Cytokines; Enhanced recovery after surgery

Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background:Both 3-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and 2-dimensional (2D) LG are commonly used for gastric cancer (GC). To investigate their safety and efficacy, we performed this meta-analysis.Methods:PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The total number of lymph node dissections (LNDs), operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and hospitalization cost were extracted as major endpoints.Results:Among 904 articles that were enrolled, 9 studies were included for analysis. The 3D group was observed to have shorter operation times [95% confidence interval (CI): −0.54 to −0.06; P = .01] and less blood loss (95% CI: −0.41 to −0.19; P < .00001) than the 2D group. Compared with the 2D group, slightly higher hospitalization cost was found in the 3D group (95% CI: 0.06–0.37; P = .008). However, the outcomes among the total LNDs, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were similar. Subgroup analysis suggested that the 3D LG group had more 11p (2.22 ± 1.80 vs 1.47 ± 1.99, P = .019) and 8a (2.52 ± 1.88 vs 1.48 ± 1.43, P = .001) LNDs compared to the 2D LG group.Conclusions:3D LG has advantages for GC, with shorter operation times, less blood loss, and possibly more LNDs. However, the cost was slightly higher than that of 2D LG.

Early postoperative complications and risk factors in laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Objective: To investigate the morbidity and treatment of early postoperative complications after laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, and to explore the risk factors. Methods: A case-control study was performed to retrospectively collect clinicopathological data of 764 patients undergoing laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer at our department between January 2015 and December 2017. Patient inclusion criteria: (1) gastric cancer diagnosed by preoperative electronic gastroscopy and biopsy, and confirmed by postoperative pathology; (2) without invasion into adjacent organs by preoperative evaluation of tumors; (3) tumors without definite liver and distant metastasis; (4) R0 resection of gastric cancer and standard D2 lymph node dissection; (5) patients with informed consent. Exclusion criteria: (1) unperformed laparoscopic D2 radical resection; (2) other types of gastric tumor confirmed by pathology; (3) cases with incomplete clinical data. Complication occurring within two weeks after laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy was defined as early postoperative complication. Patients were divided into two groups: non-complication group (693 cases) and complication group (71 cases) according to the occurrence of complications after operation. The clinicopathological data of two groups were analyzed and compared with t test and χ(2) test, and the factors of P < 0.2 were included in the multivariate logistic regression model to analyze the risk factors of postoperative complications. Results: Of 764 patients, 71 (9.3%) developed early postoperative complications, with median onset time of 3 (1 to 11) days. Surgical complications accounted for 7.9% (60/764), including 13 cases (1.7%) of abdominal hemorrhage, 12 cases (1.6%) of anastomotic leakage, 10 cases (1.3%) of incision infection, 8 cases (1.0%) of anastomotic bleeding, 7 cases (0.9%) of gastric stump weakness, 4 cases (0.5%) of abdominal infection, 4 cases (0.5%) of duodenal stump leakage and 2 cases (0.3%) of small intestinal obstruction. Non-surgical complications accounted for 1.4% (11/764), including 6 cases (0.8%) of pulmonary infection and 5 cases (0.7%) of cardiovascular disease. Two cases (0.3%) died of sepsis caused by severe abdominal infection; 9 cases (1.2%) recovered after receiving the second operation, among whom 5 cases were abdominal hemorrhage, 2 cases were anastomotic leakage and 2 cases were duodenal stump leakage; the remaining patients were healed with conservative treatment. Compared with patients without complications, patients with complications had higher proportions of BMI ≥24 kg/m(2) [42.3% (30/71) vs. 24.2%(168/693), χ(2)=10.881, P=0.001], comorbity [64.8% (46/71) vs. 33.5% (232/693), χ(2)=27.277, P<0.001], combined organ resection [70.4% (50/71) vs. 20.5% (142/693), χ(2)=85.338, P<0.001], and pTNM stage of III [70.4% (50/71) vs. 40.1% (278/693), χ(2)=24.196, P<0.001], meanwhile had longer time to postoperative flatus [(4.2±2.1) days vs. (2.9±1.2) days, t=4.621, P=0.023], longer hospital stay [(34.6±12.6) days vs. (14.2±6.2) days, t=9.862, P<0.001] and higher hospitalization cost [(126.8±64.5) thousand yuan vs. (85.2±35.8) thousand yuan, t=11.235, P<0.001]. Multivariate analysis showed that BMI ≥24 kg/m(2) (OR=3.762, 95% CI: 1.960-8.783, P=0.035), accompanying disease (OR=8.620, 95% CI: 1.862-29.752, P<0.001), combined organ resection (OR=6.210, 95% CI: 1.357-21.568, P=0.026), and pTNM stage (OR=4.752, 95% CI: 1.214-12.658, P<0.001) were the independent risk factors of postoperative complications. Conclusions: Laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy is a safe and effective approach for gastric cancer. Most early postoperative complications can obtain satisfactory efficacy after conservative treatment. Perioperative management should be strengthened for those patients with high BMI, accompanying diseases, combined organ resection, and advanced pTNM stage.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: Five year overall survival and morbidity results from a randomized phase II multicenter clinical trial (COACT 1001).

Background: For advanced gastric cancer (AGC), D2 gastrectomy is the standard treatment. However, a laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy(LG) is technically challenging surgery. Our previous report of COACT 1001 study, which is randomized phase II study to evaluate the feasibility of LG compared with open surgery(OG) for AGC, showing primary endpoint of non-compliance of lymph node dissection and three-year disease-free survival supported role of LG for AGC. Herein we report five-year overall and disease-free survival outcome of the study.

Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Mid-Term Results and Current Evidence.

Although the first laparoscopic gastrectomy was performed in 1991, there was a long delay until it was incorporated into the regular practice of western surgeons. In Brazil, there are only few case series reported and data on its safety and efficacy along with mid- and long-term results are desired. Present the mid-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy with curative intent in the treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma and review the current evidence on the therapy of this neoplasia with the laparoscopic access. Patients who underwent D2 laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were retrospectively reviewed. Sixty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 59.2 years and the mean body mass index was 24.2 kg/m2. Subtotal gastrectomy was performed in 73.9%. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 36.7, increased lymph node count and shorter operative time were observed in the last 34 cases. Median hospital stay was 8 days. Postoperative complications occurred in 22 (31.9%) cases. Surgical mortality was 4.3%. Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be performed safely with excellent short- and mid-term results. As experience increases, surgical duration is reduced and lymph node count rises.

Long-Term Outcomes in Laparoscopic D2 Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Large Comprehensive Study Proposing Novel Hypotheses

BackgroundThe long-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) versus open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer (GC) remain obscure, especially for advanced cancer and disease affecting the upper stomach and in older patients. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the long-term efficacy of LG for GC using a large prospective database. MethodsTotally, 1877 consecutive patients (1186 receiving LG and 691 OG) operated in 2004–2016 were analyzed, with a median follow-up of 63 months. Association of LG versus OG with disease-specific survival (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) overall and in various subgroups were investigated using multivariable Cox regression. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for sensitivity analysis. ResultsBefore PSM, overall, there was no significant association of LG versus OG with survival after multivariable adjustment; however, in subgroup analyses, LG was associated with superior DSS in patients aged ≥ 70 years and those with upper GC. No significant associations regarding DFS were observed overall or in stratifications. PSM analyses revealed that LG was associated with better DSS also in patients aged ≥ 70 years (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.15–0.72) and in those with upper GC (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.29–0.91), and with better DFS in those with upper GC (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.37–0.99). Multivariable analysis showed that age, hepatitis B, performance status, tumor histology, stage, and vascular invasion were significantly associated with post-LG survival. LG-specific nomograms were then constructed with concordance indexes of 0.814 (DSS) and 0.809 (DFS) and excellent calibration. ConclusionsIn this large institutional analysis, while LG for GC was associated with DSS and DFS similar to those for OG overall, non-inferior LG-associated survival especially DSS was observed in some subgroups rarely investigated in prospective or randomized settings. There could still be biases even after PSM due to confounders not accounted for in this observational study. However, these findings offer novel hypotheses for further validation.

Application of intraoperative ultrasound in laparoscopic lymphadenectomy of gastric cancer

To explore the application value of intraoperative ultrasound (IU) in laparoscopic lymphadenectomy of gastric cancer. Patients with gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic radical D2 gastrectomy at General Surgery of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University between August 2016 and May 2018 were prospectively enrolled and were randomly divided into IU group (n=78) and conventional group (n=91). The conventional group underwent laparoscopy only. In IU group, the laparoscopy examination was followed with intraoperative ultrasound by ultrasound specialist. The lesser curvature, peripheral gastric organs and gastric lymph nodes were scanned. Lymph nodes were considered positive if maximum diameter was greater than 10 mm or internal hyperechoic features and normal oval shape were lost. The postoperative pathological results were used as the gold standard to analyze the sensitivity of positive lymph nodes by IU detection [true positive lymph nodes/(true positive lymph node+false negative lymph nodes)×100%], specificity [true negative lymph nodes/(true negative lymph nodes+false positive lymph nodes)×100%] and the accuracy rate[(true positive lymph nodes+ true negative lymph nodes/total lymph nodes)×100%]. A consistency check between N staging diagnosed by IU and by postoperative pathology was performed with Kappa test(Kappa>0.75 indicating good consistency). Number of dissected lymph node, number of positive lymph node detected by pathology and the operation time were compared between the IU group and the conventional group. Among 169 gastric cancer patients, 95 were males and 74 were females with age of (63±8) years. Among 1 794 lymph nodes detected by IU from 78 patients in IU group, predicted positive lymph nodes were 832 and 740 positive nodes were confirmed by postoperative pathology. True positive lymph nodes were 679 and true negative lymph nodes were 901 by IU, and a total of 1 580 lymph nodes were accurately diagnosed by IU. The sensitivity and specificity of IU for N staging of gastric cancer were 91.8%(679/740) and 85.5%(901/1 054), respectively. Overall accuracy was 88.1%(1 580/1 794), which was in good accordance with postoperative N staging(Kappa=0.758). There was no significant difference in number of lymph node detected between the IU group and conventional group during laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery(23.0±6.9 vs. 22.0±7.7, t=0.880, P=0.380). However, the numbers of lymph nodes in the third station (No.10, No.11, No.12) in the IU group were significantly higher than those in the conventional group [No.10: median 1 (0-1) vs. 0 (0-1), Z=-6.307, P<0.001; No.11: median 1(0-2) vs. 0(0-1), Z=-5.895, P<0.001; No.12: median 1 (0-1) vs. 0 (0-1), Z=-6.693, P<0.001]. There was no significant difference in the number of positive lymph node between IU group and the conventional group(P>0.05), but the number of positive lymph nodes dissected in stage III patients of IU group was significantly higher than that in stage III patients of conventional group (14.6±4.8 vs. 14.0±3.6, t=2.531, P=0.011). The operative time of IU group was(272.0±12.0) minutes, which was significantly longer than (249.0±7.0) minutes of conventional group (t=14.638, P<0.001). However, with the increase of patients undergoing IU, the operation time of IU showed a downward trend. The average operation time of the last 20 patients was 264 minutes, and the average IU time was 15 minutes. Intraoperative ultrasound is more accurate N-staging of gastric cancer. Although increasing operation time, it is helpful for lymph node dissection in laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery, especially by providing good support for laparoscopic No.10, No.11 and No.12 lymph nodes dissection.

Laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique for radical total gastrectomy.

IntroductionComplete mesogastrium excision (CME) of the perigastric mesogastrium and dissection of lymph nodes (LNs) no. 10 and no. 11 remain technically challenging aspects of laparoscopic radical total gastrectomy (LRTG) plus CME. To address some of these difficulties, we introduced the laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique (LPMET) and the concept of the “enjoyable space” to partly modify the procedures of conventional radical surgery and characterize the perigastric space and the surgical plane as well as its boundaries.AimTo introduce the laparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique (LPMET) and the “enjoyable space” when undergoing laparoscopic radical total gastrectomy.Material and methodsFrom July 2016 to June 2017, 79 cases of upper gastric cancer that were treated by laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy plus CME were investigated. The retrospective database included the patient characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and morbidity and mortality rates depending on the completeness of their medical records.ResultsLaparoscopic D2 gastrectomy plus CME was successfully performed in all 79 cases. The mean surgical time was 232.5 ±46.0 min, and the intraoperative blood loss was 67.6 ±52.3 ml. A total of 2245 LNs were retrieved (mean 28.1 ±10.8 retrieved from each specimen). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 10.3 ±1.6 days. The postoperative morbidity rate was 17.7%. After a median follow-up period of 12 months, one patient experienced liver metastasis; of the other 78 patients, none died or experienced tumor recurrence or metastasis.ConclusionsLaparoscopic perigastric mesogastrium excision technique and the “enjoyable space” could be a novel, minimally invasive approach and space to achieve CME and provide benefit for the dissection of LNs no. 10 and no. 11.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

BackgroundTechnical safety and short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) have been investigated in many clinical trials. However, studies with large sample size and sufficient follow-up comparing LAG and open gastrectomy (OG) for AGC have seldom been reported. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of LAG versus open OG for AGC using a propensity score matching analysis. MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated 459 and 856 patients who underwent LG or OG with D2 lymph node dissection, respectively, for AGC between June 2007 and June 2012. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compensate for heterogeneity between groups. We compared long-term outcomes between the two groups after propensity score matching. ResultsIn the propensity score-matched cohort, no significant differences were observed in 5-year overall survival (OS) (52.0% vs. 53.4%; P = 0.805) and disease-free survival (DFS) (46.8% vs. 47.3%; P = 0.963) between the LAG group and OG group. Stratified analysis showed that the 5-year OS and DFS rates were comparable between the two groups in each tumor stage (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis revealed that the operation method was not an independent prognostic factor for OS or DFS. Further analysis showed that the recurrence pattern was similar between the LAG group the OG group (P > 0.05). ConclusionLAG is a feasible surgical procedure for AGC in terms of long-term prognosis, although the results should be confirmed by the ongoing randomized controlled trials.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: Five year overall survival and morbidity results from a randomized phase II multicenter clinical trial (COACT 1001).

4041Background: For advanced gastric cancer (AGC), D2 gastrectomy is the standard treatment. However, a laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy(LG) is technically challenging surgery. Our previous report of CO...

Long-term outcomes in laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A large comprehensive study proposing novel hypotheses.

e16025Background: The long-term outcomes of LG versus open gastrectomy (OG) for GC remain obscure, especially for advanced cancer and disease affecting the upper stomach and in older patients. This...

Totally Laparoscopic versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Matched Pair Analysis.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been established for treatment of early gastric cancer (EGC) especially in Eastern Asian countries. Currently, it still needs evaluation for advanced gastric cancer (AGC, T ≥ 2). Difficulty is how far Asian study data are valid for western conditions. Out of 502 patients who underwent gastric cancer surgery between 2003 and 2016 at Klinikum Suedstadt Rostock 90 patients were selected for a retrospective study to compare totally laparoscopic D2-gastrectomy (LG, n = 45) with open D2-gastrectomy (OG, n = 45). The groups were matched by age, gender and tumour stage (TNM). Average age was 62.9 years (33 - 83), 42.2% were female. There were no differences between both study groups concerning BMI, ECOG and comorbidities. Amounts of EGC and AGC were 35.5% and 64.4% in LG, 28.9% and 71.0% in OG (p = 0.931). In LG-group 53.3% of the patients and in OG-group 51.1% of the patients were nodal negative (p = 0.802). 31.1% of patients in LG and in 33.3% in OG (p = 0.821) undergone perioperative chemotherapy. Total gastrectomy was performed in 73.3% in LG and 82.2% in OG, subtotal resections were done in 26.7% in LG and 17.8% in OG (p = 0.310). Resection free margins (R0) were recognized in 97.8% of the patients in both groups, and for EGC in all cases (p = 0.928). Total numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were significant higher in LG (33.1, 17 - 72) than in OG (28.2, 14 - 57). A significant longer operation time was noticed for laparoscopic gastrectomy in contrast to open surgery (+ 43.0 ± 27.2 min, p = 0.0054). Overall morbidity in OG (44.4%) was twice as high as in LG (22.2%, p < 0.05) due to lower rate of minor complications (Clavien I - II) in LG (LG vs. OG: 13.3% vs. 37.8%, p = 0.0078). For major complications (Clavien ≥ III) no difference between both groups was detected (LG vs. OG: 8.8% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.69). LG showed a significant faster postoperative recovery with earlier oral fluid intake (LG vs. OG: 25.9 h vs. 46.2 h) and shorter time to first flatus (LG vs. OG: 81.6 vs. 102.6 h). Patients after LG were earlier out of bed (LG vs. OG: 69.7 h vs. 108.7 h) and also hospital stay was significantly shorter (11.9 days in LG vs. 16.3 days in OG, p = 0.037). 30- and 90-days mortality was equal for LG and OG (0 and 2.2% per group). After a median follow up of 51.9 month (1 - 117) there were similar results for 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS for LG: 75.6% and 64.6% vs. OG: 68.9% and 64.6%, p = 0.446). Also no differences for 3- and 5-year OS were detected concerning patients without lymph node metastases (LG: 91.7% and 83.4% vs. OG: 91.3% and 78.3%, p = 0.658) or lymph node positive patients (LG: 47.6% and 38.1% vs. OG: 40.9% and 31.8%, p = 0.665). Despite western conditions laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy is certainly a save and feasibly approach for surgical therapy of EGC and AGC with low morbidity and mortality, and faster postoperative recovery. The oncologic outcome seems to be equivalent to open surgery.

Surgical outcomes and learning curve analysis of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: multidimensional analysis in a comparison with 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy.

162 Background: There is a lack of supporting evidence regarding the safety, efficacy and surgeon acceptance of robotic versus three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic surgery for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Methods: An ambispective cohort study was conducted. We compared short-term surgical outcomes including financial cost between robotic and 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy for all GC patients and the GC patients treated by Prof. Chen’s team. The Cumulative Sum (CUSUM) method was developed and used to analyze the learning curves of robotic and 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by Prof. Chen. Results: From August 2011 to June 2017, a total of 517 patients were enrolled for treatment with either robotic (n=408 including n=73 performed by Prof. Chen) or 3D laparoscopic (n=109 including n=71 performed by Prof. Chen) gastrectomy. There were no significant differences between the two operation methods regarding the clinical pathological characteristics, except for smoking habit (p &lt; 0.001). In analysis of all the 517 patients, robotic group had shorter operative time (208 min vs 228 min, p=0.004), less time to first flatus (3 days vs 4 days, p=0.025), longer time to remove drainage and nasogastric tube (12 days vs 9 days, p=0.001, 6 days vs. 4 days, p=0.001, respectively), and more postoperative complications (21.3% vs. 9.2%, p=0.003). While we compared these short-term outcomes of robotic and 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by Prof. Chen, only number of lymph node dissections (robotic 27 vs. 3D 33, p=0.038) and time to remove nasogastric tube (robotic 5 days vs. 3D 3 days, p &lt; 0.001) were significantly different. CUSUM analysis showed that operative time reached a stable state after around 21 cases in robotic gastrectomy and 19 cases in 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that robotic gastrectomy had significantly higher total cost than 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy (robotic = RMB 124907 vs. 3D-laparoscopic = RMB 94395; p &lt; 0.001). Conclusions: With comparable surgical outcomes, higher surgeon acceptance and less financial cost, 3D laparoscope is a highly recommended minimal invasive surgical method for GC patients.

Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy with complete mesogastrium excision (D2+CME) versus conventional D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: An interim report of a single-center, prospective, randomized trial (NCT01978444).

TPS190 Background: In our previous research, laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus Complete Mesogastrium Excision (D2+CME) has been proven to be an optimal surgical approach for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, there is a lack of evidence regarding its oncologic safety. Here, we conducted a single-centre, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic D2+CME with conventional D2 gastrectomy in AGC. Methods: Patients eligibly criteria were pathologically-proven adenocarcinoma, 18 to 75 years old, cT2-4N0-3M0 at preoperative evaluation, expected curative resection via laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, no history of other cancers, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, no history of upper abdominal operation and perioperative ASA class I, II or III. The primary end-point was 3-year disease-free survival. The morbidity and mortality were compared to evaluate the safety of this trial. We hypothesized that the morbidity of this study was not significantly different from that of previous reports on laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (5.7%-15.5%). This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, ID number is NCT01978444. Clinical trial information: NCT01978444.

Comparison of 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy with a 2D procedure for gastric cancer: A phase 3 randomized controlled trial

ObjectiveTo determine the relative safety and efficacy of 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy and 2D laparoscopic surgery in patients with gastric cancer. BackgroundThere is still a lack of randomized controlled trials regarding the safety and efficacy of 3D versus 2D laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer. MethodsA large-scale, phase 3, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02327481). ResultsA total of 438 patients were randomized (3D group: 219 cases; 2D group: 219 cases) between January 1, 2015, and April 1, 2016; 19 patients were excluded. Finally, data from 419 patients were analyzed (3D group: 211 cases; 2D group: 208 cases). There were no differences between the 2 groups regarding the operation time (3D versus 2D, 176 ± 35 min vs. 174 ± 33 min, P = .562). The intraoperative blood loss in the 3D group was somewhat less than in the 2D group (61 ± 83 mL vs. 82 ± 119 mL, P = .045). Further analysis suggested that the use of 3D laparoscopic surgery was a protective factor against excessive blood loss (≥200 mL). Conclusion3D laparoscopic gastrectomy did not shorten the operation time compared with 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy, but provided the benefit of less intraoperative blood loss and a lesser occurrence of excessive bleeding than the conventional 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy; the clinical value of the difference is limited.

Discussion on standardized implementation of laparoscopic radical lymphadenectomy for distal gastric cancer

Laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer has been widely applied in clinical practice, and its indications have been extended from early gastric cancer to advanced gastric cancer. It is acknowledged that laparoscopic radical gastrectomy is technically challenging because of the complexity of anatomy, rich blood supply, and extensive lymph node dissection. This paper primarily intends to share the experience of laparoscopic radical D2 gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer with details of choosing the location of Trocar, surgical approaches and the sequence of lymph node dissection. All the surgeries were performed at Department of General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Guangdong General Hospital. The finding suggests that a correct laparoscopic Trocar placement is the foundation of adequate surgical field visualization. Under most circumstances, the observation hole should be around 2 cm below the umbilicus and the operating hole should be close to the bilateral clavicle midline. Furthermore, proper surgical approach and sequence of lymph node dissection are the prerequisites for successful laparoscopic radical D2 gastrectomy, as well as the reassurance of dissecting lymph node safely and comprehensively. The position of surgical team adopted in our center is that the surgeon stands to the left of the patient, with laparoscope operator stands in between patient's legs while the first assistant positions himself opposite the surgeon on the right side of the patient. This position correlates to the rules of sequential lymph node dissection, which is "from left to right", "from proximal to distal" and "from inferior to superior". Therefore, it is conductive to inferior and superior pylorus region dissection and it can effectively prevent subsidiary-injury. In our center, the procedure of lymph node dissection has been standardized: the initial step is to undergo station 4sb dissection and greater gastric curvature clearance; then change the patient's position to clean the sub-pyloric lymph node region and cut off the duodenum by linear stapler; followed by the clearance of inferior region of the pylorus and the upper margin of the pancreas; in the final step, the first and the third groups of lymph node dissection is performed. Although varied surgical approaches and sequences of lymph node dissection are applied in different hospitals, the techniques required for laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer are sophisticated and advanced in general. Radical lymph node dissection is complicated, urging surgeons to familiarize themselves with the anatomy of gastric peripheral vascular system and characteristics of lymph node drainage. By designing and implementing effective strategies, such as formulating a regular team, positioning surgical team reasonably, changing a patient's posture during operation, choosing an appropriate surgical approach and following a logically sequence of lymph node dissection, surgeons can standardize the complete surgical procedure, which ultimately reduces bleeding during surgery and shortens the operative time.

O-006 - Randomized, controlled phase III trial comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

O-006 - Randomized, controlled phase III trial comparing 3D and 2D laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A meta-analysis on long-term outcomes

Objective To evaluate the long-term clinical between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy with D2 lymph dissection for advanced gastric cancer. Methods Clinical studies that compared clinical of laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer were searched from PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane Library, WanFang, CNKI, CMCC and VIP database with the Gastric neoplasms Laparoscopy Gastrectomy Long-term outcomes Meta-analysis between Jan. 2002 and Oct. 2016. Data of long-term survival and recurrence were analyzed by using of RevMan 5.2 software.Survival data were present by the odds ratio(OR) and 95%CI. The heterogeneity of the data was analyzed using the I2 test. Results Fifteen studies including 4, 053 cases were enrolled.There were 2, 091 patients in LG group and 1, 962 patients in the open gastrectomy group. There was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate(OR=1.00, 95%CI: 0.83-1.20, P=0.98), 5-year overall survival rate(OR=1.14, 95%CI: 0.95-1.36, P=0.15), 5-year disease-free survival rate(OR=1.13, 95%CI: 0.93~1.39, P=0.22)and cancer recurrence rate(OR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.79~1.18, P=0.71) between the patients treated with laparoscopic gastrectomy, or open gastrectomy (P>0.05). Conclusion Laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph dissection for advanced gastric cancer has similar long-term as compared to open gastrectomy. Key words: Stomach neoplasms; Laparoscopes; Gastrectomy; Long-term outcomes; Meta-analysis

Laparoscopic D2 gastrectomy with complete mesogastrium excision (D2+CME) to reduce cancer leak from mesogastrium in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

18 Background: The mechanism underlying tumor recurrence following curative surgery remains unclear. It is believed that intraperitoneal free cancer cells leaked into peritoneal cavity during curative surgery play an important role. In gastric cancer, new strategies should be established towards preventing leakage of cancer cells from the primary tumor involved tissues. Our previous research demonstrated the existence of disseminated cancer cells in the mesogastrium, and we proposed laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy plus complete mesogastrium excision (D2+CME) as an optimized surgical procedure for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). By dissecting along the surgical planes and embryonic boundary of mesogastrium, D2+CME is repeatable with less blood lost and improved short-term surgical outcomes. In this study, we further evaluated the oncological effect of D2+CME based on the detection of “cancer leak”. Methods: The peritoneal washings were collected prior to and after tumor resection from 45 patients who underwent D2+CME (D2+CME group) and 46 patients who underwent conventional D2 lymphadenectomy (D2 group). RT-PCR was used to determine the presence of cancer cells. Positive samples are defined as those with CEA mRNA level over threshold (cutoff value). Results: Of 91 peritoneal washing samples obtained before gastrectomy, 84 (41 in D2+CME; 43 in D2 alone) showed no presence of cancer cell. After gastrectomy, CEA positive was detected in 17 of 43 (39.5%) samples with D2 group, however, only 5 of 41 (12.2%) samples in D2+CME group detected positive CEA. The average level of CEA expression in D2+CME group was also significant lower than that in D2 group after gastrectomy (p &lt; 0.05). Presence of “cancer leak” was closely associated with pT stage and surgical procedures. The DFS of patients with CEA positive after gastrectomy was significantly poorer than that of patients with CEA negative (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: LaparoscopicD2+CME could reduce the leakage of free cancer cells from the envelop of mesogastrium into the peritoneal cavity during radical gastrectomy, and thus, it might potentially increase the prognosis of AGC patients. Clinical trial information: NCT01978444.