Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy Group Research Articles

Safety and Limitations of Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of Short and Long-term Outcomes With Open Surgery.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is a standard treatment strategy for gastric cancer (GC); however, the clinical impact of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) on survival outcomes remains unclear. We compared the short- and long-term results of LTG with those of open total gastrectomy (OTG). Patients undergoing total gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for Stage I/II/III GC between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were classified into those undergoing LTG (n=143, LTG group) and OTG (n=173, OTG group). The primary outcome was relapse-free survival (RFS). The LTG group exhibited a higher prevalence of early T and N factors, with pStage I/II/III distribution skewed toward early-stage in a ratio of 86/24/33 compared to 38/65/69 in the OTG group (p<0.001), respectively. Longer operation time (p<0.001), less blood loss (p<0.001), fewer grade 3-4 complications (p<0.001), and shorter hospital stay (p<0.001) were observed in the LTG than in the OTG group. LTG was associated with survival benefits for patients without indication for adjuvant chemotherapy [5-year RFS rate, 96.3% vs. 73.2%; hazard ratio (HR)=0.24; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.10-0.56; p<0.001]. Among the eligibility criteria for adjuvant chemotherapy (Stage II/III excluding pT1 and pT3N0), while the LTG group received more frequently doublet-agent administration (56.5% vs. 11%, p<0.001), conversely, the OTG group exhibited slightly better long-term survival rates (5-year RFS rate, 33.9% vs. 50.2%; HR=1.31; 95%CI=0.82-2.10; p=0.251). LTG contributed to favorable short-term outcomes and demonstrated improved long-term outcomes in early-stage GC; however, careful consideration of indications is warranted for advanced GC cases.

Evaluation of Quality of Life and Prognosis of Gastric Cancer Patients After Laparoscopic Subtotal Gastrectomy.

The clinical significance of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy (LsTG) with a small remnant stomach remains unclear in patients with gastric cancer, including at an advanced stage. The present study assessed postoperative quality of life (QOL) and survival after LsTG compared with laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent LsTG (n=26) or LTG (n=26). Surgical outcome, postoperative nutritional status, QOL, and prognosis were compared between the LsTG and LTG groups. The Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale was used to evaluate postoperative QOL. Operating time was significantly shorter (p<0.01) and postoperative morbidity was significantly lower (p=0.04) in the LsTG than in the LTG group. The reduction in body weight after surgery was significantly greater in the LTG than in the LsTG group (p<0.01). The Postgastrectomy Syndrome Assessment Scale revealed that, compared with LTG, LsTG significantly improved postoperative QOL (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in relapse-free survival and cancer-specific survival between the two groups. Three patients in the LTG group died of pneumonia and overall survival was significantly longer in the LsTG group (p=0.01). This study demonstrated the efficacy of LsTG with a small remnant stomach to prevent a decline in postoperative QOL and non-cancer-related death.

Intraoperative performance and outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A high-volume center retrospective propensity score matching study.

Studies on robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) are currently limited. This study aimed to compare the intraoperative performance as well as short- and long-term outcomes of RTG and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). A total of 969 patients underwent robotic (n=161) or laparoscopic (n=636) total gastrectomy between October 2014 and October 2021. The two groups of patients were matched 1:3 using the propensity score matching (PSM) method. The intraoperative performance as well as short- and long-term outcomes of the robotic (n=147) and the laparoscopic (n=371) groups were compared. After matching, the estimated intraoperative blood loss was lower (80.51 ± 68.77 vs. 89.89 ± 66.12, p=0.008), and the total number of lymph node dissections was higher (34.74 ± 12.44 vs. 29.83 ± 12.22, p < 0.001) in the RTG group compared with the LTG group. More lymph node dissections at the upper edge of the pancreas were performed in the RTG group than in the LTG (12.59 ± 4.18 vs. 10.33 ± 4.58, p=0.001). Additionally, postoperative recovery indicators and laboratory data were greater in the RTG group than those in the LTG group, while postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups (19.0% vs. 18.9%, p=0.962). For overweight or obese patients with body mass indexes (BMIs) ≥25, certain clinical outcomes of the RTG remained advantageous, and no significant differences in three-year overall survival (OS) or relapse-free survival (RFS) were observed. Robotic total gastrectomy demonstrated better intraoperative performance, could improve the short-term clinical outcomes of patients, and was more conducive to patient recovery. However, the long-term efficacies of the two approaches were similar. Robotic surgical systems may reduce surgical stress responses in patients, allowing them to receive postoperative chemotherapy sooner.

Effect of Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy With Double-Tract Reconstruction vs Total Gastrectomy on Hemoglobin Level and Vitamin B12 Supplementation in Upper-Third Early Gastric Cancer

Patients undergoing proximal gastrectomy (PG) with double-tract reconstruction (DTR) have been reported to have an incidence of reflux esophagitis that is as low as that observed after total gastrectomy (TG). It is unclear whether PG has an advantage over TG for the treatment of patients with upper early gastric cancer (GC). To evaluate the effect of laparoscopic PG with DTR (LPG-DTR) vs laparoscopic TG (LTG) on levels of hemoglobin and vitamin B12 supplementation required among patients with clinically early GC in the upper third of the stomach (upper-third early GC). This multicenter open-label superiority randomized clinical trial was conducted at 10 institutions in Korea. A total of 138 patients with upper-third cT1N0M0 GC were enrolled between October 27, 2016, and September 9, 2018. Follow-up ended on December 3, 2020. Patients were randomized to undergo either LPG-DTR or LTG. The primary co-end points were change in hemoglobin level and cumulative amount of vitamin B12 supplementation at 2 years after LPG-DTR or LTG. The secondary end points included morbidity, postoperative reflux esophagitis, quality of life, overall survival, and disease-free survival. Quality of life outcomes were assessed using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) 30-item core questionnaire (C30) and the EORTC QLQ stomach cancer-specific questionnaire at 3 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Among 138 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.0 [10.9] years; 87 men [63.0%]; all of Asian race and Korean ethnicity), 68 (mean [SD] age, 56.7 [10.4] years; 39 men [57.4%]) were randomized to receive LPG-DTR and 69 (mean [SD] age, 61.3 [11.3] years; 48 men [69.6%]) were randomized to receive LTG. The mean (SD) changes in hemoglobin levels from baseline to month 24 were -5.6% (7.4%) in the LPG-DTR group and -6.9% (8.3%) in the LTG group, for an estimated difference of -1.3% (95% CI, -4.0% to 1.4%; P = .35). The mean (SD) cumulative amount of vitamin B12 supplementation was 0.4 (1.3) mg in the LPG-DTR group and 2.5 (3.0) mg in the LTG group, for an estimated difference of 2.1 mg (95% CI, 1.3-2.9 mg; P < .001). The late complication rates in the LPG-DTR and LTG groups were 17.6% and 10.1%, respectively (P = .31). The incidence of reflux esophagitis was not different between the LPG-DTR and LTG groups (2.9% vs 2.9%; P = .99). Compared with the LTG group, the LPG-DTR group had better physical functioning scores (85.2 [15.6] vs 79.9 [19.3]; P = .03) and social functioning scores (89.5 [17.9] vs 82.4 [19.4]; P = .03) on the EORTC QLQ-C30. Two-year overall survival (98.5% vs 100%; P = .33) and disease-free survival (98.5% vs 97.1%; P = .54) did not significantly differ between the LPG-DTR vs LTG groups. In this study, patients with upper-third early GC who received LPG-DTR required less vitamin B12 supplementation than those who received LTG, with no increase in complication rates and no difference in overall and disease-free survival rates. There was no difference in change in hemoglobin level between groups. In addition, the LPG-DTR group had better physical and social functioning than the LTG group. These findings suggest that LPG-DTR may be as safe as LTG and may be a function-preserving procedure for the treatment of patients with upper-third early GC. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02892643.

Feasibility of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with piggyback jejunal interposition double-tract reconstruction for proximal gastric cancer: A propensity score-matching analysis.

The feasibility of using laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) for the treatment of proximal early gastric cancer (EGC) has not been addressed. This study aimed to comparatively evaluate the effects on LPG with piggyback jejunal interposition double-tract reconstruction (PJIDTR) versus laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (overlap method) using propensity score matching for proximal EGC. We examined the clinical outcomes of LPG with PJIDTR for proximal EGC. We retrospectively collected data from patients with proximal EGC who were treated at Shanxi Cancer Hospital between January 2012 and December 2015. The complication rate, nutritional indicators, reflux oesophagitis incidence and overall survival were compared between LTG and LPG with PJIDTR. Of the 424 patients, 200 were excluded, and 50 of the remaining patients received LPG with PJIDTR. Fifty matched LTG patients were screened. The incidence of early complications was 14% in the LPG group and 16% in the LTG group (P > 0.05). At 1 year after surgery, nutrition indices in the LPG group were significantly better than those in the LTG group (P < 0.05). One year after surgery, the Visick score II rate was 2% and 4%, and the endoscopic oesophagitis rate was 4% and 6% in the LPG and LTG groups, respectively. No tumour recurrence was observed in either group. The 5-year overall survival rates of the two groups were 98% and 90% (P = 0.08). LPG with PJIDTR may be suitable for proximal EGC.

Impact of preoperative therapy on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer.

As laparoscopic surgery is widely applied for primarily treated gastric cancer (GC)/gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC) and gains many advantages, the feasibility of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for GC/GEJC patients who have received preoperative therapy (PT) has come to the fore. This study aims to analyze the safety and feasibility of LTG after PT for GC/GEJC patients. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 511 patients with GC/GEJC undergoing LTG, of which 405 received LTG (LTG group) and 106 received PT+LTG (PT-LTG group) at Nanfang Hospital between June 2018 and September 2022. The surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups. The surgical duration was significantly longer in the PT-LTG group (P<0.001), while the incidence of intraoperative complications (P=1.000), postoperative complications (LTG group vs. PT-LTG group: 26.2% vs. 23.6%, P=0.587), the classification of complication severity (P=0.271), and postoperative recovery was similar between two groups. Notably, the incidence of anastomotic complications of esophagojejunostomy was also comparable between the two groups (LTG group vs. PT-LTG group: 5.9% vs. 5.7%, P=0.918). The univariate and multivariate analysis confirmed that positive proximal margin [positive vs. negative: odds ratio (OR)=14.094, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 2.639-75.260, P=0.002], rather than PT, has an impact on anastomotic complications after LTG (OR=0.945, 95% CI: 0.371-2.408, P=0.905). PT did not increase the surgical risk of LTG for GC/GEJC. Therefore, considering the positive effect of PT on long-term survival, the broader application of PT and LTG for GC/GEJC is supported by our findings.

Short and Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy Compared with Open Total Gastrectomy in Gastric Cancer Patients

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with that of open total gastrectomy (OTG) in terms of postoperative complications and long-term survival. We retrospectively reviewed the clinicopathological data of 560 patients, who underwent total gastrectomy between 2012 and 2016 at the National Cancer Center, Korea. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was performed to correct for discrepancies between the two groups. Matched variables included sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and pathological Tumor-Node-Metastasis stage. After PSM, 238 patients were included in this analysis. The rate of D2 lymph node dissection was significantly higher in the OTG group than in the LTG group. The estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the LTG group than in the OTG group. The overall complication rate was not significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the 3-year disease-free and 5-year overall survival rates between the two groups. LTG and OTG had comparable efficacies in gastric cancer patients regarding short- and long-term surgical outcomes. This study suggests that LTG could be an alternative approach to the OTG.

Survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy with nodal dissection for gastric cancer in a high-volume Japanese center: A propensity score-matched analysis.

To compare the survival outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with those of open total gastrectomy (OTG) in gastric cancer. Using an in-house database, this single-center study reviewed clinical data for patients who underwent surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma in 2008-2018. The patients were divided into an LTG group and an OTG group. Data for 638 patients were screened. After exclusions, 580 patients (LTG, n=212; OTG, n=368) were enrolled. Noting that the OTG group included more advanced tumors, 1:1 propensity score matching was implemented to reduce any selection bias, leaving 326 patients (LTG, n=163; OTG, n=163; pStage I/II/III=147/87/92) for further analysis. The operation time was longer and blood loss was less in the LTG group. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the LTG group than in the OTG group (9d vs 10d；P=.040). There was no significant difference in the incidence of grade III or worse postoperative complications (8.9% vs 11.0%). Five-year overall survival was better in the LTG group (84.9% vs 73.5%; P=.0010, log-rank test), but there was no significant difference in overall survival according to pStage (I, 93.0% vs 89.0%; II, 85.8% vs 77.5%; III, 64.1% vs 52.5%). There was a similar trend in relapse-free survival. Distribution of recurrence sites was comparable. LTG may provide survival outcomes similar to those of OTG when performed by an experienced surgical team. Further evidence is required for final conclusions, especially regarding its efficacy for stage II/III.

Short and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open total gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

BACKGROUNDNeoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) combined with surgery is regarded as an effective treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Laparoscopic surgery represents the mainstream of minimally invasive surgery. Currently, surgeons focus more on surgical safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy after NACT. Thus, we sought to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and open total gastrectomy (OTG) after NACT. AIMTo compare the short and long-term outcomes between LTG and OTG for AGC after NACT.METHODSWe retrospectively collected the clinicopathological data of 136 patients who accepted gastrectomy after NACT from June 2012 to June 2019, including 61 patients who underwent LTG and 75 who underwent OTG. Clinicopathological characteristics between the LTG and OTG groups showed no significant difference. SPSS 26.0, R software, and GraphPad PRISM 8.0 were used to perform statistical analyses.RESULTSOf the 136 patients included, eight acquired pathological complete response, and the objective response rate was 47.8% (65/136). The LTG group had longer operation time (P = 0.015), less blood loss (P = 0.003), shorter days to first flatus (P < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospitalization days (P < 0.001). LTG spent more surgical cost than OTG (P < 0.001), while total hospitalized cost of LTG was less than OTG (P < 0.001). 21 (28.0%) patients in the OTG group and 14 (23.0%) in the LTG group had 30-d postoperative complications, but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.503). The 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 60.6% and 64.6% in the LTG and OTG groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.859, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.522-1.412, P = 0.546], while the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was 54.5% and 51.8% in the LTG and OTG group, respectively (HR = 0.947, 95%CI: 0.582-1.539, P = 0.823). Multivariate cox analysis showed that body mass index and pTNM stage were independent risk factors for OS while vascular invasion and pTNM stage were independent risk factors for DFS (P < 0.05).CONCLUSIONAfter NACT, LTG shows comparable 30-d postoperative morbidity as well as 3-year OS and DFS rate to OTG. We recommend that experienced surgeons select LTG other than OTG for proper AGC patients after NACT.

A comparative study on perioperative outcomes between robotic versus laparoscopic D2 total gastrectomy

ObjectiveRobotic surgery has been increasingly used worldwide owing to its advanced features. However, the significant benefits of robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) over laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) have yet to be demonstrated. We conducted a prospective cohort study to compare the safety and efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC. MethodsBetween March 26, 2018 and July 30, 2021, 155 patients between 18 and 80 years of age with locally advanced gastric cancer (cT2-4a, N0/+, M0) were enrolled. The perioperative outcomes within 30 days after surgery were compared between the RTG (n = 69) and LTG (n = 73) groups on a per-protocol (PP) basis. Postoperative complications were evaluated according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. ResultsThe overall postoperative morbidity rate was 21.74% in the RTG group and 28.77% in the LTG group with no significant difference (P = 0.44), RTG was associated with a lower incidence of pneumonia (4.35% vs. 15.07%, P = 0.047). No mortality was observed in either group. There was no significant difference in the total operative time (284.48 vs. 271.73 min, P = 0.171), but RTG was associated with a lower estimated volume of blood loss (110 vs. 150 ml, P < 0.001) and more total retrieved lymph nodes (LNs) (41.36 vs 35.1, P = 0.019), more extraperigastric LNs (14.91 vs. 12.19, P = 0.024) and more LNs in the suprapancreatic areas (14.68 vs. 11.82, P = 0.017). The laboratory data (amylase, inflammatory, Albumin and T lymphocyte levels) of the RTG group were better than those of the LTG group. ConclusionAccording to the results of this prospective cohort study, for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, Robotic surgery has advantages over laparoscopic surgery for radical total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy performed by well-trained doctors.

Comparisons of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy in patients with clinical stage I/IIA gastric cancer.

The robotic approach is especially promising for challenging surgeries, such as total gastrectomy. However, it remains unclear whether robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) is superior to conventional laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG). The present study aimed to clarify the impact of RTG on short- and long-term outcomes for patients with clinical stage I/IIA gastric cancer. This study included 98 patients with clinical stage I/IIA gastric cancer who underwent minimally invasive total gastrectomy from October 2013 to December 2020 at the Shizuoka Cancer Center. The short- and long-term outcomes of RTG were compared with those of LTG. This study included 36 RTG and 58 LTG patients. RTG was associated with a significantly longer operative time than LTG (p = 0.023). All complications tended to be lower in the RTG group than in the LTG group (2.8% and 15.5%, respectively; p = 0.083). There were no patients with anastomotic leakage in the RTG group. The multivariate analysis identified LTG as the only independent risk factor for postoperative complications (odds ratio, 6.620; 95% confidence interval, 1.132-126.4; p = 0.034). The survival of the RTG and LTG groups was equivalent. RTG reduced the risk of complications compared to LTG. Patients treated using the two approaches showed equivalent survival.

Comparison of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy with double-tract reconstruction and laparoscopic total gastrectomy for proximal gastric cancer with stage cT1-2.

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and nutritional benefits of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG) with double-tract reconstruction (DTR) in comparison with laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG).The demographic, clinical, and pathological data and postoperative nutritional status of patients undergoing LPG with DTR (n = 21) or LTG (n = 26) at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital between January 2016 and January 2019 were retrospectively reviewed and compared.The operative time in the LPG group was slightly longer than that in the LTG group; however, the difference was not statistically significant. Blood loss was not significantly different between groups. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was higher in the LTG group than in the LPG group (P = .02). The time to first flatus, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were comparable between the groups. During the 3-year postoperative follow-up, a statistically significant decrease in hemoglobin level was observed in the LTG group. There were no differences between the two groups of patients before and after the operation regarding albumin levels. The mean vitamin B12 level was higher in the LPG group than in the LTG group from 12 to 18 months postoperatively.LPG with DTR is an acceptable procedure for patients with upper gastric cancer. LPG with DTR has numerous potential advantages in preserving the physiological and nutritional functions of the remnant stomach and the conservation of the gastric reservoir.

Could neoadjuvant chemotherapy increase postoperative complication risk of laparoscopic total gastrectomy? A mono-institutional propensity score-matched study in China.

BACKGROUNDThe potential survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) in patients with advanced gastric cancer has been widely recognized. With the development of minimally invasive surgery, which is represented by laparoscopy, the effect of NC on the safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy remains to be further explored.AIMTo compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) after NC (NC-LTG) with LTG alone.METHODSA total of 92 patients who underwent NC-LTG and 381 patients who received LTG alone at the Chinese PLA General Hospital between September 2015 and September 2020 were retrospectively included in our study. We used propensity-score matching (PSM) to balance baseline bias. After 1:1 PSM, 73 patients were included in each group with no statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics.RESULTSThe NC-LTG group exhibited a longer operation time (244.10 ± 48.13 min vs 225.74 ± 45.33 min, P = 0.019) and increased intraoperative blood loss [150 (100-300) mL vs 100 (100-200) mL, P = 0.011] compared to the LTG group. The 30-d postoperative morbidity of the NC-LTG group was 20.5% (15/73), and that of the LTG group was 13.7% (10/73). There were no significant differences in 30-d severe complication rates or anastomotic leakage rates. Subgroup analysis showed that the patients with pTNM (pathological tumor-node-metastasis classification) T0N0-II in the NC-LTG group underwent a longer operation than the LTG group, while no significant difference was found in any perioperative index for the pTNM III patients. A multivariate analysis showed that an operation time longer than 240 min was an independent risk factor (odds ratio = 3.021, 95% confidence interval: 1.160-7.868, P = 0.024), while NC was not an independent risk factor for postoperative complications in LTG.CONCLUSIONDespite a longer operation time and more blood loss after NC-LTG, which indicate surgical difficulty, NC-LTG exhibits acceptable short-term outcomes compared to LTG, suggesting the safety and feasibility of NC-LTG.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a cohort study using the propensity score matching method.

Until now, little is known about the benefit of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). This study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of the LTG versus the open total gastrectomy (OTG) approach after NACT treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This study involved a cohort of 145 patients with AGC who underwent total gastrectomy after NACT at our centre between April 2013 and August 2018 including 24 cases of LTG and 121 OTG. The baseline characteristics were matched based on 1:2 balanced propensity score-matching method. Sixty-nine marched cases were finally analysed (23 LTG vs. 46 OTG). All patients underwent R0 resection. Compared to the OTG group, the LTG group had a longer surgery duration (P<0.001), but a shorter incision length (P<0.001) and less intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) time after surgery (P=0.027). No statistical differences were observed in terms of blood loss, retrieved lymph nodes (LNs), resection margin, length of stay, postoperative pain intensity, and complications (P>0.05). LTG had comparable safety and histological findings to OTG after NACT in the perioperative period; however, LTG is less invasive and patients can benefit from less IV-PCA use. Further research is needed to investigate long-term effects. Gastric cancer (GC); neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT); safety; laparoscopic technique.

Clinical outcomes of gastric tube reconstruction following laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer in the upper third of the stomach: experience with 100 consecutive cases.

Gastric tube reconstruction is a form of esophagogastrostomy performed after laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG). It is a simple and safe technique, but it may cause reflux esophagitis (RE) and impair postsurgical QOL. For several years, we have developed the gastric tube reconstruction and performed it on more than 100 patients. This study aimed to determine whether gastric tube reconstruction can be a feasible choice after LPG in regard to surgical safety and postoperative nutritional status. The subjects consisted of 171 patients who underwent LPG (n = 102) or laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) (n = 69). We compared the two groups in terms of surgical outcomes, incidence rate of RE, and nutritional status including postoperative weight loss and hemoglobin levels. There were no significant differences with regard to the surgical duration and blood loss between the two groups. The incidence of RE was not significantly higher with LPG than with LTG (16.7% vs. 10.1%, respectively; P = 0.07). Later than 2 years and 6 months after surgery, the body weight percentage of preoperative body weight in the LPG group was significantly higher than that in the LTG group. Hemoglobin and ferritin levels in the LPG group were significantly higher than those in the LTG group, later than one after surgery. The overall survival rates were similar between the two groups (5-year survival rates: 97.1% vs. 94.2% in the LPG and LTG groups, respectively; P = 0.69). Gastric tube reconstruction after LPG is simple and had better outcomes than LTG in terms of postoperative nutritional status.

Comparative analysis of laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy plus semi-embedded valve anastomosis with laparoscopic total gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a single-center retrospective cohort study

BackgroundWe invented a new antireflux anastomosis method for use in proximal gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) and named it semi-embedded valve anastomosis (SEV). This study was conducted to compare and analyze the short-term efficacy and long-term prognosis of this anastomosis reconstruction method versus laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG).MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the general data and surgical outcomes of patients with AEG who underwent three united laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy plus semi-embedded valve anastomosis (TULPG-SEV, N = 20) and LTG (N = 20) at our hospital from January 2015 to September 2017 and investigated the incidence of postoperative reflux esophagitis and postoperative nutritional status between the two groups. Survival analysis was also performed.ResultsThe operative time (178.25 ± 15.41 vs 196.5 ± 21.16 min) and the gastrointestinal reconstruction time (19.3 ± 2.53 vs 34.65 ± 4.88 min) of the TULPG-SEV group were significantly less than that of the LTG group. There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. There was no difference in the scores on the postoperative reflux disease questionnaires (RDQs) conducted 1 month (P = 0.501), 3 months (P = 0.238), and 6 months (P = 0.655) after surgery between the TULPG-SEV group and LTG group. Gastroscopy revealed 2 cases of reflux esophagitis (grade B or higher) in each group. The postoperative hemoglobin level was better in the TULPG-SEV group than in the LTG group, and the difference was most noticeable at 1 month after surgery (P = 0.024) and 3 months after surgery (P = 0.029). The levels of albumin and total protein were not significantly different between the groups. There were more patients with weight loss over 5 kg after surgery in the LTG group than in the TULPG-SEV group (P = 0.043). There was no significant difference in the 3-year overall survival rate between the two groups (P = 0.356).ConclusionSEV has a certain antireflux effect and can reduce the anastomosis time. Proximal gastrectomy may be better than total gastrectomy for maintaining postoperative hemoglobin levels and reducing weight loss.

Surgical Outcomes, Technical Performance, and Surgery Burden of Robotic Total Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Study.

To compare the short-term outcomes, surgery burden, and technical performance of robotic total gastrectomy (RTG) and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for gastric cancer (GC). The impact of robotic systems on total gastrectomy remains obscure. This prospective study included 50 patients with advanced proximal GC underwent RTG combined with spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy between March 2018 and February 2020. Patients who underwent LTG in the FUGES-002, http://links.lww.com/SLA/C929 study were enrolled to compare the outcomes between RTG and LTG. After propensity score matching, 48 patients in the RTG group and 96 patients in the LTG group were included in the analysis. The RTG group had a lower volume of intraoperative blood loss than the LTG group (38.7 vs 66.4 mL, P = 0.042). Significantly more extraperigastric lymph nodes were retrieved in the RTG group than in the LTG group (20.2 vs 17.5, P = 0.039). The average number of errors was lower in the RTG group than in the LTG group (43.2 vs 53.8 times/case, P < 0.001). The RTG group had a higher technical skill score (30.2 vs 28.4, P < 0.001) and a lower surgery task load index (33.2 vs 39.8, P < 0.001) than the LTG group. No significant difference was found in terms of postoperative morbidity between the 2 groups (14.6% vs 16.7%, P = 0.748). In complex total gastrectomy for GC, compared with traditional laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery provides a technically superior operative environment and reduces surgeon workload at high-volume specialized institutions.

Proximal Gastrectomy Is a Viable Alternative to Total Gastrectomy in Early Stage Proximal Gastric Cancer.

Background:Total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy is a life-extending procedure for patients with nonmetastatic proximal gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, yet it can be a life-altering procedure with negative impact on quality of life.1 Perioperative recovery often involves the need for supplemental nutrition (either enteral or parenteral). Furthermore, long-term effects of early satiety, dysphagia, sustained weight loss, and difficulty in maintaining a healthy weight, dumping syndrome, and intestinal overgrowth are not unusual. Although the alternative of untreated cancer is clearly unacceptable, these lifestyle consequences are not benign.Methods:A retrospective review of patients who had undergone laparoscopic total and proximal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma was conducted. Patient demographic data, pathologic parameters, and short-term and long-term clinical data were compared between total gastrectomy and proximal gastrectomy cohorts.Results:Seventeen patients were included in the study: 13 had undergone laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) and 4 had undergone laparoscopic proximal gastrectomy (LPG). Patients who had LPG, given the nature of the procedure, were confined to early stage (up to T2) tumors in the gastric cardia or GE junction. Patients who had LTG tended to be larger, later stage tumors (but not exclusively). The mean operative time was greater for LTG than for LPG (247 ± 54 versus 181 ± 49 min, respectively, P = .036). Length of hospital stay (9.0 ± 3.2 versus 5.0 ± 0.8 days, P < .001) and readmission for postoperative complication (38.5 versus 0%, P = .009) were also higher in the LTG group. There was no significant difference in terms of mean estimated blood loss or blood transfusion rates, overall complications, or anastomotic stricture requiring endoscopic dilation between the patients who underwent LTG and those who underwent LPG.Conclusion:In early stage tumors (T1b or T2), proximal gastrectomy (PG) should be considered to mitigate diminished quality of life. PG with esophagogastrostomy, which can easily be performed minimally invasively, can be more tolerable for the patient, with no anatomic basis for dumping syndrome or small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), and a greater reservoir for more normal meal habits when compared to total gastrectomy (TG) with Roux-en-Y reconstruction.

Morbidity and Mortality of Laparoscopic vs Open Total Gastrectomy for Clinical Stage I Gastric Cancer

The safety of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for the treatment of gastric cancer remains uncertain given the lack of high-level clinical evidence. To compare the safety of LTG for clinical stage I gastric cancer with that of conventional open total gastrectomy (OTG). The Chinese Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (CLASS) Group CLASS02 study was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial that compared the safety of LTG vs OTG with lymphadenectomy for patients with clinical stage I gastric cancer. From January 2017 to September 2018, a total of 227 patients were enrolled. Final follow-up was in October 2018. Eligible patients were randomized to LTG (n = 113) or OTG (n = 114) by an interactive web response system. The primary outcome was the morbidity and mortality within 30 days following surgeries between LTG and OTG with a noninferiority margin of 10%. The secondary outcomes were recovery courses and postoperative hospital stays. A total of 214 patients were analyzed for morbidity and mortality (105 patients in the LTG group and 109 patients in the OTG group). The mean (SD) age was 59.8 (9.4) years in the LTG group and 59.4 (9.2) years in the OTG group, and most were male (LTG group, 75 of 105 [71.4%]; OTG group, 80 of 109 [73.4%]). The overall morbidity and mortality rates were not significantly different between the groups (rate difference, -1.1%; 95% CI, -11.8% to 9.6%). Intraoperative complications occurred in 3 patients (2.9%) in the LTG group and 4 patients (3.7%) in the OTG group (rate difference, -0.8%; 95% CI, -6.5% to 4.9%). In addition, there was no significant difference in the overall postoperative complication rate of 18.1% in the LTG group and 17.4% in the OTG group (rate difference, 0.7%; 95% CI, -9.6% to 11.0%). One patient in the LTG group died from intra-abdominal bleeding secondary to splenic artery hemorrhage. However, there was no significant difference in mortality between the LTG group and the OTG group (rate difference, 1.0%; 95% CI, -2.5% to 5.2%), and the distribution of complication severity was similar between the 2 groups. The results of the CLASS02 trial showed that the safety of LTG with lymphadenectomy by experienced surgeons for clinical stage I gastric cancer was comparable to that of OTG. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03007550.

Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Remnant Gastric Cancer: A Single-institution Experience and Systematic Literature Review.

The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) for remnant gastric cancer (RGC) remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of LTG with open total gastrectomy (OTG) for RGC. Twenty-two patients who underwent total gastrectomy for RGC were enrolled in this study. LTG was carried out in seven patients, and OTG was performed in the remaining 15 patients. The mean operation time in the LTG group was longer than that in the OTG group. The estimated blood loss in the LTG group was less than that in the OTG group. No cases in the LTG group required open conversion. Postoperatively, the first meal and defecation were earlier in the LTG group than in the OTG group. The overall survival rates of the two groups were comparable. Laparoscopic total gastrectomy is a feasible surgical option for RGC.