Although performing effective laparoscopic gastrectomy remains a challenge, especially for cancer in the upper part of the stomach and for advanced-stage cancer, it is no longer considered a topic of great interest in terms of novelty. Current new topics on gastric cancer surgery in the Japanese surgical meetings are more or less focused on single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS, or reduced-port surgery) [1] and robotic surgery, both of which should be attempted only by surgeons who are armed with significant expertise in laparoscopic surgery. Perhaps these two techniques could be related to each other in that novel robotic devices that would greatly facilitate surgical procedures in the SILS approach may appear in future [2]. However, the current aims of robotic (or Da Vinci) surgery and SILS in gastric cancer surgery are completely different. To the eyes of this narrow-minded editor, SILS can be viewed as a highly demanding procedure with modest, if any, benefit and with potential harm to the patient. Any highly skilled surgeon who can accomplish gastrectomy by the SILS approach will undoubtedly be able to more comfortably perform the same surgery through the ‘‘conventional’’ laparoscopic approach without greater cost or additional risk of disease recurrence. A greater proportion of people, this editor included, would gladly accept accommodating a few more ‘‘holes’’ measuring 5 mm in diameter if he or she could then expect to receive surgery utilizing a wellestablished and more secure technique. On the other hand, Da Vinci gastrectomy could currently be viewed as a highly expensive procedure with little benefit to the patient, because a patient concedes a similar number of ‘‘holes’’ as the ‘‘conventional’’ laparoscopic approach, whereas a proficient laparoscopic surgeon who is qualified to operate a Da Vinci system in Japan would easily perform gastrectomy laparoscopically. This fact does not reflect the true value of the Da Vinci system, however. The Da Vinci system has strengths such as additional degrees of freedom, elimination of the fulcrum effect, three-dimensional vision that can be magnified, and reduced human tremor along with several other benefits [3]. After sufficient training, a surgeon should be able to perform finer and more complex surgical procedures, particularly suturing and knot-tying in demanding situations such as pancreaticojejunostomy. In addition, the robot would certainly be able to give meaningful assistance to the older generation of surgeons who have difficulty adjusting to techniques peculiar to laparoscopic surgery. In other words, it would enable proficient laparoscopic surgeons to add extra meticulous touches to their routine laparoscopic procedures and then to expand their repertoire to include more complex types of surgery. At the same time, Da Vinci might be able assist surgeons who are familiar only with open surgery to step into the area of minimally invasive surgery with a more favorable learning curve. Unfortunately, the learning curve issue has only been discussed in situations in which an established laparoscopic surgeon challenged robotic surgery [4]. Somewhat paradoxically, only proficient laparoscopic surgeons who can perform gastrectomy laparoscopically without any help from either an instructor or a robot are considered appropriate to seek assistance from this device in Japan, which is essentially because Da Vinci has not been approved by their social insurance system. Use of an unapproved drug This editorial refers to the article doi:10.1007/s10120-013-0293-3.