Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 7/2017

29.03.2017 | Gastrointestinal Oncology

Surgical Outcomes After Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

verfasst von: Seung Yoon Yang, MD, Kun Ho Roh, MD, You-Na Kim, MD, Minah Cho, MD, Seung Hyun Lim, MD, Taeil Son, MD, Woo Jin Hyung, MD, PhD, Hyoung-Il Kim, MD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 7/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

In contrast to the significant advantages of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy has shown little benefit over laparoscopic gastrectomy. This study aimed to compare multi-dimensional aspects of surgical outcomes after open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy.

Methods

Data from 915 gastric cancer patients who underwent gastrectomy by one surgeon between March 2009 and May 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative parameters were analyzed for short-term outcomes. Surgical success was defined as the absence of conversion to open surgery, major complications, readmission, positive resection margin, or fewer than 16 retrieved lymph nodes.

Results

This study investigated 241 patients undergoing open gastrectomy, 511 patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 173 patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy. For each approach, the respective incidences were as follows: conversion to open surgery (not applicable, 0.4%, and 0%; p = 0.444), in-hospital major complications (5.8, 2.7, and 1.2%; p = 0.020), delayed complications requiring readmission (2.9, 2.0, and 1.2%; p = 0.453), positive resection margin (1.7, 0, and 0%; p = 0.003), and inadequate number of retrieved lymph nodes (0.4, 4.1, and 1.7%; p = 0.010). Compared with open and laparoscopic surgery, robotic gastrectomy had the highest surgical success rate (90, 90.8, and 96.0%). Learning-curve analysis of success using cumulative sum plots showed success with the robotic approach from the start. Multivariate analyses identified age, sex, and gastrectomy extent as significant independent parameters affecting surgical success. Surgical approach was not a contributing factor.

Conclusions

Open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy exhibited different incidences and causes of surgical failure. Robotic gastrectomy produced the best surgical outcomes, although the approach method itself was not an independent factor for success.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Choi YY, Noh SH, Cheong JH. Evolution of gastric cancer treatment: from the golden age of surgery to an era of precision medicine. Yonsei Med J. 2015;56:1177–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Choi YY, Noh SH, Cheong JH. Evolution of gastric cancer treatment: from the golden age of surgery to an era of precision medicine. Yonsei Med J. 2015;56:1177–85.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Uyama I, Sugihara K, Tanigawa N. A multicenter study on oncologic outcome of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early cancer in Japan. Ann Surg. 2007;245:68–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Uyama I, Sugihara K, Tanigawa N. A multicenter study on oncologic outcome of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early cancer in Japan. Ann Surg. 2007;245:68–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report: a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg. 2010;251:417–20.CrossRefPubMed Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report: a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg. 2010;251:417–20.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, et al. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:117–9.CrossRefPubMed Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, et al. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 2005;19:117–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Ruurda JP, van Vroonhoven TJ, Broeders IA. Robot-assisted surgical systems: a new era in laparoscopic surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2002;84:223–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ruurda JP, van Vroonhoven TJ, Broeders IA. Robot-assisted surgical systems: a new era in laparoscopic surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2002;84:223–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Camarillo DB, Krummel TM, Salisbury JK Jr. Robotic technology in surgery: past, present, and future. Am J Surg. 2004;188:2s–15s.CrossRefPubMed Camarillo DB, Krummel TM, Salisbury JK Jr. Robotic technology in surgery: past, present, and future. Am J Surg. 2004;188:2s–15s.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, et al. Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016;263:103–9.CrossRefPubMed Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, et al. Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016;263:103–9.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat White I, Greenberg R, Itah R, Inbar R, Schneebaum S, Avital S. Impact of conversion on short- and long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of curable colorectal cancer. JSLS. 2011;15:182–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral White I, Greenberg R, Itah R, Inbar R, Schneebaum S, Avital S. Impact of conversion on short- and long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of curable colorectal cancer. JSLS. 2011;15:182–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Acher AW, Squires MH, Fields RC, et al. Readmission following gastric cancer resection: risk factors and survival. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20:1284–94.CrossRefPubMed Acher AW, Squires MH, Fields RC, et al. Readmission following gastric cancer resection: risk factors and survival. J Gastrointest Surg. 2016;20:1284–94.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Liang Y, Ding X, Wang X, et al. Prognostic value of surgical margin status in gastric cancer patients. ANZ J Surg. 2015;85:678–84.CrossRefPubMed Liang Y, Ding X, Wang X, et al. Prognostic value of surgical margin status in gastric cancer patients. ANZ J Surg. 2015;85:678–84.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, et al. Long-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large-scale case-control and case-matched Korean multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2014. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.48.8551. Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, et al. Long-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large-scale case-control and case-matched Korean multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2014. doi:10.​1200/​JCO.​2013.​48.​8551.
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Schmidt B, Chang KK, Maduekwe UN, et al. D2 lymphadenectomy with surgical ex vivo dissection into node stations for gastric adenocarcinoma can be performed safely in Western patients and ensures optimal staging. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2991–9.CrossRefPubMed Schmidt B, Chang KK, Maduekwe UN, et al. D2 lymphadenectomy with surgical ex vivo dissection into node stations for gastric adenocarcinoma can be performed safely in Western patients and ensures optimal staging. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2991–9.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Son T, Hyung WJ, Lee JH, et al. Clinical implication of an insufficient number of examined lymph nodes after curative resection for gastric cancer. Cancer. 2012;118:4687–93.CrossRefPubMed Son T, Hyung WJ, Lee JH, et al. Clinical implication of an insufficient number of examined lymph nodes after curative resection for gastric cancer. Cancer. 2012;118:4687–93.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Kayano H, Okuda J, Tanaka K, Kondo K, Tanigawa N. Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2972–9.CrossRefPubMed Kayano H, Okuda J, Tanaka K, Kondo K, Tanigawa N. Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:2972–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee JH, Kim JG, Jung HK, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for gastric cancer in Korea: an evidence-based approach. J Gastric Cancer. 2014;14:87–104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lee JH, Kim JG, Jung HK, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for gastric cancer in Korea: an evidence-based approach. J Gastric Cancer. 2014;14:87–104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefPubMed Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Edge SB, American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. Springer, New York, 2010. Edge SB, American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 7th ed. Springer, New York, 2010.
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HI, Park MS, Song KJ, Woo Y, Hyung WJ. Rapid and safe learning of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: multidimensional analysis in a comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:1346–54.CrossRefPubMed Kim HI, Park MS, Song KJ, Woo Y, Hyung WJ. Rapid and safe learning of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: multidimensional analysis in a comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:1346–54.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Jin SH, Kim DY, Kim H, et al. Multidimensional learning curve in laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:28–33.CrossRefPubMed Jin SH, Kim DY, Kim H, et al. Multidimensional learning curve in laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc. 2007;21:28–33.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ, Tong Y, Park SS. Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1566–78.CrossRefPubMed Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ, Tong Y, Park SS. Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1566–78.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, et al. Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1779–87.CrossRefPubMed Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, et al. Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1779–87.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Suda K, Man IM, Ishida Y, Kawamura Y, Satoh S, Uyama I. Potential advantages of robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in comparison with conventional laparoscopic approach: a single-institutional retrospective comparative cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:673–85.CrossRefPubMed Suda K, Man IM, Ishida Y, Kawamura Y, Satoh S, Uyama I. Potential advantages of robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in comparison with conventional laparoscopic approach: a single-institutional retrospective comparative cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:673–85.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, Kashfi A, Schemmer P, Buchler MW. Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1390–7.CrossRefPubMed Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, Kashfi A, Schemmer P, Buchler MW. Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1390–7.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Moloo H, Mamazza J, Poulin EC, et al. Laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer: does conversion survival? Surg Endosc. 2004;18:732–5.CrossRefPubMed Moloo H, Mamazza J, Poulin EC, et al. Laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer: does conversion survival? Surg Endosc. 2004;18:732–5.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Woo JW, Ryu KW, Park JY, et al. Prognostic impact of microscopic tumor involved resection margin in advanced gastric cancer patients after gastric resection. World J Surg. 2014;38:439–46.CrossRefPubMed Woo JW, Ryu KW, Park JY, et al. Prognostic impact of microscopic tumor involved resection margin in advanced gastric cancer patients after gastric resection. World J Surg. 2014;38:439–46.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Lawson EH, Hall BL, Louie R, et al. Association between occurrence of a postoperative complication and readmission: implications for quality improvement and cost savings. Ann Surg. 2013;258:10–8.CrossRefPubMed Lawson EH, Hall BL, Louie R, et al. Association between occurrence of a postoperative complication and readmission: implications for quality improvement and cost savings. Ann Surg. 2013;258:10–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Surgical Outcomes After Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer
verfasst von
Seung Yoon Yang, MD
Kun Ho Roh, MD
You-Na Kim, MD
Minah Cho, MD
Seung Hyun Lim, MD
Taeil Son, MD
Woo Jin Hyung, MD, PhD
Hyoung-Il Kim, MD
Publikationsdatum
29.03.2017
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 7/2017
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5851-1

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2017

Annals of Surgical Oncology 7/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.