Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Updates in Surgery 3/2020

15.05.2020 | Review Article

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence

verfasst von: Nobuaki Hoshino, Katsuhiro Murakami, Koya Hida, Shigeo Hisamori, Shigeru Tsunoda, Kazutaka Obama, Yoshiharu Sakai

Erschienen in: Updates in Surgery | Ausgabe 3/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Many systematic reviews have been published to evaluate the clinical benefits of robotic surgery for gastric cancer. However, these reviews have investigated various outcomes and differ considerably in quality. In this overview, we summarize the findings and quality of these reviews. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses that compared robotic surgery with laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer. We summarized the results of the meta-analyses and evaluated the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool. The literature search identified 14 eligible reviews. The reviews showed that estimated blood loss was significantly less and time to resumption of oral intake was significantly shorter in patients who underwent robotic surgery than in those who underwent laparoscopic surgery. However, no significant differences in other outcomes were found between the two types of surgery. The quality of the included reviews was judged to be critically low. In conclusion, the available evidence, albeit of critically low quality, suggests that robotic surgery decreases estimated blood loss and shortens the time to resumption of oral intake in patients with gastric cancer. There is currently no high-quality evidence that robotic surgery has clinical benefits for gastric cancer patients.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M et al (1994) Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4:146–148PubMed Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M et al (1994) Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4:146–148PubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Etoh T, Shiroshita H, Shiraishi N et al (2016) Ongoing clinical studies of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Japan. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 1:31PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Etoh T, Shiroshita H, Shiraishi N et al (2016) Ongoing clinical studies of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Japan. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 1:31PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Shinohara T, Satoh S, Kanaya S et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27:286–294PubMedCrossRef Shinohara T, Satoh S, Kanaya S et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27:286–294PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K et al (2002) A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery 131:S306–311PubMedCrossRef Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K et al (2002) A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery 131:S306–311PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Best LM, Mughal M, Gurusamy KS (2016) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD01389 Best LM, Mughal M, Gurusamy KS (2016) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD01389
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Obama K, Sakai Y (2016) Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Today 46:528–534PubMedCrossRef Obama K, Sakai Y (2016) Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Today 46:528–534PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Hashizume M, Sugimachi K (2003) Robot-assisted gastric surgery. Surg Clin N Am 83:1429–1444PubMedCrossRef Hashizume M, Sugimachi K (2003) Robot-assisted gastric surgery. Surg Clin N Am 83:1429–1444PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen K, Pan Y, Zhang B et al (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis. BMC Surg 17:93PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Chen K, Pan Y, Zhang B et al (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis. BMC Surg 17:93PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Chuan L, Yan S, Pei-Wu Y (2015) Meta-analysis of the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24:127–134PubMedCrossRef Chuan L, Yan S, Pei-Wu Y (2015) Meta-analysis of the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24:127–134PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Duan BS, Zhao J, Xie LF et al (2017) Robotic verse laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a pooled analysis of 11 individual studies. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 27:147–153PubMedCrossRef Duan BS, Zhao J, Xie LF et al (2017) Robotic verse laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a pooled analysis of 11 individual studies. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 27:147–153PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Guerra F, Giuliani G, Formisano G et al (2018) Pancreatic complications after conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy versus robotic radical gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28:1207–1215PubMedCrossRef Guerra F, Giuliani G, Formisano G et al (2018) Pancreatic complications after conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy versus robotic radical gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28:1207–1215PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Hu LD, Li XF, Wang XY et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma: a meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17:4327–4333PubMedCrossRef Hu LD, Li XF, Wang XY et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma: a meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17:4327–4333PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ et al (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg 100:1566–1578PubMedCrossRef Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ et al (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg 100:1566–1578PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Liao GX, Xie GZ, Li R et al (2013) Meta-analysis of outcomes compared between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 14:4871–4875PubMedCrossRef Liao GX, Xie GZ, Li R et al (2013) Meta-analysis of outcomes compared between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 14:4871–4875PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Marano A, Young Choi Y, Hyung WJ et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy: a meta-analysis. J Gastr Cancer 13:136–148CrossRef Marano A, Young Choi Y, Hyung WJ et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy: a meta-analysis. J Gastr Cancer 13:136–148CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Pan JH, Zhou H, Zhao XX et al (2017) Long-term oncological outcomes in robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 31:4244–4251PubMedCrossRef Pan JH, Zhou H, Zhao XX et al (2017) Long-term oncological outcomes in robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 31:4244–4251PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Shen WS, Xi HQ, Chen L et al (2014) A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 28:2795–2802PubMedCrossRef Shen WS, Xi HQ, Chen L et al (2014) A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 28:2795–2802PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang Y, Zhao X, Song Y et al (2017) A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Medicine (Baltimore) 96:e8797CrossRef Wang Y, Zhao X, Song Y et al (2017) A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Medicine (Baltimore) 96:e8797CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of short outcomes. Surg Oncol 21:274–280PubMedCrossRef Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of short outcomes. Surg Oncol 21:274–280PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Xiong J, Nunes QM, Tan C et al (2013) Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of 2495 patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:965–976PubMedCrossRef Xiong J, Nunes QM, Tan C et al (2013) Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of 2495 patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:965–976PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Zong L, Seto Y, Aikou S et al (2014) Efficacy evaluation of subtotal and total gastrectomies in robotic surgery for gastric cancer compared with that in open and laparoscopic resections: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9:e103312PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Zong L, Seto Y, Aikou S et al (2014) Efficacy evaluation of subtotal and total gastrectomies in robotic surgery for gastric cancer compared with that in open and laparoscopic resections: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9:e103312PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62:e1–34PubMedCrossRef Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62:e1–34PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Higgins JPT, Green S (editors) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic review of intervention 5. 1. 0. The Cochrane Collaboration Higgins JPT, Green S (editors) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic review of intervention 5. 1. 0. The Cochrane Collaboration
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Uyama I, Suda K, Nakauchi M et al (2019) Clinical advantages of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional prospective single-arm study. Gastric Cancer 22:377–385PubMedCrossRef Uyama I, Suda K, Nakauchi M et al (2019) Clinical advantages of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional prospective single-arm study. Gastric Cancer 22:377–385PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK et al (2016) Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 263:103–109PubMedCrossRef Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK et al (2016) Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 263:103–109PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Kumar A, Tandon S, Samavedi S et al (2016) Current status of various neurovascular bundle-sparing techniques in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg 10:187–200PubMedCrossRef Kumar A, Tandon S, Samavedi S et al (2016) Current status of various neurovascular bundle-sparing techniques in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg 10:187–200PubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Shiroki R, Fukami N, Fukaya K et al (2016) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: superiority over laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol 23:122–131PubMedCrossRef Shiroki R, Fukami N, Fukaya K et al (2016) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: superiority over laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol 23:122–131PubMedCrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Biffi R, Luca F, Bianchi PP et al (2016) Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: current status and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 22:546–556PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Biffi R, Luca F, Bianchi PP et al (2016) Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: current status and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 22:546–556PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoshino N, Sakamoto T, Hida K et al (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence. Surg Today 49:556–570PubMedCrossRef Hoshino N, Sakamoto T, Hida K et al (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence. Surg Today 49:556–570PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence
verfasst von
Nobuaki Hoshino
Katsuhiro Murakami
Koya Hida
Shigeo Hisamori
Shigeru Tsunoda
Kazutaka Obama
Yoshiharu Sakai
Publikationsdatum
15.05.2020
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Updates in Surgery / Ausgabe 3/2020
Print ISSN: 2038-131X
Elektronische ISSN: 2038-3312
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00793-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2020

Updates in Surgery 3/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

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

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis 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“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ 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“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
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.