Comparison of Ligasure Versus Conventional Surgery for Curative Gastric Cancer Resection: a Meta-Analysis

Background: The LigaSure vessel sealing system has been proposed to save operation time and reduce intraoperative blood loss for various surgeries. However, its usage for gastric cancer is still controversial. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to compare the effectiveness of LigaSure with conventional surgery in gastrectomy. Materials and Methods: Sources were retrieved from the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Google Scholar until February, 2015. All randomized controlled trials comparing LigaSure with conventional surgery in curative gastric cancer resection were selected. After data extraction, statistics were performed by Review Manager 5.1 software. Results: Three eligible randomized controlled trials were evaluated, with a total of 335 patients. The quality of the included trials was good, yet some methodological and clinical heterogeneity existed. There were no significant differences between the LigaSure and conventional groups in operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD], -22.95 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], [-59.75, 13.85]; P = 0.22), blood loss (WMD, -45.8 ml; 95% CI, [-134.5, 42.90]; P = 0.31), nor the incidence of surgical complications (odds ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, [0.68, 2.05]; P = 0.54). But there was a longer duration of hospital stay in LigaSure group (WMD, 1.41 days; 95% CI, [0.14, 2.68]; P = 0.03). Conclusions: All available randomized evidence has been summarized. LigaSure does not confer significant advantage over conventional surgery for curative gastric cancer resection. The usefulness of the device may be limited in gastrectomy. But, more trials are needed for further assessment of the LigaSure system for gastric cancer.