• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.44-50
• /
• 2013

Purpose: Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been adopted for the treatment of gastric cancer, and despite the technical difficulties, totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy has been considered less invasive than laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy. Although there have been many reports regarding the feasibility and safety of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy at large volume centers, few reports have been conducted at low-volume centers. The purpose of this study is to try to assess the feasibility and safety of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy at a low volume center through the analysis of short-term outcomes of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy compared with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy. Materials and Methods: The clinical data and short-term surgical outcomes of 35 patients who had undergone laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy between April 2007 and March 2010, and 37 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy between April 2010 and August 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Results: There was no significant difference in the demographic and clinical data. However the reconstruction method and extent of lymphadenectomy showed statistically significant differences. Operation time and estimated blood loss did not show significant differences. Surgical and medical complications did not show significant differences but postoperative courses including time-to-first oral intake and postoperative hospital stay were significantly increased. Conclusions: Our study shows that totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is technically feasible at a low volume center. Therefore, totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy can be considered as one of the surgical treatment for early gastric cancer. However the possibility that totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy may have less benefit should also be considered.

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.14 no.8
• /
• pp.4871-4875
• /
• 2013

This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate and compare the outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) for treating gastric cancer. A systematic literature search was carried out using the PubMed database, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Library database to obtain comparative studies assessing the safety and efficiency between RG and LG in May, 2013. Data of interest were analyzed by using of Review Manager version 5.2 software (Cochrane Collaboration). A fixed effects model or random effects model was applied according to heterogeneity. Seven papers reporting results that compared robotic gastrectomy with laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer were selected for this meta-analysis. Our metaanalysis included 2,235 patients with gastric cancer, of which 1,473 had undergone laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 762 had received robotic gastrectomy. Compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy was associated with longer operative time but less blood loss. There were no significant difference in terms of hospital stay, total postoperative complication rate, proximal margin, distal margin, numbers of harvested lymph nodes and mortality rate between robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy. Our meta-analysis showed that robotic gastrectomy is a safe technique for treating gastric cancer that compares favorably with laparoscopic gastrectomy in short term outcomes. However, the long term outcomes between the two techniques need to be further examined.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.57-68
• /
• 2024

Reduced-port gastrectomy (RPG) includes all procedures derived from various efforts to minimize surgical invasiveness, with single-incision laparoscopic gastrectomy (SILG) being the ultimate reduced-port technique. However, there are challenges related to its feasibility, oncological validity, training, and education. This review describes the current issues and challenges, as well as the future prospects of RPG for gastric cancer. Gastrectomy, which started as an open surgery, has evolved into a laparoscopic surgery. With the advancements in laparoscopic technology, SILG has been used to minimize surgical scarring. However, owing to the technical difficulties of SILG, cases involving the addition of 1 trocar or needle grasper alongside the multichannel port have also been reported. Additionally, 3-port laparoscopic gastrectomy (3PLG) using only 3 trocars is also being performed. RPG, as a concept, includes a range of approaches such as SILG, 2-port laparoscopic gastrectomy, and 3PLG. These techniques aimed to reduce the number of ports or incisions required for laparoscopic gastrectomy. Despite technical difficulties, RPGs offer numerous advantages, including minimal invasiveness, excellent cosmetic outcomes, and the potential for improved postoperative recovery, such as reduced length of hospital stay and post-operative pain. It could be considered similar to conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, and may not be oncologically inferior. Ongoing studies, such as the KLASS 12, are required to gain further insights.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.26-33
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The aims are to: (i) display the multidimensional learning curve of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, and (ii) verify the feasibility of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy after learning curve completion by comparing it with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy. Materials and Methods: From January 2005 to June 2012, 247 patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (n=136) and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (n=111) for early gastric cancer were enrolled. Their clinicopathological characteristics and early surgical outcomes were analyzed. Analysis of the totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy learning curve was conducted using the moving average method and the cumulative sum method on 180 patients who underwent totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. Results: Our study indicated that experience with 40 and 20 totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy cases, is required in order to achieve optimum proficiency by two surgeons. There were no remarkable differences in the clinicopathological characteristics between laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy groups. The two groups were comparable in terms of open conversion, combined resection, morbidities, reoperation rate, hospital stay and time to first flatus (P>0.05). However, totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy had a significantly shorter mean operation time than laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (P<0.01). We also found that intra-abdominal abscess and overall complication rates were significantly higher before the learning curve than after the learning curve (P<0.05). Conclusions: Experience with 20~40 cases of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is required to complete the learning curve. The use of totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy after learning curve completion is a feasible and timesaving method compared to laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.136-148
• /
• 2013

Purpose: To define the role of robotic gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer, the present systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search up to July 2012 was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. All eligible studies comparing robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy were included. Results: Included in our meta-analysis were seven studies of 1,967 patients that compared robotic (n=404) with open (n=718) or laparoscopic (n=845) gastrectomy. In the complete analysis, a shorter hospital stay was noted with robotic gastrectomy than with open gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: -2.92, 95% confidence interval: -4.94 to -0.89, P=0.005). Additionally, there was a significant reduction in intraoperative blood loss with robotic gastrectomy compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: -35.53, 95% confidence interval: -66.98 to -4.09, P=0.03). These advantages were at the price of a significantly prolonged operative time for both robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: 63.70, 95% confidence interval: 44.22 to 83.17, P<0.00001) and robotic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy (weighted mean difference: 95.83, 95% confidence interval: 54.48 to 137.18, P<0.00001). Analysis of the number of lymph nodes retrieved and overall complication rates revealed that these outcomes did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusions: Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer reduces intraoperative blood loss and the postoperative hospital length of stay compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy at a cost of a longer operating time. Robotic gastrectomy also provides an oncologically adequate lymphadenectomy. Additional high-quality prospective studies are recommended to better evaluate both short and long-term outcomes.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.133-139
• /
• 2012

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has become widely used as a minimally invasive technique for the treatment of gastric cancer. When it was first introduced, most surgeons preferred a laparoscopic-assisted approach with a minilaparotomy rather than a totally laparoscopic procedure because of the technical challenges of achieving an intracorporeal anastomosis. Recently, with improved skills and instruments, several surgeons have reported the safety and feasibility of a totally laparoscopic gastrectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. This review describes the recent technical advances in intracorporeal anastomoses using circular and linear staplers that allow for totally laparoscopic distal, total, and proximal gastrectomies. Data that demonstrate advantages in early surgical outcomes of a total laparoscopic method compared to laparoscopic-assisted operations are also discussed.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.19-25
• /
• 2013

Laparoscopic gastrectomy has been widely accepted especially in patients with early-stage gastric cancer. However, the safety and oncologic validity of laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer are still being debated. Since the late 90s', we have been engaged in developing a stable and robust methodology of laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer, and have established laparoscopic distinctive technique for suprapancreatic lymph node dissection, namely the outermost layer-oriented medial approach. In this article, We present the development history of this method, and current status and future perspectives of laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer based on our experience and a review of the literature.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.172-181
• /
• 2018

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes and investigate the feasibility of reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy using learning curve analysis in a small-volume center. Materials and Methods: We reviewed 269 patients who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for gastric carcinoma between 2012 and 2017. Among them, 159 patients underwent reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy. The cumulative sum technique was used for quantitative assessment of the learning curve. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in the baseline characteristics of patients who underwent conventional and reduced-port LDG, and the operative time did not significantly differ between the groups. However, the amount of intraoperative bleeding was significantly lower in the reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy group (56.3 vs. 48.2 mL; P<0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the first flatus time or length of hospital stay. Neither the incidence nor the severity of the complications significantly differed between the groups. The slope of the cumulative sum curve indicates the trend of learning performance. After 33 operations, the slope gently stabilized, which was regarded as the breakpoint of the learning curve. Conclusions: The surgical outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy were comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy, suggesting that transition from conventional to reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy is feasible and safe, with a relatively short learning curve, in a small-volume center.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.51-57
• /
• 2013

Purpose: Additional gastrectomy is needed after endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer when pathology confirms any possibility of lymph node metastasis or margin involvement. No studies depicted the optimal type of surgery to apply in these patients. We compared the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy with those of open gastrectomy after endoscopic resection to identify the optimal type of surgery. Materials and Methods: From 2003 to 2010, 110 consecutive patients who underwent gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy either by laparoscopic (n=74) or by open (n=36) for gastric cancer after endoscopic resection were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative and oncological outcomes were compared according to types of surgical approach. Results: Clinicopathological characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Laparoscopic group showed significantly shorter time to gas passing and soft diet and hospital day than open group while operation time and rate of postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups. All specimens had negative margins regardless of types of approach. Mean number of retrieved lymph nodes did not differ significantly between the two groups. During the median follow-up of 47 months, there were no statistical differences in recurrence rate (1.4% for laparoscopic and 5.6% for open, P=0.25) and in overall (P=0.22) and disease-free survival (P=0.19) between the two groups. Type of approach was not an independent risk factor for recurrence and survival. Conclusions: Laparoscopic gastrectomy after endoscopic resection showed comparable oncologic outcomes to open approach while maintaining benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Thus, laparoscopic gastrectomy can be a treatment of choice for patients previously treated by endoscopic resection.

• Journal of Gastric Cancer
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.75-81
• /
• 2004

Recently detection of early gastric cancer (EGC) has been increasing and the treatment strategies for gastric cancer have been changing. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between laparoscopically assisted (LADG) and hand-assisted laparoscopic gastrectomy (HALDG) and open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. This review is directed toward providing gastric surgeons with recent advances in the treatment of EGC. We investigated the English language literature for the past 12 years through computer searches which focused on : 1) Patient demographics, 2) Operation time, 3) Intra-operative blood loss, 4) Depth of invasion, 5) CBC, 6)Weight loss, 7) Analgesic requirement, 8)Time NPO, 9) Length of hospital stay, 10) Tumor stage, 11) Lymph node (LN) dissection, 12) Position of LN resected, 13) Complications. Improved operative techniques and surgical instrumentation have facilitated the development of minimally invasive gastric cancer surgery. The short-term benefits of laparoscopic gastrectomy included less surgical trauma, less pain, rapid return of gastrointestinal function, and shorter hospital stay, with no change in operative outcome. Laparoscopic gastrectomy was better accepted by the patients as a good procedure and promptly brought the patients back to their previous lifestyle and activities of daily living. But the advantages of HALDG for gastric cancer, extended lymph node dissection and intracorporeal anastomosis are feasible and easier with the presence of the internal hand. The hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALDG) method reported the best results in lymph node dissection.This method is an alternative to total laparoscopic radical gastrectomy. LADG and HALDG, when compared with conventional open gastrectomy, have several advantages. When performed by a skilled surgeon, LADG and HALDG are safe and useful techniques for patients with early-stage gastric cancer. Their appropriateness for gastric cancer surgery require further study.