TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Surgical Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Distal Gastrectomy for cT1 Gastric Cancer
AU - Hikage, Makoto
AU - Tokunaga, Masanori
AU - Makuuchi, Rie
AU - Irino, Tomoyuki
AU - Tanizawa, Yutaka
AU - Bando, Etsuro
AU - Kawamura, Taiichi
AU - Terashima, Masanori
N1 - Funding Information:
Funding This research was partially supported by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund (26-A-4) and Practical Research for Innovative Cancer Control (15ck0106043h0002) from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, Société Internationale de Chirurgie.
PY - 2018/6/1
Y1 - 2018/6/1
N2 - Background: Increasing numbers of patients are treated by robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG); however, it remains unclear whether RDG is clinically comparable with conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG). This study aimed to clarify the feasibility of RDG from safety aspects. Methods: The study included 109 cT1 gastric cancer patients who underwent RDG at Shizuoka Cancer Center from January 2012 to April 2015. Short-term outcomes were compared with 160 cT1 gastric cancer patients who underwent LDG during the same period. Results: Patient characteristics were well matched. The RDG patients experienced longer operative times (323 min) than LDG patients (285 min; P < 0.001), although all other surgical outcomes were comparable between the groups. Drain amylase levels on POD 1 were significantly lower in the RDG group compared to LDG cases (median 452 U/L and 892 U/L; P < 0.001). The incidence of all complications was similar across the study patients, although intra-abdominal infectious complications tended to be lower in the RDG group than in the LDG group (2.8 and 8.1%; P = 0.112). Conclusions: RDG was comparable to LDG in terms of feasibility for cT1 gastric cancer. RDG has the potential to reduce pancreas damage and thus to decrease intra-abdominal infectious complications.
AB - Background: Increasing numbers of patients are treated by robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG); however, it remains unclear whether RDG is clinically comparable with conventional laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG). This study aimed to clarify the feasibility of RDG from safety aspects. Methods: The study included 109 cT1 gastric cancer patients who underwent RDG at Shizuoka Cancer Center from January 2012 to April 2015. Short-term outcomes were compared with 160 cT1 gastric cancer patients who underwent LDG during the same period. Results: Patient characteristics were well matched. The RDG patients experienced longer operative times (323 min) than LDG patients (285 min; P < 0.001), although all other surgical outcomes were comparable between the groups. Drain amylase levels on POD 1 were significantly lower in the RDG group compared to LDG cases (median 452 U/L and 892 U/L; P < 0.001). The incidence of all complications was similar across the study patients, although intra-abdominal infectious complications tended to be lower in the RDG group than in the LDG group (2.8 and 8.1%; P = 0.112). Conclusions: RDG was comparable to LDG in terms of feasibility for cT1 gastric cancer. RDG has the potential to reduce pancreas damage and thus to decrease intra-abdominal infectious complications.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033585091&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033585091&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00268-017-4345-4
DO - 10.1007/s00268-017-4345-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 29134310
AN - SCOPUS:85033585091
SN - 0364-2313
VL - 42
SP - 1803
EP - 1810
JO - World Journal of Surgery
JF - World Journal of Surgery
IS - 6
ER -