BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) compared to open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in the treatment of early gastric cancer with respect to survival, surgical outcomes, complications, and quality of life (QOL). METHODS:One hundred sixty-four patients with cT1N0M0 andcT1N1M0 distal gastric cancer were randomly assigned to either the LADG group or the ODG group. The primary end point was the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. Complications were classified using the accordion severity classification of postoperative complications scheme. QOL was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22 preoperatively and postoperatively during regular follow-up visits. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00546468). RESULTS: The median (range) follow-up period was 74.3 (24.8-90.8) months. The LADG and ODG groups showed similar survival [5-year DFS rate: 98.8 % vs. 97.6 %, respectively (P = 0.514), 5-year overall survival (OS) rate: 97.6 vs. 96.3 %, respectively (P = 0.721)] or overall complication rate (29.3 vs. 42.7 %, respectively; P = 0.073). Mild complications were significantly less frequent in the LADG group than in the ODG group (23.2 vs. 41.5 %; P = 0.012). The rates of moderate, severe, and long-term complications (i.e., 31 days to 5 years after surgery) did not differ significantly between groups. No clinically meaningful differences were detected between the two groups in long-term QOL. CONCLUSION:LADG showed similar DFS and OS compared to ODG in treating early gastric cancer. Marginal benefits in mild complications were observed with LADG. LADG did not show advantages over ODG regarding other complications and long-term QOL.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) compared to open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in the treatment of early gastric cancer with respect to survival, surgical outcomes, complications, and quality of life (QOL). METHODS: One hundred sixty-four patients with cT1N0M0 and cT1N1M0 distal gastric cancer were randomly assigned to either the LADG group or the ODG group. The primary end point was the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate. Complications were classified using the accordion severity classification of postoperative complications scheme. QOL was measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-STO22 preoperatively and postoperatively during regular follow-up visits. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00546468). RESULTS: The median (range) follow-up period was 74.3 (24.8-90.8) months. The LADG and ODG groups showed similar survival [5-year DFS rate: 98.8 % vs. 97.6 %, respectively (P = 0.514), 5-year overall survival (OS) rate: 97.6 vs. 96.3 %, respectively (P = 0.721)] or overall complication rate (29.3 vs. 42.7 %, respectively; P = 0.073). Mild complications were significantly less frequent in the LADG group than in the ODG group (23.2 vs. 41.5 %; P = 0.012). The rates of moderate, severe, and long-term complications (i.e., 31 days to 5 years after surgery) did not differ significantly between groups. No clinically meaningful differences were detected between the two groups in long-term QOL. CONCLUSION:LADG showed similar DFS and OS compared to ODG in treating early gastric cancer. Marginal benefits in mild complications were observed with LADG. LADG did not show advantages over ODG regarding other complications and long-term QOL.
Authors: Marco Braga; Matteo Frasson; Andrea Vignali; Walter Zuliani; Vittorio Civelli; Valerio Di Carlo Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: J Esteban Varela; Michael Hiyashi; Tien Nguyen; Allen Sabio; Samuel E Wilson; Ninh T Nguyen Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Mark Buunen; Ruben Veldkamp; Wim C J Hop; Esther Kuhry; Johannes Jeekel; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio Lacy; Hendrik J Bonjer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: R Pugliese; D Maggioni; F Sansonna; G C Ferrari; A Forgione; A Costanzi; C Magistro; J Pauna; S Di Lernia; D Citterio; C Brambilla Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2008-03-14 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Heidi Nelson; Daniel J Sargent; H Sam Wieand; James Fleshman; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; David Ota Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David G Jayne; Pierre J Guillou; Helen Thorpe; Philip Quirke; Joanne Copeland; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Juan C Rodríguez-Sanjuán; Marcos Gómez-Ruiz; Soledad Trugeda-Carrera; Carlos Manuel-Palazuelos; Antonio López-Useros; Manuel Gómez-Fleitas Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Young-Woo Kim; Daniel Reim; Ji Yeon Park; Bang Wool Eom; Myeong-Cherl Kook; Keun Won Ryu; Hong Man Yoon Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Andreas Andreou; Sebastian Knitter; Sascha Chopra; Christian Denecke; Moritz Schmelzle; Benjamin Struecker; Ann-Christin Heilmann; Johanna Spenke; Tobias Hofmann; Peter C Thuss-Patience; Marcus Bahra; Johann Pratschke; Matthias Biebl Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 3.452