Wei-Song Shen1, Hong-Qing Xi, Lin Chen, Bo Wei. 1. Department of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) for gastric cancer is still a controversial surgical technique for adequate tumor resection, lymphadenectomy, and postoperative outcome. METHODS: A meta-analysis analyzed updated clinical trials that have compared RAG with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) to evaluate whether RAG is equivalent to LAG. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the analysis, comprising 1,875 patients. RAG was associated with a longer operative time (p < 0.05), lower estimated blood loss (p < 0.05), and a longer distal margin (p < 0.05). RAG can be performed safely with lower estimated blood loss and a longer distal margin than with LAG. Complications, hospital stay, proximal margin, and harvested lymph nodes for RAG and LAG were similar. CONCLUSIONS: RAG is as acceptable as LAG for obtaining safe complications and for performing radical gastrectomy.
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) for gastric cancer is still a controversial surgical technique for adequate tumor resection, lymphadenectomy, and postoperative outcome. METHODS: A meta-analysis analyzed updated clinical trials that have compared RAG with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) to evaluate whether RAG is equivalent to LAG. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the analysis, comprising 1,875 patients. RAG was associated with a longer operative time (p < 0.05), lower estimated blood loss (p < 0.05), and a longer distal margin (p < 0.05). RAG can be performed safely with lower estimated blood loss and a longer distal margin than with LAG. Complications, hospital stay, proximal margin, and harvested lymph nodes for RAG and LAG were similar. CONCLUSIONS: RAG is as acceptable as LAG for obtaining safe complications and for performing radical gastrectomy.
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: Stefano Caruso; Alberto Patriti; Franco Roviello; Lorenzo De Franco; Franco Franceschini; Andrea Coratti; Graziano Ceccarelli Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Maurizio Degiuli; Giovanni De Manzoni; Alberto Di Leo; Domenico D'Ugo; Erica Galasso; Daniele Marrelli; Roberto Petrioli; Karol Polom; Franco Roviello; Francesco Santullo; Mario Morino Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-03-14 Impact factor: 5.742