Yuan Deng1, Yan Zhang2, Tian-Kang Guo3. 1. Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, China. 2. Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China. 3. Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China. Electronic address: gt7890@sina.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to answer the superiority of comparing laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in the treatment early gastric cancer (EGC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive search up to May 31, 2014 was conducted on PubMed, Web of science, and the Cochrane Library. All eligible studies comparing LADG versus ODG were included. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were performed using RevMan 5.2 software. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) totaling 390 patients (195 LADG and 195 ODG) were analyzed. Compared to ODG, LADG showed longer operative time (WMD = 79.60; 95%CI = 59.86 to 99.35; P < 0.00001), but was associated with less blood loss (WMD = -108.11; 95%CI = -145.97 to -70.26; P < 0.00001), fewer administered analgesics (WMD = -1.70; 95%CI = -2.19 to -1.22; P < 0.00001), fewer number of harvested lymph node (WMD = -2.77; 95%CI = -4.38 to -1.16; P = 0.0007), lower incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.26; 95%CI = 0.13 to 0.54; P = 0.0003), shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -1.0; 95% CI = -1.83 to -0.16; P = 0.02) and earlier passage of flatus (WMD = -0.62; 95% CI = -0.96 to -0.27; P = 0.0005). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that LADG significantly reduced blood loss, decreased the frequency of analgesic administration, faster recovery, a shorter hospital stay and fewer postoperative complications compared with ODG, though at the price of longer operative times and the number of harvested lymph nodes lesser as compared to ODG.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to answer the superiority of comparing laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with open distal gastrectomy (ODG) in the treatment early gastric cancer (EGC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comprehensive search up to May 31, 2014 was conducted on PubMed, Web of science, and the Cochrane Library. All eligible studies comparing LADG versus ODG were included. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were performed using RevMan 5.2 software. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) totaling 390 patients (195 LADG and 195 ODG) were analyzed. Compared to ODG, LADG showed longer operative time (WMD = 79.60; 95%CI = 59.86 to 99.35; P < 0.00001), but was associated with less blood loss (WMD = -108.11; 95%CI = -145.97 to -70.26; P < 0.00001), fewer administered analgesics (WMD = -1.70; 95%CI = -2.19 to -1.22; P < 0.00001), fewer number of harvested lymph node (WMD = -2.77; 95%CI = -4.38 to -1.16; P = 0.0007), lower incidence of postoperative complications (OR = 0.26; 95%CI = 0.13 to 0.54; P = 0.0003), shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -1.0; 95% CI = -1.83 to -0.16; P = 0.02) and earlier passage of flatus (WMD = -0.62; 95% CI = -0.96 to -0.27; P = 0.0005). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that LADG significantly reduced blood loss, decreased the frequency of analgesic administration, faster recovery, a shorter hospital stay and fewer postoperative complications compared with ODG, though at the price of longer operative times and the number of harvested lymph nodes lesser as compared to ODG.
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