Jeong Ho Song1, Yoon Young Choi1, Ji Yeong An2, Dong Wook Kim3, Woo Jin Hyung1, Sung Hoon Noh4. 1. Department of Surgery, Yonsei University Health System, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 2. Department of Surgery, Yonsei University Health System, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Biostatistics Collaboration Unit, Yonsei University Health System, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 4. Department of Surgery, Yonsei University Health System, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. ; Brain Korea 21 PLUS Project for Medical Science, Yonsei University Health System, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is more complicated than laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, especially during a surgeon's initial experience with the technique. In this study, we evaluated the short-term outcomes of and learning curve for LTG during the initial cases of a single surgeon compared with those of open total gastrectomy (OTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2009 and 2013, 134 OTG and 74 LTG procedures were performed by a single surgeon who was experienced with OTG but new to performing LTG. Clinical characteristics, operative parameters, and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: Advanced gastric cancer and D2 lymph node dissection were more common in the OTG than LTG group. Although the operation time was significantly longer for LTG than for OTG (175.7±43.1 minutes vs. 217.5±63.4 minutes), LTG seems to be slightly superior or similar to OTG in terms of postoperative recovery measures. The operation time moving average of 15 cases in the LTG group decreased gradually, and the curve flattened at 54 cases. The postoperative complication rate was similar for the two groups (11.9% vs. 13.5%). No anastomotic or stump leaks occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Although LTG is technically difficult and operation time is longer for surgeons experienced in open surgery, it can be performed safely, even during a surgeon's early experience with the technique. Considering the benefits of minimally invasive surgery, LTG is recommended for early gastric cancer.
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is more complicated than laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, especially during a surgeon's initial experience with the technique. In this study, we evaluated the short-term outcomes of and learning curve for LTG during the initial cases of a single surgeon compared with those of open total gastrectomy (OTG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2009 and 2013, 134 OTG and 74 LTG procedures were performed by a single surgeon who was experienced with OTG but new to performing LTG. Clinical characteristics, operative parameters, and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: Advanced gastric cancer and D2 lymph node dissection were more common in the OTG than LTG group. Although the operation time was significantly longer for LTG than for OTG (175.7±43.1 minutes vs. 217.5±63.4 minutes), LTG seems to be slightly superior or similar to OTG in terms of postoperative recovery measures. The operation time moving average of 15 cases in the LTG group decreased gradually, and the curve flattened at 54 cases. The postoperative complication rate was similar for the two groups (11.9% vs. 13.5%). No anastomotic or stump leaks occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Although LTG is technically difficult and operation time is longer for surgeons experienced in open surgery, it can be performed safely, even during a surgeon's early experience with the technique. Considering the benefits of minimally invasive surgery, LTG is recommended for early gastric cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
Laparoscopy; Learning curve; Stomach neoplasms; Total gastrectomy
Authors: Sang Eok Lee; Keun Won Ryu; Byung Ho Nam; Jun Ho Lee; Young-Woo Kim; Jun Sik Yu; Soo Jeong Cho; Jong Yeul Lee; Chan Gyoo Kim; Il Ju Choi; Myeong Cherl Kook; Sook Ryun Park; Min Ju Kim; Jong Seok Lee Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Tae-Han Kim; Keun Won Ryu; Jun Ho Lee; Gyu-Seok Cho; Woo Jin Hyung; Chan-Young Kim; Min-Chan Kim; Seung Wan Ryu; Dong Woo Shin; Hyuk-Joon Lee Journal: Gastric Cancer Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 7.701
Authors: S D Nelen; L Heuthorst; R H A Verhoeven; F Polat; Ph M Kruyt; K Reijnders; F T J Ferenschild; J J Bonenkamp; J E Rutter; J H W de Wilt; E J Spillenaar Bilgen Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2017-08-16 Impact factor: 3.452