Literature DB >> 28742708

Postoperative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy Versus Open Gastrectomy During the Early Introduction of Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy in the Netherlands: A Population-based Cohort Study.

Hylke J F Brenkman1, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Annelijn E Slaman, Lucas Goense, Jelle P Ruurda, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen, Richard van Hillegersberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) to open gastrectomy (OG) for cancer during the introduction of MIG in the Netherlands.
BACKGROUND: Between 2011 and 2015, the use of MIG increased from 4% to 53% in the Netherlands.
METHODS: This population-based cohort study included all patients with curable gastric adenocarcinoma that underwent gastrectomy between 2011 and 2015, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. Patients with missing preoperative data, and patients in whom no lymphadenectomy or reconstruction was performed were excluded. Propensity score matching was applied to create comparable groups between patients receiving MIG or OG, using year of surgery and other potential confounders. Morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay were evaluated.
RESULTS: Of the 1697 eligible patients, 813 were discarded after propensity score matching; 442 and 442 patients who underwent MIG and OG, respectively, remained. Conversions occurred in 10% of the patients during MIG. Although the overall postoperative morbidity (37% vs 40%, P = 0.489) and mortality rates (6% vs 4%, P = 0.214) were comparable between the 2 groups, patients who underwent MIG experienced less wound complications (2% vs 5%, P = 0.006). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 8% of the patients after MIG, and in 7% after OG (P = 0.525). The median hospital stay declined over the years for both procedures (11 to 8 days, P < 0.001). Overall, hospital stay was shorter after MIG compared with OG (8 vs 10 days, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: MIG was safely introduced in the Netherlands, with overall morbidity and mortality comparable with OG, less wound complications and shorter hospitalization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28742708     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002391

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  11 in total

Review 1.  Open and minimally invasive gastrectomy in Eastern and Western patient populations: A review of the literature and reasons for differences in outcomes.

Authors:  Mason D Stillman; Sam S Yoon
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 2.885

2.  Laparoscopic Resection for Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach or Gastroesophageal Junction Improves Postoperative Outcomes: a Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

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

Review 3.  [Evidence in minimally invasive oncological gastric surgery].

Authors:  Kaja Ludwig; Christian Barz; Uwe Scharlau
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 0.955

4.  Factors influencing health-related quality of life after gastrectomy for cancer.

Authors:  Hylke J F Brenkman; Juul J W Tegels; Jelle P Ruurda; Misha D P Luyer; Ewout A Kouwenhoven; Werner A Draaisma; Donald L van der Peet; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Jan H M B Stoot; Richard van Hillegersberg
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 7.370

Review 5.  Compliance to D2 lymphadenectomy in laparoscopic gastrectomy.

Authors:  Wietse J Eshuis; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Werner A Draaisma; Suzanne S Gisbertz
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2018-06-20

6.  Population-Based Study on Risk Factors for Tumor-Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Leonie R van der Werf; Charlotte Cords; Ivo Arntz; Eric J T Belt; Ivan M Cherepanin; Peter-Paul L O Coene; Erwin van der Harst; Joos Heisterkamp; Barbara S Langenhoff; Bas Lamme; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Sjoerd M Lagarde; Bas P L Wijnhoven
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Identification of the clinically most relevant postoperative complications after gastrectomy: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Emma C Gertsen; Lucas Goense; Hylke J F Brenkman; Richard van Hillegersberg; Jelle P Ruurda
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2019-09-03       Impact factor: 7.370

8.  Correlative Analysis Between Adverse Events of Preoperative Chemotherapy and Postoperative Complications of Gastric Cancer.

Authors:  Zhouqiao Wu; Yiding Wang; Shiyang Hou; Qi Wang; Bailong Li; Xiangji Ying; Shuangxi Li; Ziyu Li; Jiafu Ji
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2021-12-02

9.  Laparoscopic versus open surgery for gastric cancer: the experience of one European centre.

Authors:  Mindaugas Kiudelis; Aistė Rikterė; Kristina Zviniene; Antanas Mickevicius; Almantas Maleckas; Audrius Ivanauskas; Zilvinas Endzinas
Journal:  Prz Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-06-04

10.  Safety and feasibility of minimally invasive surgical interventions for esophageal and gastric cancer in the acute setting: a nationwide cohort study.

Authors:  Alicia S Borggreve; B Feike Kingma; Jelle P Ruurda; Richard van Hillegersberg
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.