Yunhe Gao1,2, Hongqing Xi1,2, Zhi Qiao1, Jiyang Li1,2, Kecheng Zhang1,2, Tianyu Xie1, Weisong Shen3, Jianxin Cui1, Bo Wei4,5, Lin Chen6,7. 1. Department of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing, 100853, People's Republic of China. 2. General Surgery Institute, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing, 100853, People's Republic of China. 3. Nanjing General Hospital of Nanjing Military Command, Nanjing, 210002, People's Republic of China. 4. Department of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing, 100853, People's Republic of China. weibo@vip.163.com. 5. General Surgery Institute, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing, 100853, People's Republic of China. weibo@vip.163.com. 6. Department of General Surgery, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing, 100853, People's Republic of China. chenlinbj@sina.com. 7. General Surgery Institute, Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Fuxing Road 28, Beijing, 100853, People's Republic of China. chenlinbj@sina.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence has demonstrated that either laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) or robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) could be adopted as standard treatment for early gastric cancer. However, the long-term survival and recurrence rate after LAG or RAG for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has seldom been reported. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data from 339 patients who underwent LAG and 163 patients who underwent RAG from a prospectively established database in the Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital. We compared the short- and long-term oncological outcomes of the RAG group versus the LAG group in the entire cohort, and in a propensity score-matched cohort. RESULTS: Before propensity score matching (PSM), the two groups revealed comparable 3-year overall survival rates (OS, RAG vs. LAG: 76.1 vs. 81.7%, p = 0.118), and recurrence-free survival rates (RFS, RAG vs. LAG: 73.0 vs. 67.6%, p = 0.297). Similar results were obtained in the propensity score-matched cohort; the respective overall survival rates in the propensity score-matched RAG and LAG groups were 76.1 and 79.8% (p = 0.552), and the respective RFS rates were 73.0 and 68.7% (p = 0.386). After PSM, RAG was still associated with a significantly longer mean operating time (249.46 ± 63.26 vs. 232.17 ± 65.39 min, p = 0.008) and higher total costs (133.38 ± 41.62 vs. 95.34 ± 29.39 103 RMB, p < 0.001) than LAG; the two groups did not significantly differ in other surgical and oncological characteristics. CONCLUSION: Although there were some differences in the outcomes of RAG versus LAG in AGC patients, both RAG and LAG were similar in short-term recovery and long-term oncological outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence has demonstrated that either laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) or robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) could be adopted as standard treatment for early gastric cancer. However, the long-term survival and recurrence rate after LAG or RAG for locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) has seldom been reported. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data from 339 patients who underwent LAG and 163 patients who underwent RAG from a prospectively established database in the Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital. We compared the short- and long-term oncological outcomes of the RAG group versus the LAG group in the entire cohort, and in a propensity score-matched cohort. RESULTS: Before propensity score matching (PSM), the two groups revealed comparable 3-year overall survival rates (OS, RAG vs. LAG: 76.1 vs. 81.7%, p = 0.118), and recurrence-free survival rates (RFS, RAG vs. LAG: 73.0 vs. 67.6%, p = 0.297). Similar results were obtained in the propensity score-matched cohort; the respective overall survival rates in the propensity score-matched RAG and LAG groups were 76.1 and 79.8% (p = 0.552), and the respective RFS rates were 73.0 and 68.7% (p = 0.386). After PSM, RAG was still associated with a significantly longer mean operating time (249.46 ± 63.26 vs. 232.17 ± 65.39 min, p = 0.008) and higher total costs (133.38 ± 41.62 vs. 95.34 ± 29.39 103 RMB, p < 0.001) than LAG; the two groups did not significantly differ in other surgical and oncological characteristics. CONCLUSION: Although there were some differences in the outcomes of RAG versus LAG in AGC patients, both RAG and LAG were similar in short-term recovery and long-term oncological outcomes.
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