Tomoyuki Matsunaga 1 , Wataru Miyauchi 1 , Yusuke Kono 1 , Yuji Shishido 1 , Kozo Miyatani 1 , Takehiko Hanaki 1 , Joji Watanabe 1 , Kyoichi Kihara 1 , Manabu Yamamoto 1 , Yoji Fukumoto 1 , Naruo Tokuyasu 1 , Shuichi Takano 1 , Teruhisa Sakamoto 1 , Soichiro Honjo 1 , Hiroaki Saito 2 , Yoshiyuki Fujiwara 1 Show Affiliations »
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes including inflammatory marker levels between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) to define the advantages of RG over LG. METHODS: We enrolled 209 patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative distal gastrectomy. We compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes including inflammatory marker levels between RG and LG to define the advantages of RG over LG. C-reactive protein (CRP) levels; the CRP-to-albumin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios; and the prognostic nutritional index were compared as systemic inflammatory markers. RESULTS: RG was associated with a longer operative time. The incidence of postoperative infectious complications of grade II or higher according to the Clavien-Dindo classification was not significantly different between the two groups. Amylase levels in drainage fluid on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group. The incidence of pancreatic fistula in the RG group (4.3%) was lower than that in the LG group (7.5%), albeit without significance. There were no significant differences in inflammatory marker levels either before or after surgery between the two groups. The 3-year overall survival rate did not significantly differ between the RG and LG groups (91.1% vs. 91.1%). Similar results were observed regarding the 3-year disease-specific survival rate (100% vs. 97.1%). CONCLUSION: RG might be feasible and safe for treating gastric cancer from both surgical and oncological perspectives. The use of robotic assistance is associated with decreased amylase levels in drainage fluid, which may reduce the risk of pancreatic fistula and prevent pancreatic injury. ©2020 Tottori University Medical Press.
BACKGROUND: We compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes including inflammatory marker levels between robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) to define the advantages of RG over LG. METHODS: We enrolled 209 patients with gastric cancer who underwent curative distal gastrectomy. We compared short- and long-term clinical outcomes including inflammatory marker levels between RG and LG to define the advantages of RG over LG. C-reactive protein (CRP) levels; the CRP-to-albumin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios; and the prognostic nutritional index were compared as systemic inflammatory markers. RESULTS: RG was associated with a longer operative time. The incidence of postoperative infectious complications of grade II or higher according to the Clavien-Dindo classification was not significantly different between the two groups. Amylase levels in drainage fluid on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group. The incidence of pancreatic fistula in the RG group (4.3%) was lower than that in the LG group (7.5%), albeit without significance. There were no significant differences in inflammatory marker levels either before or after surgery between the two groups. The 3-year overall survival rate did not significantly differ between the RG and LG groups (91.1% vs. 91.1%). Similar results were observed regarding the 3-year disease-specific survival rate (100% vs. 97.1%). CONCLUSION: RG might be feasible and safe for treating gastric cancer from both surgical and oncological perspectives. The use of robotic assistance is associated with decreased amylase levels in drainage fluid, which may reduce the risk of pancreatic fistula and prevent pancreatic injury. ©2020 Tottori University Medical Press.
Entities: Chemical
Keywords:
gastric cancer; robotic gastrectomy
Year: 2020
PMID： 32494215 PMCID： PMC7231873 DOI： 10.33160/yam.2020.05.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Yonago Acta Med ISSN： 0513-5710 Impact factor: 1.641