Published online Jun 21, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i23.3672
Revised: May 13, 2013
Accepted: May 18, 2013
Published online: June 21, 2013
AIM: To compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
METHODS: A retrospective study was performed by comparing the outcomes of 54 patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with those of 54 patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy (ODG) between October 2004 and October 2007. The patients’ demographic data (age and gender), date of surgery, extent of lymphadenectomy, and differentiation and tumor-node-metastasis stage of the tumor were examined. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, complications, pathological findings, and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LADG group than in the ODG group (259.3 ± 46.2 min vs 199.8 ± 40.85 min; P < 0.05), whereas intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were significantly lower (160.2 ± 85.9 mL vs 257.8 ± 151.0 mL; 13.0% vs 24.1%, respectively, P < 0.05). In addition, the time to first flatus, time to initiate oral intake, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the LADG group than in the ODG group (3.9 ± 1.4 d vs 4.4 ± 1.5 d; 4.6 ± 1.2 d vs 5.6 ± 2.1 d; and 9.5 ± 2.7 d vs 11.1 ± 4.1 d, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no signiﬁcant difference between the LADG group and ODG group with regard to the number of harvested lymph nodes. The median follow-up was 60 mo (range, 5-97 mo). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 94.3%, 90.2%, and 76.7%, respectively, in the LADG group and 89.5%, 84.7%, and 82.3%, respectively, in the ODG group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.0%, 91.9%, and 81.1%, respectively, in the LADG group and 91.5%, 86.9%, and 82.1%, respectively, in the ODG group. There was no signiﬁcant difference between the two groups with regard to the survival rate.
CONCLUSION: LADG is suitable and minimally invasive for treating distal gastric cancer and can achieve similar long-term results to ODG.
Core tip: We retrospectively analyzed patients treated with laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and compared the surgical and long-term outcomes of LADG and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Our analysis showed that LADG has the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, rapid recovery, and fewer complications. The effect of lymph node dissection and distance of excision margin were as good as those of open gastrectomy. Long-term follow-up showed no obvious differences compared to open surgery. LADG can achieve a radical effect similar to that of open surgery.