A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Issue 48 (December 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Wang, Yi; Zhao, Xudong; Song, Yanjing; Cai, Aizhen; Xi, Hongqing; Chen, Lin
• Other Names: Huang. Ting-Shuo section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 96:Issue 48(2017)
• Publication Date: 2017-12
• Subjects: gastric cancer -- laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy -- meta-analysis -- robot-assisted gastrectomy; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008797
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) has been used for gastric cancer since 2002. This meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate whether RAG is safer and more effective than conventional laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy (LAG) for gastric cancer. Methods: We performed a manual search for these 2 types of operations (RAG and LAG) in the PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases up to April 30, 2016. Twelve nonrandomized controlled trials that reported on RAG and LAG for gastric cancer were included. Outcomes evaluated included operation time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, blood loss, length of the resection margin, complications, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: A total of 3744 patients in 12 studies were included (1134 patients in the RAG group and 2610 patients in the LAG group). The operation time was significantly shorter in the LAG group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 42.0 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 28.11–55.89) minutes; P < .00001], while the loss of blood volume was lower in the RAG group ( P = .01). The number of retrieved lymph nodes, duration of postoperative stay, length of the proximal resection margin, length of the distal resection margin, and postoperative complications were similar between groups. Conclusion: We conclude that RAG is a safe and appropriate treatment for gastric cancer patients in comparison to LAG. Nevertheless, RAG is not superior to LAG. Future research on RAG should focus on comparing the differences in retrieved lymph nodes in different tiers, evaluating the postoperative recovery and reducing the cost of the treatment. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text