Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Less Severe Intra-Abdominal Infections in Robotic Surgery for Gastric Cancer Compared with Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis

  • Gastrointestinal Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The impact of robotic gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) on the incidence of postoperative complication is debatable and unclear.

Methods

This study enrolled 200 patients with GC who were surgically treated and consisted of 100 RG and 100 laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) cases using an ultrasonic scalpel. The short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. These outcomes were compared using a 1:1 propensity score (PS)-matching analysis.

Results

After PS matching, 76 cases in each group were well matched. Mean surgical time was significantly longer in the RG group than in the LG group (393 vs. 342 min, p < 0.005), whereas mean blood loss during surgery was significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group (30.1 vs. 50.1 mL, p = 0.023). The median number of surgeons who attend the main part of the surgery was significantly less in the RG group than in the LG group (2.0 vs. 3.0, p = 0.01). The rate of severe intra-abdominal infectious complication was significantly lower in the RG group than in the LG group (0% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.014). The duration from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly shorter in the RG group than in the LG group (29.6 ± 11.0 vs. 45.2 ± 27.8 days, p = 0.046).

Conclusions

RG using an ultrasonic scalpel may be a viable alternative to LG because of the improvement in the rate of postoperative intra-abdominal infectious complications after curative surgery for GC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Japanese Gastric Cancer A. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017;20(1):1-19.

  3. Kitano S, Shimoda K, Miyahara M, et al. Laparoscopic approaches in the management of patients with early gastric carcinomas. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1995;5(5):359–62.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee HJ, Hyung WJ, Yang HK, et al. Short-term outcomes of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy to open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer (KLASS-02-RCT). Ann Surg. 2019;270(6):983–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim W, Kim HH, Han SU, et al. Decreased morbidity of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy compared with open distal gastrectomy for stage I gastric cancer: short-term outcomes from a multicenter randomized controlled trial (KLASS-01). Ann Surg. 2016;263(1):28–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K, Yasuda K, Inomata M, Adachi Y. A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery. 2002;131(1 Suppl):S306–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kinoshita T, Uyama I, Terashima M, et al. Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for clinical stage II/III gastric cancer: a multicenter cohort study in Japan (LOC-A Study). Ann Surg. 2019;269(5):887–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Etoh T, Honda M, Kumamaru H, et al. Morbidity and mortality from a propensity score-matched, prospective cohort study of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: data from a nationwide web-based database. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(6):2766–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kodera Y, Yoshida K, Kumamaru H, et al. Introducing laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer in general practice: a retrospective cohort study based on a nationwide registry database in Japan. Gastric Cancer. 2019;22(1):202–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hiki N, Honda M, Etoh T, et al. Higher incidence of pancreatic fistula in laparoscopic gastrectomy. Real-world evidence from a nationwide prospective cohort study. Gastric Cancer. 2018;21(1):162–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wood DP, Schulte R, Dunn RL, et al. Short-term health outcome differences between robotic and conventional radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2007;70(5):945–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang Y, Gieschen H, Greenberger M, et al. Survival after robotic-assisted prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: An epidemiologic study. Ann Surg. 2021;274(6):e507–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB, Vandewarker JF, Cleary RK. A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(4):1576–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Krummel TM. Surgical simulation and virtual reality: the coming revolution. Ann Surg. 1998;228(5):635–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Dalsgaard T, Jensen MD, Hartwell D, Mosgaard BJ, Jorgensen A, Jensen BR. Robotic surgery is less physically demanding than laparoscopic surgery: Paired cross sectional study. Ann Surg. 2020;271(1):106–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shibasaki S, Suda K, Obama K, Yoshida M, Uyama I. Should robotic gastrectomy become a standard surgical treatment option for gastric cancer? Surg Today. 2020;50(9):955–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ma J, Li X, Zhao S, Zhang R, Yang D. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2020;18(1):306.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Webber C, Gospodarowicz M, Sobin LH, et al. Improving the TNM classification: findings from a 10-year continuous literature review. Int J Cancer. 2014;135(2):371–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Hyung WJ, Woo Y, Noh SH. Robotic surgery for gastric cancer: a technical review. J Robot Surg. 2011;5(4):241–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Suda K, Man IM, Ishida Y, Kawamura Y, Satoh S, Uyama I. Potential advantages of robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in comparison with conventional laparoscopic approach: a single institutional retrospective comparative cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(3):673–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Uyama I, Suda K, Nakauchi M, et al. Clinical advantages of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional prospective single-arm study. Gastric Cancer. 2019;22(2):377–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, et al. Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016;263(1):103–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Zheng-Yan L, Yong-Liang Z, Feng Q, Yan S, Pei-Wu Y. Morbidity and short-term surgical outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2021;35(7):3572–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Uyama I, Kanaya S, Ishida Y, Inaba K, Suda K, Satoh S. Novel integrated robotic approach for suprapancreatic D2 nodal dissection for treating gastric cancer: technique and initial experience. World J Surg. 2012;36(2):331–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, et al. Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(6):1779–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tian Y, Cao S, Kong Y, et al. Short- and long-term comparison of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer by the same surgical team: a propensity score matching analysis. Surg Endosc. 2022;36(1):185–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hikage M, Fujiya K, Kamiya S, et al. Robotic gastrectomy compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer patients: A propensity score-matched analysis. World J Surg. 2021;45(5):1483–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Li ZY, Zhou YB, Li TY, et al. Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A multicenter cohort study of 5402 patients in China. Ann Surg. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000005046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yang C, Shi Y, Xie S, et al. Short-term outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy for advanced gastric Cancer: a propensity score matching study. BMC Cancer. 2020;20(1):669.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Kong Y, Cao S, Liu X, et al. Short-term clinical outcomes after laparoscopic and robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A propensity score matching analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2020;24(3):531–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Suda K, Yamamoto H, Nishigori T, et al. Safe implementation of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer under the requirements for universal health insurance coverage: a retrospective cohort study using a nationwide registry database in Japan. Gastric Cancer. 2021;12:1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ojima T, Nakamura M, Hayata K, et al. Short-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2021;156(10):954–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lu J, Zheng CH, Xu BB, et al. Assessment of robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2021;273(5):858–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang WJ, Li HT, Yu JP, et al. Severity and incidence of complications assessed by the Clavien-Dindo classification following robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective and propensity score-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(10):3341–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yang SY, Roh KH, Kim YN, et al. Surgical outcomes after open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(7):1770–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Park SS, Kim MC, Park MS, Hyung WJ. Rapid adaptation of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(1):60–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Yi B, Jiang J, Zhu S, Li J. The impact of robotic technology on the learning curve for robot-assisted gastrectomy in the initial clinical application stage. Surg Endosc. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08743-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Okabe H, Obama K, Tsunoda S, et al. Feasibility of robotic radical gastrectomy using a monopolar device for gastric cancer. Surg Today. 2019;49(10):820–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hikage M, Tokunaga M, Makuuchi R, et al. Impact of an ultrasonically activated device in robot-assisted distal gastrectomy. Innovations (Phila). 2017;12(6):453–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Inoue K, Nakane Y, Michiura T, et al. Ultrasonic scalpel for gastric cancer surgery: a prospective randomized study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(10):1840–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Nishi M, Shimada M, Yoshikawa K, et al. Advantages of the left-handed ultrasonic shears technique for robotic gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2021;31(4):497–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Mizuno Y, Narimatsu H, Kodama Y, Matsumura T, Kami M. Mid-career changes in the occupation or specialty among general surgeons, from youth to middle age, have accelerated the shortage of general surgeons in Japan. Surg Today. 2014;44(4):601–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sasako M, Sakuramoto S, Katai H, et al. Five-year outcomes of a randomized phase III trial comparing adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 versus surgery alone in stage II or III gastric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(33):4387–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have no financial or other interests with regard to the submitted manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital, Osaka, Japan

    Naoshi Kubo M.D., Ph.D., Katsunobu Sakurai M.D., Ph.D., Yutaka Tamamori M.D., Ph.D., Yasuyuki Fukui M.D., Kenji Kuroda M.D., Ph.D., Naoki Aomatsu M.D., Ph.D., Takafumi Nishii M.D., Ph.D., Akiko Tachimori M.D., Ph.D. & Kiyoshi Maeda M.D., Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Naoshi Kubo M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katsunobu Sakurai M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yutaka Tamamori M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yasuyuki Fukui M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kenji Kuroda M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Naoki Aomatsu M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Takafumi Nishii M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Akiko Tachimori M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Kiyoshi Maeda M.D., Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Naoshi Kubo M.D., Ph.D..

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

The authors have no financial or other interests with regard to the submitted manuscript.

Ethical Statement

This was a retrospective study approved by the review board of Osaka City General Hospital.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kubo, N., Sakurai, K., Tamamori, Y. et al. Less Severe Intra-Abdominal Infections in Robotic Surgery for Gastric Cancer Compared with Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 29, 3922–3933 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11410-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11410-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation