Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 31, Issue 10, pp 4002–4009 | Cite as

Safety and feasibility of reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a phase I/II clinical trial

  • Seungho Lee
  • Jin Kyong Kim
  • Youn Nam Kim
  • Dong-Su Jang
  • Yoo Min Kim
  • Taeil Son
  • Woo Jin Hyung
  • Hyoung-Il KimEmail author
Article

Abstract

Introduction

Theoretically, reducing the number of ports required in minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer would further minimize trauma associated therewith. Advances in single-site surgery have afforded surgeons the ability to perform reduced-port distal gastrectomy via a robotic approach using the Single-Site™ system, eliminating restrictions on the movement of surgical instruments.

Methods

This phase I/II study was designed as a single-arm prospective trial of reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy (RRDG) by a single surgeon (NCT02347956). From January to October 2015, 40 individuals scheduled to undergo robotic surgery for early gastric cancer were asked to participate in the trial. Nineteen were enrolled and underwent RRDG. The primary endpoints were 30-day morbidity and mortality.

Results

No intraoperative event requiring conversion to laparoscopic or open surgery occurred, and no major complication was observed following RRDG (0.0% [80% CI (0.0–11.4%)]). Medians of operation time, blood loss, the number of retrieved lymph nodes, days until gas passing, and hospital stay were 190 min, 20 mL, 48, 3, and 5 days, respectively.

Conclusions

Deemed safe and feasible through the present trial, RRDG could be a valid alternative to conventional robot distal gastrectomy for managing early gastric cancer. Our reduced-port robotic surgery using the Single-Site system and a third robotic arm could potentially be applicable as a highly advanced, minimally invasive surgery for other solid organ diseases.

Keywords

Early Gastric Cancer Visual Analogue Scale Score Retrieve Lymph Node Intuitive Surgical Needle Driver 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Abbreviations

RRDG

Reduced-port robotic distal gastrectomy

CI

Confidence interval

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning (NRF-2013R1A1A1007706). The authors would like to thank Anthony Thomas Milliken, ELS (Editing Synthase, Seoul, Korea) for his help with the editing of this manuscript and thank Soyoung Kim, Kyoung Hee Lee, and other nursing staff members for their professional help and enthusiasm.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure

Mrs. Youn Nam Kim, Mr. Dong-Su Jang, Drs. Seungho Lee, Jin Kyong Kim, Yoo Min Kim, Taeil Son, Woo Jin Hyung, and Hyoung-Il Kim have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Deng Y, Zhang Y, Guo TK (2015) Laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: a meta-analysis based on seven randomized controlled trials. Surg Oncol 24(2):71–77. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2015.02.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zeng YK, Yang ZL, Peng JS, Lin HS, Cai L (2012) Laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: evidence from randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials. Ann Surg 256(1):39–52. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182583e2e CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, Hyung WJ, Kim W, Lee HJ, Ryu SW, Cho GS, Song KY, Ryu SY (2014) Long-term results of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large-scale case-control and case-matched Korean multicenter study. J Clin Oncol 32(7):627–633. doi: 10.1200/jco.2013.48.8551 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amin AT, Gabr A, Abbas H (2015) Laparoscopy assisted distal gastrectomy for T1 to T2 stage gastric cancer: a pilot study of three ports technique. Updates Surg 67(1):69–74. doi: 10.1007/s13304-015-0279-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kashiwagi H, Kumagai K, Monma E, Nozue M (2015) Dual-port distal gastrectomy for the early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 29(6):1321–1326. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3827-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim SM, Lee JH, Lee SH, Ha MH, Seo JE, Kim JE, Choi MG, Sohn TS, Bae JM, Kim S (2015) Techniques of reduced PRT laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (duet LADG). Ann Surg Oncol 22(3):793. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4087-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kunisaki C, Ono HA, Oshima T, Makino H, Akiyama H, Endo I (2012) Relevance of reduced-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a pilot study. Dig Surg 29(3):261–268. doi: 10.1159/000341677 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morelli L, Guadagni S, Di Franco G, Palmeri M, Di Candio G, Mosca F (2015) Da Vinci single site(c) surgical platform in clinical practice: a systematic review. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1713 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Angus AA, Sahi SL, McIntosh BB (2014) Learning curve and early clinical outcomes for a robotic surgery novice performing robotic single site cholecystectomy. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg 10 (2):203–207. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1540 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bae SU, Jeong WK, Bae OS, Baek SK (2015) Reduced-port robotic anterior resection for left-sided colon cancer using the Da Vinci single-site platform. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. doi: 10.1002/rcs.1677 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sendag F, Akdemir A, Zeybek B, Ozdemir A, Gunusen I, Oztekin MK (2014) Single-site robotic total hysterectomy: standardization of technique and surgical outcomes. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 21(4):689–694. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2014.02.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Song J, Oh SJ, Kang WH, Hyung WJ, Choi SH, Noh SH (2009) Robot-assisted gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: lessons learned from an initial 100 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 249(6):927–932. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000351688.64999.73 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibanes E, Pekolj J, Slankamenac K, Bassi C, Graf R, Vonlanthen R, Padbury R, Cameron JL, Makuuchi M (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250(2):187–196. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213 pii]CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Park JY, Jo MJ, Nam BH, Kim Y, Eom BW, Yoon HM, Ryu KW, Kim YW, Lee JH (2012) Surgical stress after robot-assisted distal gastrectomy and its economic implications. Br J Surg 99(11):1554–1561. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8887 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tokunaga M, Kondo J, Tanizawa Y, Bando E, Kawamura T, Terashima M (2012) Postoperative intra-abdominal complications assessed by the Clavien-Dindo classification following open and laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. J Gastrointest Surg 16(10):1854–1859. doi: 10.1007/s11605-012-1981-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim SM, Ha MH, Seo JE, Kim JE, Choi MG, Sohn TS, Bae JM, Kim S, Lee JH (2015) Comparison of reduced port totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (duet TLDG) and conventional laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 22(8):2567–2572. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4333-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park S, Bergs RA, Eberhart R, Baker L, Fernandez R, Cadeddu JA (2007) Trocar-less instrumentation for laparoscopy: magnetic positioning of intra-abdominal camera and retractor. Ann Surg 245(3):379–384. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000232518.01447.c7 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marcovici I (2001) Significant abdominal wall hematoma from an umbilical port insertion. JSLS 5(3):293–295PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Koo EJ, Youn SH, Baek YH, Roh YH, Choi HJ, Kim YH, Jung GJ (2012) Review of 100 cases of single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Korean Surg Soc 82(3):179–184. doi: 10.4174/jkss.2012.82.3.179 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ahn SH, Son SY, Jung do H, Park do J, Kim HH (2014) Pure single-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: comparative study with multi-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. J Am Coll Surg 219(5):933–943. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.07.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Poon JT, Cheung CW, Fan JK, Lo OS, Law WL (2012) Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic colectomy for colonic neoplasm: a randomized, controlled trial. Surg Endosc 26(10):2729–2734. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2262-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pietrabissa A, Sbrana F, Morelli L, Badessi F, Pugliese L, Vinci A, Klersy C, Spinoglio G (2012) Overcoming the challenges of single-incision cholecystectomy with robotic single-site technology. Arch Surg 147 (8):709–714. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2012.508 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryYonsei University College of Medicine, Yonsei University Health SystemSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of BiostatisticsYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of SculptureHongik UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  4. 4.Department of Surgery, CHA Bundang Medical CenterCHA University School of MedicineSeongnamSouth Korea
  5. 5.Minimally Invasive Surgery CenterYonsei University Health SystemSeoulSouth Korea
  6. 6.Open NBI Convergence Technology Research Laboratory, Severance HospitalYonsei University Health SystemSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations