Surgical outcomes and learning curve analysis of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Multidimensional analysis compared with three‑dimensional high‑definition laparoscopic gastrectomy

  • Authors:
    • Jiyang Li
    • Hongqing Xi
    • Xin Guo
    • Yunhe Gao
    • Tianyu Xie
    • Zhi Qiao
    • Lin Chen
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: July 30, 2019     https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2019.4851
  • Pages: 733-744
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

The present ambispective cohort study was performed to compare the short‑term surgical outcomes, including financial cost and surgeons' acceptance, of robotic versus three‑dimensional high‑definition (3D‑HD) laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer (GC). Between 2011 and 2017, 517 patients with GC were enrolled for treatment with either robotic gastrectomy [408 patients, including 73 treated by one of the authors (LC)] or 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy (109 patients, including 71 treated by LC). The cumulative summation method was developed to analyze the learning curves of robotic and 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by LC. In the analysis of all 517 patients, there were no significant differences in the clinicopathological characteristics between the two treatment groups, with the exception of smoking status (P<0.001). The robotic group had a shorter operative time (OT; 209 vs. 228 min, P=0.004), fewer postoperative days (PODs) to first flatus (3 vs. 4 days, P=0.025), more PODs to removal of the drainage and nasogastric tubes (12 vs. 9 days, P=0.001; 6 vs. 4 days, P=0.001, respectively), and more postoperative complications (21.3 vs. 9.2%, P=0.003). Comparison of these short‑term outcomes of robotic and 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy performed by LC (144 patients) revealed that only the number of retrieved lymph nodes (27 in the robotic group vs. 33 in the 3D‑HD group; P=0.038) and PODs to removal of the nasogastric tube (5 days in the robotic group vs. 3 days in the 3D‑HD group; P<0.001) were significantly different. The OT stabilized after around 21 robotic gastrectomy procedures and 19 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy procedures. The cost‑effectiveness analysis revealed that robotic gastrectomy had a significantly higher total cost than 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy (124,907 vs. 94,395 RMB, P<0.001). With comparable surgical outcomes, lower financial cost and higher surgeons' acceptance, 3D‑HD laparoscopic gastrectomy is highly recommended as a minimally invasive surgical method for patients with GC prior to the popularization of robotic surgery.

References

1 

Choi YY, Noh SH and Cheong JH: Evolution of gastric cancer treatment: From the golden age of surgery to an era of precision medicine. Yonsei Med J. 56:1177–1185. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

2 

Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS, Kim MC, Han SU, Kim W, Ryu SW, Lee HJ and Song KY: Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: An interim report - a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg. 251:417–420. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

Lu J, Zheng CH, Zheng HL, Li P, Xie JW, Wang JB, Lin JX, Chen QY, Cao LL, Lin M, et al: Randomized, controlled trial comparing clinical outcomes of 3D and 2D laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: An interim report. Surg Endosc. 31:2939–2945. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar

4 

Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, Settembre A, Miranda N, Amato F, Pirozzi F and Caiazzo P: Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: Preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 19:117–119. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar

5 

Hur H, Kim JY, Cho YK and Han SU: Technical feasibility of robot-sewn anastomosis in robotic surgery for gastric cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 20:693–697. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Suda K, Man-I M, Ishida Y, Kawamura Y, Satoh S and 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. 29:673–685. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar

7 

Uyama I, Kanaya S, Ishida Y, Inaba K, Suda K and Satoh S: Novel integrated robotic approach for suprapancreatic D2 nodal dissection for treating gastric cancer: Technique and initial experience. World J Surg. 36:331–337. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar

8 

Sørensen SM, Savran MM, Konge L and Bjerrum F: Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional vision in laparoscopy: A systematic review. Surg Endosc. 30:11–23. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar

9 

Kim YM, Son T, Kim HI, Noh SH and Hyung WJ: Robotic D2 lymph node dissection during distal subtotal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Toward procedural standardization. Ann Surg Oncol. 23:2409–2410. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Song J, Oh SJ, Kang WH, Hyung WJ, Choi SH and Noh SH: Robot-assisted gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: Lessons learned from an initial 100 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg. 249:927–932. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Son T, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, Noh SH and Hyung WJ: Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Comparison with conventional laparoscopic procedure. Surg Endosc. 28:2606–2615. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Lianos GD, Rausei S, Dionigi G and Boni L: Assessing safety and feasibility of minimally invasive surgical approaches for advanced gastric cancer. Future Oncol. 12:5–8. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar

13 

Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, Yingxue H, Dongzhu Z, Yongliang Z, Feng Q and Peiwu Y: Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 28:1779–1787. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Shen W, Xi H, Wei B, Cui J, Bian S, Zhang K, Wang N, Huang X and Chen L: Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes. Surg Endosc. 30:574–580. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar

15 

Nakauchi M, Suda K, Susumu S, Kadoya S, Inaba K, Ishida Y and Uyama I: Comparison of the long-term outcomes of robotic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer and conventional lapa-roscopic approach: A single institutional retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc. 30:5444–5452. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Obama K, Kim YM, Kang DR, Son T, Kim HI, Noh SH and Hyung WJ: Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Gastric Cancer. 21:285–295. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar

17 

Coratti A, Fernandes E, Lombardi A, Di Marino M, Annecchiarico M, Felicioni L and Giulianotti PC: Robot-assisted surgery for gastric carcinoma: Five years follow-up and beyond: A single western center experience and long-term oncological outcomes. Eur J Surg Oncol. 41:1106–1113. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Rozner MA: The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score and risk of perioperative infection. JAMA. 275:15441996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

19 

Borrmann R: Geschwulste des Magens und des Duodenums. Handbuch Spez Pathol Anat und Histo. Henke F and Lubarsch O: Springer Verlag; Berlin: pp. 812–1054. 1926

20 

Ajani JA, D'Amico TA, Almhanna K, Bentrem DJ, Chao J, Das P, Denlinger CS, Fanta P, Farjah F, Fuchs CS, et al: Gastric cancer, version 3.2016, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 14:1286–1312. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Dindo D, Demartines N and Clavien PA: Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 240:205–213. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

Yang SY, Roh KH, Kim YN, Cho M, Lim SH, Son T, Hyung WJ and Kim HI: Surgical Outcomes After Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 24:1770–1777. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Maguire T, Mayne CJ, Terry T and Tincello DG: Analysis of the surgical learning curve using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Neurourol Urodyn. 32:964–967. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Zhou J, Shi Y, Qian F, Tang B, Hao Y, Zhao Y and Yu P: Cumulative summation analysis of learning curve for robot-assisted gastrectomy in gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 111:760–767. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

25 

Biswas P and Kalbfleisch JD: A risk-adjusted CUSUM in continuous time based on the Cox model. Stat Med. 27:3382–3406. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Pendlimari R, Holubar SD, Dozois EJ, Larson DW, Pemberton JH and Cima RR: Technical proficiency in hand-assisted laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery: Determining how many cases are required to achieve mastery. Arch Surg. 147:317–322. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar

27 

Biau DJ, Resche-Rigon M, Godiris-Petit G, Nizard RS and Porcher R: Quality control of surgical and interventional procedures: A review of the CUSUM. Qual Saf Health Care. 16:203–207. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

28 

Son T, Hyung WJ, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, An JY, Cheong JH and Noh SH: Clinical implication of an insufficient number of examined lymph nodes after curative resection for gastric cancer. Cancer. 118:4687–4693. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

29 

Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kwon YJ, Cho SI, Jang YJ, Kim DH, Kim JH, Park SH, Mok YJ and Park SS: Robot versus lapa-roscopic gastrectomy for cancer by an experienced surgeon: Comparisons of surgery, complications, and surgical stress. Ann Surg Oncol. 20:1258–1265. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar

30 

Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, Kim YW, Lee HJ, Ryu KW, Park JM, An JY, Kim MC, Park S, et al: Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 263:103–109. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar

31 

Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP and Meyers WC: Robotic surgery: A current perspective. Ann Surg. 239:14–21. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar

32 

Kim HI, Park MS, Song KJ, Woo Y and Hyung WJ: Rapid and safe learning of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Multidimensional analysis in a comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 40:1346–1354. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar

33 

Jeong O, Ryu SY, Choi WY, Piao Z and Park YK: Risk factors and learning curve associated with postoperative morbidity of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 21:2994–3001. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

September 2019
Volume 55 Issue 3

Print ISSN: 1019-6439
Online ISSN:1791-2423

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
APA
Li, J., Xi, H., Guo, X., Gao, Y., Xie, T., Qiao, Z., & Chen, L. (2019). Surgical outcomes and learning curve analysis of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Multidimensional analysis compared with three‑dimensional high‑definition laparoscopic gastrectomy. International Journal of Oncology, 55, 733-744. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2019.4851
MLA
Li, J., Xi, H., Guo, X., Gao, Y., Xie, T., Qiao, Z., Chen, L."Surgical outcomes and learning curve analysis of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Multidimensional analysis compared with three‑dimensional high‑definition laparoscopic gastrectomy". International Journal of Oncology 55.3 (2019): 733-744.
Chicago
Li, J., Xi, H., Guo, X., Gao, Y., Xie, T., Qiao, Z., Chen, L."Surgical outcomes and learning curve analysis of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Multidimensional analysis compared with three‑dimensional high‑definition laparoscopic gastrectomy". International Journal of Oncology 55, no. 3 (2019): 733-744. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2019.4851