Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population

Objective: In this study, it was aimed to compare short-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open surgery for gastric cancer in the Turkish population carrying both European and Asian characteristics. Material and Methods: Short-term (30-day) outcomes of the patients undergoing minimally invasive and open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenec- tomy for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2013 and December 2017 were compared. Patient demographics, history of previous abdominal surgery, comorbidities, short-term perioperative outcomes and histopathological results were evaluated between the study groups. Results: There were a total of 179 patients. Fifty (28%) patients underwent minimally invasive [laparoscopic (n= 19) and robotic (n= 31)] and 129 (72%) patients underwent open surgery. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex, body mass index and ASA scores. While operative time was significantly longer in the minimally invasive surgery group (p< 0.0001), length of hospital stay and operative morbidity were comparable between the groups. Conclusion: While both laparoscopic and robotic surgery is safe and feasible in terms of short-term outcomes in selected patients, long operating time and increased cost are the major drawbacks of the robotic technique preventing its widespread use.

Anahtar Kelime:

Mide kanseri tedavisinde minimal invazif cerrahi ile açık cerrahinin karşılaştırılması: Türk popülasyonu sonuçları

Öz:

Giriş ve Amaç: Bu çalışmada mide kanseri tedavisinde minimal invaziv cerrahinin (MİC) rolü, hem MİC hem de açık teknikte öğrenme eğrisini tamamlamış cerrahlar tarafından uygulanan radikal cerrahi olgularının sonuçları karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Ocak 2013-Aralık 2017 tarihleri arasında, iki cerrahi ekip tarafından radikal cerrahi tedavi uygulanan ardışık 199 mide adenokanseri hastası çalışmaya dahil edildi. Hastaların demografik bilgileri, geçirilmiş karın ameliyatları, komorbid faktörler, perioperatif, kısa dönem postoperatif ve histopatolojik sonuçları değerlendirildi. Postoperatif komplikasyonlar Clavien-Dindo sınıflamasına göre skoru ≥3 veya <3 olarak sınıflandırıldı. Bulgular: Toplam 179 hastanın 53 (%28)’üne MİC (Laparoskopik 19, Robotik 31), 129 (%72)’una açık radikal cerrahi uygulandı. Gruplar arasında yaş, cins, vücut kitle indeksi ve ASA skorları açısından fark saptanmadı. Ameliyat süresi MİC grubunda açık cerrahi grubuna göre istatistiksel anlamlı olarak daha uzun bulundu (p< 0,0001). Çıkarılan toplam lenf nodu sayısı, ortalama hastanede kalış süresi ve perioperatif komplikasyonlar gibi diğer sonuçlar arasında farklılık saptanmadı. Sonuç: Mide kanserinin radikal cerrahi tedavisinde geçirilmiş karın ameliyatlarından daha çok radikal mide cerrahisi ile birlikte uygulanacak işlemler MİC’nin tercihinde etkilidir. Ameliyat süresi daha uzun olmasına karşın, MİC tecrübeli ellerde standart açık cerrahinin güvenli sınırlarıyla uygulanabilir ve açık cerrahiye benzer onkolojik etkinlik sunar.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. 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. [CrossRef]
2. Herrera-Almario G, Strong VE. Minimally invasive gastric surgery. Adv Surg 2017; 51(1): 151-64. [CrossRef]
3. Lee S, Son T, Kim HI, Hyung WJ. Status and prospects of robotic gast- rectomy for gastric cancer: our experience and a review of the literatu- re. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2017; 2017: 7197652. [CrossRef]
4. Loffeld RJ. H. pylori and reflux esophagitis in Turkish patients living in the Zaanstreek region in the Netherlands. Dig Dis Sci 2003; 48(9): 1846-9. [CrossRef]
5. Bor S, Vardar R, Ormeci N, Memik F, Suleymanlar I, Oguz D, et al. Pre- valence patterns of gastric cancers in Turkey: model of a developing country with high occurrence of Helicobacter pylori. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 22(12): 2242-5. [CrossRef]
6. Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS, Kim MC, Han SU, Kim W, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report--a phase III multicenter, prospec- tive, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg 2010; 251(3): 417-20. [CrossRef]
7. Hodoglugil U, Mahley RW. Turkish population structure and genetic ancestry reveal relatedness among Eurasian populations. Ann Hum Genet 2012; 76(2): 128-41. [CrossRef]
8. The Union for International Cancer Control (UICC). TNM classificati- on of malignant tumors [updated 02.03.2021; cited]. Available from: https://www.uicc.org/resources/tnm (Accessed date: 05.05.2018). [CrossRef]
9. Degiuli M, Sasako M, Ponti A. Morbidity and mortality in the Italian Gastric Cancer Study Group randomized clinical trial of D1 versus D2 resection for gastric cancer. Br J Surg 2010; 97(5): 643-9. [CrossRef]
10. Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ, Tong Y, Park SS. Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional lapa- roscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg 2013; 100(12): 1566-78. [CrossRef]
11. Lee J, Kim YM, Woo Y, Obama K, Noh SH, Hyung WJ. Robotic distal subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer patients with high body mass index: comparison with conventional laparoscopic distal subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. Surg Endosc 2015; 29(11): 3251-60. [CrossRef]
12. Hu Y, Huang C, Sun Y, Su X, Cao H, Hu J, et al. Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gast- ric cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34(12): 1350-7. [CrossRef]
13. Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, Yingxue H, Dongzhu Z, Yongliang Z, et al. Robo- tic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 2014; 28(6): 1779-87. [CrossRef]
14. Seevaratnam R, Bocicariu A, Cardoso R, Yohanathan L, Dixon M, Law C, et al. How many lymph nodes should be assessed in patients with gastric cancer? A systematic review. Gastric Cancer 2012; 15(Suppl 1): S70-88. [CrossRef]
15. Bonenkamp JJ, Hermans J, Sasako M, van de Velde CJ, Welvaart K, Songun I, et al. Extended lymph-node dissection for gastric cancer. N Engl J Med 1999; 340(12): 908-14. [CrossRef]
16. Songun I, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM, Sasako M, van de Velde CJ. Surgi- cal treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the rando- mised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11(5): 439-49. [CrossRef]
17. Smyth EC, Verheij M, Allum W, Cunningham D, Cervantes A, Arnold D. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treat- ment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2016; 27(Suppl 5): v38-v49. [CrossRef]
18. Aytac E, Aslan F, Cicek B, Erdamar S, Gurses B, Guven K, et al. Dealing with the gray zones in the management of gastric cancer: the consen- sus statement of the Istanbul Group. Turk J Gastroenterol 2019; 30(7): 584-98. [CrossRef]
19. Son T, Hyung WJ, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, An JY, et al. Clinical imp- lication of an insufficient number of examined lymph nodes after curative resection for gastric cancer. Cancer 2012; 118(19): 4687-93. [CrossRef]
20. Vinuela EF, Gonen M, Brennan MF, Coit DG, Strong VE. Laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and high-quality nonrandomized studi- es. Ann Surg 2012; 255(3): 446-56. [CrossRef]
21. Kim W, Kim HH, Han SU, Kim MC, Hyung WJ, Ryu SW, 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. [CrossRef]
22. Son T, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, Noh SH, Hyung WJ. Robotic spleen-pre- serving total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with con- ventional laparoscopic procedure. Surg Endosc 2014; 28(9): 2606-15. [CrossRef]
23. Kostakis ID, Alexandrou A, Armeni E, Damaskos C, Kouraklis G, Dia- mantis T, et al. Comparison between minimally invasive and open gastrectomy for gastric cancer in europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Surg 2017; 106(1): 3-20. [CrossRef]
24. Guner A. Recent trends of gastric cancer treatment in Turkey. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 2: 31. [CrossRef]
25. Liakakos T, Roukos DH. Randomized evidence for laparoscopic gast- rectomy short-term quality of life improvement and challenges for improving long-term outcomes. Ann Surg 2009; 250(2): 349-50. [CrossRef]
26. Sand J, Luostarinen M, Matikainen M. Enteral or parenteral feeding after total gastrectomy: prospective randomised pilot study. Eur J Surg 1997; 163(10): 761-6. [CrossRef]
27. Ichikawa D, Kurioka H, Yamaguchi T, Koike H, Okamoto K, Otsuji E, et al. Postoperative complications following gastrectomy for gastric cancer during the last decade. Hepatogastroenterology 2004; 51(56): 613-7. [CrossRef]
28. Yang SY, Roh KH, Kim YN, Cho M, Lim SH, Son T, et al. Surgical out- comes after open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2017; 24(7): 1770-7. [CrossRef]
29. Kim MC, Heo GU, Jung GJ. Robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: sur- gical techniques and clinical merits. Surg Endosc 2010; 24(3): 610-5. [CrossRef]
30. Mamidanna R, Almoudaris AM, Bottle A, Aylin P, Faiz O, Hanna GB. National outcomes and uptake of laparoscopic gastrectomy for can- cer in England. Surg Endosc 2013; 27(9): 3348-58. [CrossRef]

APA	AGCAOGLU O, Sengun B, Tarcan A, Aytac E, Bayram O, ZENGER S, Benlice C, Ozben V, BALIK E, Baca B, Hamzaoglu I, KARAHASANOĞLU T, Bugra D (2021). Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. , 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
Chicago	AGCAOGLU ORHAN,Sengun Berke,Tarcan Ahmet,Aytac Erman,Bayram Onur,ZENGER SERKAN,Benlice Cigdem,Ozben Volkan,BALIK Emre,Baca Bilgi,Hamzaoglu Ismail,KARAHASANOĞLU Tayfun,Bugra Dursun Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. (2021): 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
MLA	AGCAOGLU ORHAN,Sengun Berke,Tarcan Ahmet,Aytac Erman,Bayram Onur,ZENGER SERKAN,Benlice Cigdem,Ozben Volkan,BALIK Emre,Baca Bilgi,Hamzaoglu Ismail,KARAHASANOĞLU Tayfun,Bugra Dursun Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. , 2021, ss.142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
AMA	AGCAOGLU O,Sengun B,Tarcan A,Aytac E,Bayram O,ZENGER S,Benlice C,Ozben V,BALIK E,Baca B,Hamzaoglu I,KARAHASANOĞLU T,Bugra D Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. . 2021; 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
Vancouver	AGCAOGLU O,Sengun B,Tarcan A,Aytac E,Bayram O,ZENGER S,Benlice C,Ozben V,BALIK E,Baca B,Hamzaoglu I,KARAHASANOĞLU T,Bugra D Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. . 2021; 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
IEEE	AGCAOGLU O,Sengun B,Tarcan A,Aytac E,Bayram O,ZENGER S,Benlice C,Ozben V,BALIK E,Baca B,Hamzaoglu I,KARAHASANOĞLU T,Bugra D "Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population." , ss.142 - 150, 2021. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
ISNAD	AGCAOGLU, ORHAN vd. "Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population". (2021), 142-150. https://doi.org/10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506

APA	AGCAOGLU O, Sengun B, Tarcan A, Aytac E, Bayram O, ZENGER S, Benlice C, Ozben V, BALIK E, Baca B, Hamzaoglu I, KARAHASANOĞLU T, Bugra D (2021). Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. Turkish Journal of Surgery, 37(2), 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
Chicago	AGCAOGLU ORHAN,Sengun Berke,Tarcan Ahmet,Aytac Erman,Bayram Onur,ZENGER SERKAN,Benlice Cigdem,Ozben Volkan,BALIK Emre,Baca Bilgi,Hamzaoglu Ismail,KARAHASANOĞLU Tayfun,Bugra Dursun Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. Turkish Journal of Surgery 37, no.2 (2021): 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
MLA	AGCAOGLU ORHAN,Sengun Berke,Tarcan Ahmet,Aytac Erman,Bayram Onur,ZENGER SERKAN,Benlice Cigdem,Ozben Volkan,BALIK Emre,Baca Bilgi,Hamzaoglu Ismail,KARAHASANOĞLU Tayfun,Bugra Dursun Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. Turkish Journal of Surgery, vol.37, no.2, 2021, ss.142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
AMA	AGCAOGLU O,Sengun B,Tarcan A,Aytac E,Bayram O,ZENGER S,Benlice C,Ozben V,BALIK E,Baca B,Hamzaoglu I,KARAHASANOĞLU T,Bugra D Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. Turkish Journal of Surgery. 2021; 37(2): 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
Vancouver	AGCAOGLU O,Sengun B,Tarcan A,Aytac E,Bayram O,ZENGER S,Benlice C,Ozben V,BALIK E,Baca B,Hamzaoglu I,KARAHASANOĞLU T,Bugra D Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population. Turkish Journal of Surgery. 2021; 37(2): 142 - 150. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
IEEE	AGCAOGLU O,Sengun B,Tarcan A,Aytac E,Bayram O,ZENGER S,Benlice C,Ozben V,BALIK E,Baca B,Hamzaoglu I,KARAHASANOĞLU T,Bugra D "Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population." Turkish Journal of Surgery, 37, ss.142 - 150, 2021. 10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506
ISNAD	AGCAOGLU, ORHAN vd. "Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population". Turkish Journal of Surgery 37/2 (2021), 142-150. https://doi.org/10.47717/turkjsurg.2021.4506