Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 May 12:2019:8738502.
doi: 10.1155/2019/8738502. eCollection 2019.

Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer: The European Point of View

Mickael Chevallay  1 , Minoa Jung  1 , Felix Berlth  2 , Chon Seung-Hun  2 , Philippe Morel  1 , Stefan Mönig  1
Affiliations
Review

Laparoscopic Surgery for Gastric Cancer: The European Point of View

Mickael Chevallay et al. J Oncol. .

Abstract

Objective: Multiple Asian studies have proved the feasibility of laparoscopic approach for surgical treatment of gastric cancer. The difference between Asian and European patients could limit their application in Europe. We reviewed the literature for European studies comparing open gastrectomy with laparoscopic approach in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Method: We searched the keywords gastric cancer and laparoscopy in MEDLINE and EMBASE. We included all studies published between 1990 and 2016 and conducted in Europe.

Result: We found 1 randomized and 13 cohort studies which compared laparoscopic with open gastrectomy. We found no mean difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested between laparoscopic and open group (mean difference: -0.49; 95% CI: -2.42; 1.44, p=0.62) and no difference of short-term or long-term mortality (short-term odds ratio: 0.74, p=0.47; long-term odds ratio: 0.65, p=0.11). We found a longer operative time in the laparoscopic group (mean difference: 35.75 minutes, p<0.01) but lesser reoperation rate than the open group (odds ratio: 1.55 p=0.01).

Conclusion: European based population studies found results comparable with their Asian counterpart. In the current state of evidence, minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is safe and can achieve the same oncological results.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study selection process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of the mean difference for lymph node resected in each study.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of the mean difference of operative time in each study.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Odds ratio for in-hospital mortality comparing open and laparoscopic approach.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ferlay J., Steliarova-Foucher E., Lortet-Tieulent J., et al. Cancer incidence and mortality patterns in Europe: estimates for 40 countries in 2012. European Journal of Cancer. 2013;49(6):1374–1403. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.12.027. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2010. Gastric Cancer. 2011;14(2):113–123. - PubMed
    1. Guillou P. J., Quirke P., Thorpe H., et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–1726. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66545-2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jayne D. G., Guillou P. J., Thorpe H., et al. Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-Year results of the UK MRC CLASICC trial group. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2007;25(21):3061–3068. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.7758. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kitano S., Iso Y., Moriyama M., et al. Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy. 1994;4:146–148. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources