Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 7/2018

01-07-2018 | Original Article

A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Oncological, Cost, and Surgical Stress Analysis

Authors: Jun Lu, Hua-Long Zheng, Ping Li, Jian-Wei Xie, Jia-Bin Wang, Jian-Xian Lin, Qi-Yue Chen, Long-Long Cao, Mi Lin, Ru-Hong Tu, Ze-Ning Huang, Chang-Ming Huang, Chao-Hui Zheng

Published in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery | Issue 7/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) has been rapidly adopted for gastric cancer (GC) treatment. However, whether RAG provides any significant outcome/cost advantages over laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) for the experienced laparoscopist remains unclear.

Methods

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database identified 768 consecutive patients who underwent either RAG (n = 103) or LAG (n = 667) for GC between July 2016 and June 2017 at a large center. A 1:3 matched propensity score analysis was performed. The short-term outcomes and hospital costs between the two groups were compared.

Results

A well-balanced cohort of 404 patients was analyzed (RAG:LAG = 1:3 match). The mean operation times were 226.6 ± 36.2 min for the RAG group and 181.8 ± 49.8 min for the LAG group (p < 0.001). The total numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were similar in the RAG and LAG groups (means 38 and 40, respectively, p = 0.115). The overall and major complication rates (RAG, 13.9% vs. LAG, 12.5%, p = 0.732 and RAG, 3.0% vs. LAG, 1.3%, p = 0.373, respectively) were similar. RAG was much more costly than LAG (1.3 times, p < 0.001) mainly due to the amortization and consumables of the robotic system. According to cumulative sum (CUSUM), the learning phases were divided as follows: phase 1 (cases 1–21), phase 2 (cases 22–63), and phase 3 (cases 64–101), in the robotic group. The surgical stress (SS) was higher in the robotic group compared with the laparoscopic group in phase 1 (p < 0.05). However, the SS did not differ significantly between the two groups in phase 3.

Conclusions

RAG is a feasible and safe surgical procedure for GC, especially in the post-learning curve period. However, further studies are warranted to evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes and to elucidate whether RAG is cost-effective when compared to LAG.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M, Sugimachi K. Laparoscopy-Assisted Billroth I Gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1994; 2: 146–8. Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M, Sugimachi K. Laparoscopy-Assisted Billroth I Gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1994; 2: 146–8.
2.
go back to reference Song J, Oh SJ, Kang WH, Hyung WJ, Choi SH, Noh SH. Robot-Assisted Gastrectomy with Lymph Node Dissection for Gastric Cancer: Lessons Learned From an Initial 100 Consecutive Procedures. Ann Surg. 2009; 6: 927–32.CrossRef Song J, Oh SJ, Kang WH, Hyung WJ, Choi SH, Noh SH. Robot-Assisted Gastrectomy with Lymph Node Dissection for Gastric Cancer: Lessons Learned From an Initial 100 Consecutive Procedures. Ann Surg. 2009; 6: 927–32.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference 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; 2: 331–7.CrossRef 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; 2: 331–7.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Park SS, Kim MC, Park MS, Hyung WJ. Rapid Adaptation of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer by Experienced Laparoscopic Surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2012; 1: 60–7.CrossRef Park SS, Kim MC, Park MS, Hyung WJ. Rapid Adaptation of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer by Experienced Laparoscopic Surgeons. Surg Endosc. 2012; 1: 60–7.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hashizume M, Sugimachi K. Robot-Assisted Gastric Surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 2003; 6: 1429–44.CrossRef Hashizume M, Sugimachi K. Robot-Assisted Gastric Surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 2003; 6: 1429–44.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Song J, Kang WH, Oh SJ, Hyung WJ, Choi SH, Noh SH. Role of Robotic Gastrectomy Using Da Vinci System Compared with Laparoscopic Gastrectomy: Initial Experience of 20 Consecutive Cases. Surg Endosc. 2009; 6: 1204–11.CrossRef Song J, Kang WH, Oh SJ, Hyung WJ, Choi SH, Noh SH. Role of Robotic Gastrectomy Using Da Vinci System Compared with Laparoscopic Gastrectomy: Initial Experience of 20 Consecutive Cases. Surg Endosc. 2009; 6: 1204–11.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Kim MC, Heo GU, Jung GJ. Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Surgical Techniques and Clinical Merits. Surg Endosc. 2010; 3: 610–5.CrossRef Kim MC, Heo GU, Jung GJ. Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Surgical Techniques and Clinical Merits. Surg Endosc. 2010; 3: 610–5.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bellochi R et al. Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Total and Partial Gastric Resection with D2 Lymph Node Dissection for Adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2008; 12: 2753–60.CrossRef Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bellochi R et al. Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Total and Partial Gastric Resection with D2 Lymph Node Dissection for Adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc. 2008; 12: 2753–60.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Anderson C, Ellenhorn J, Hellan M, Pigazzi A. Pilot Series of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Subtotal Gastrectomy with Extended Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer. Surg Endosc. 2007; 9: 1662–6.CrossRef Anderson C, Ellenhorn J, Hellan M, Pigazzi A. Pilot Series of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Subtotal Gastrectomy with Extended Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer. Surg Endosc. 2007; 9: 1662–6.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference D'Annibale A, Pende V, Pernazza G et al. Full Robotic Gastrectomy with Extended (D2) Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer: Surgical Technique and Preliminary Results. J Surg Res. 2011; 2: e113–20.CrossRef D'Annibale A, Pende V, Pernazza G et al. Full Robotic Gastrectomy with Extended (D2) Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer: Surgical Technique and Preliminary Results. J Surg Res. 2011; 2: e113–20.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Lee HH, Hur H, Jung H, Jeon HM, Park CH, Song KY. Robot-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Initial Experience. Am J Surg. 2011; 6: 841–5.CrossRef Lee HH, Hur H, Jung H, Jeon HM, Park CH, Song KY. Robot-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Initial Experience. Am J Surg. 2011; 6: 841–5.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Isogaki J, Haruta S, Man-I M et al. Robot-Assisted Surgery for Gastric Cancer: Experience at Our Institute. Pathobiology. 2011; 6: 328–33.CrossRef Isogaki J, Haruta S, Man-I M et al. Robot-Assisted Surgery for Gastric Cancer: Experience at Our Institute. Pathobiology. 2011; 6: 328–33.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK et al. Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016; 1: 103–9.CrossRef Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK et al. Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016; 1: 103–9.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Wright JD, Burke WM, Wilde ET et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 8: 783–91.CrossRef Wright JD, Burke WM, Wilde ET et al. Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 8: 783–91.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Porter ME. What is Value in Health Care? N Engl J Med. 2010; 26: 2477–81.CrossRef Porter ME. What is Value in Health Care? N Engl J Med. 2010; 26: 2477–81.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Breitenstein S, Nocito A, Puhan M, Held U, Weber M, Clavien PA. Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Outcome and Cost Analyses of a Case-Matched Control Study. Ann Surg. 2008; 6: 987–93.CrossRef Breitenstein S, Nocito A, Puhan M, Held U, Weber M, Clavien PA. Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Outcome and Cost Analyses of a Case-Matched Control Study. Ann Surg. 2008; 6: 987–93.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Tabuchi T, Shimazaki J, Satani T, Nakachi T, Watanabe Y, Tabuchi T. The Perioperative Granulocyte/Lymphocyte Ratio is a Clinically Relevant Marker of Surgical Stress in Patients with Colorectal Cancer. Cytokine. 2011; 2: 243–8.CrossRef Tabuchi T, Shimazaki J, Satani T, Nakachi T, Watanabe Y, Tabuchi T. The Perioperative Granulocyte/Lymphocyte Ratio is a Clinically Relevant Marker of Surgical Stress in Patients with Colorectal Cancer. Cytokine. 2011; 2: 243–8.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Lu J, Liu H, Cao LL et al. The Granulocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Marker of Surgical Stress and a Predictor of Postoperative Infectious Complications After Gastric Cancer Surgery: An Analysis of Patients Enrolled in a Prospective Randomized Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017; 9: 2688–97.CrossRef Lu J, Liu H, Cao LL et al. The Granulocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Marker of Surgical Stress and a Predictor of Postoperative Infectious Complications After Gastric Cancer Surgery: An Analysis of Patients Enrolled in a Prospective Randomized Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017; 9: 2688–97.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2014 (Ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017; 1: 1–19. Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese Gastric Cancer Treatment Guidelines 2014 (Ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017; 1: 1–19.
20.
go back to reference Washington K. 7Th Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Stomach. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 12: 3077–9.CrossRef Washington K. 7Th Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Stomach. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 12: 3077–9.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Huang CM, Zheng CH. Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer. Berlin: Springer. 2015.CrossRef Huang CM, Zheng CH. Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer. Berlin: Springer. 2015.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference 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; 2: 205–13.CrossRef 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; 2: 205–13.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kim KM, An JY, Kim HI, Cheong JH, Hyung WJ, Noh SH. Major Early Complications Following Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic Gastrectomy. Br J Surg. 2012; 12: 1681–7.CrossRef Kim KM, An JY, Kim HI, Cheong JH, Hyung WJ, Noh SH. Major Early Complications Following Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic Gastrectomy. Br J Surg. 2012; 12: 1681–7.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Kim W, Song KY, Lee HJ, Han SU, Hyung WJ, Cho GS. The Impact of Comorbidity On Surgical Outcomes in Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Analysis of Multicenter Results. Ann Surg. 2008; 5: 793–9.CrossRef Kim W, Song KY, Lee HJ, Han SU, Hyung WJ, Cho GS. The Impact of Comorbidity On Surgical Outcomes in Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Analysis of Multicenter Results. Ann Surg. 2008; 5: 793–9.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Silva-Velazco J, Dietz DW, Stocchi L et al. Considering Value in Rectal Cancer Surgery: An Analysis of Costs and Outcomes Based on the Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approach for Proctectomy. Ann Surg. 2017; 5: 960–8.CrossRef Silva-Velazco J, Dietz DW, Stocchi L et al. Considering Value in Rectal Cancer Surgery: An Analysis of Costs and Outcomes Based on the Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approach for Proctectomy. Ann Surg. 2017; 5: 960–8.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Huang ZN, Huang CM, Zheng CH et al. Learning Curve of the Application of Huang Three-Step Maneuver in a Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Splenic Hilar Lymphadenectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 13: e3252.CrossRef Huang ZN, Huang CM, Zheng CH et al. Learning Curve of the Application of Huang Three-Step Maneuver in a Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Splenic Hilar Lymphadenectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 13: e3252.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference 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; 6: 1779–87.CrossRef 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; 6: 1779–87.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Obama K, Kim YM, Kang DR et al. Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer Compared with Laparoscopic Gastrectomy. Gastric Cancer. 2017. Obama K, Kim YM, Kang DR et al. Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer Compared with Laparoscopic Gastrectomy. Gastric Cancer. 2017.
29.
go back to reference Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kwon YJ et al. Robot Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Cancer by an Experienced Surgeon: Comparisons of Surgery, Complications, and Surgical Stress. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013; 4: 1258–65.CrossRef Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kwon YJ et al. Robot Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Cancer by an Experienced Surgeon: Comparisons of Surgery, Complications, and Surgical Stress. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013; 4: 1258–65.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Lee SI, Choi YS, Park DJ, Kim HH, Yang HK, Kim MC. Comparative Study of Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and Open Distal Gastrectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2006; 6: 874–80.CrossRef Lee SI, Choi YS, Park DJ, Kim HH, Yang HK, Kim MC. Comparative Study of Laparoscopy-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and Open Distal Gastrectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2006; 6: 874–80.CrossRef
31.
go back to reference Woo Y, Hyung WJ, Pak KH et al. Robotic Gastrectomy as an Oncologically Sound Alternative to Laparoscopic Resections for the Treatment of Early-Stage Gastric Cancers. Arch Surg. 2011; 9: 1086–92.CrossRef Woo Y, Hyung WJ, Pak KH et al. Robotic Gastrectomy as an Oncologically Sound Alternative to Laparoscopic Resections for the Treatment of Early-Stage Gastric Cancers. Arch Surg. 2011; 9: 1086–92.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Huang KH, Lan YT, Fang WL et al. Initial Experience of Robotic Gastrectomy and Comparison with Open and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012; 7: 1303–10.CrossRef Huang KH, Lan YT, Fang WL et al. Initial Experience of Robotic Gastrectomy and Comparison with Open and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012; 7: 1303–10.CrossRef
33.
go back to reference Eom BW, Yoon HM, Ryu KW et al. Comparison of Surgical Performance and Short-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery in Distal Gastric Cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012; 1: 57–63.CrossRef Eom BW, Yoon HM, Ryu KW et al. Comparison of Surgical Performance and Short-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery in Distal Gastric Cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012; 1: 57–63.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH, Jang YS, Jun SH. Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer: Case-Matched Analysis of Short-Term Outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 12: 3195–202.CrossRef Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH, Jang YS, Jun SH. Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer: Case-Matched Analysis of Short-Term Outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010; 12: 3195–202.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Nakauchi M, Suda K, Susumu S et al. Comparison of the Long-Term Outcomes of Robotic Radical Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer and Conventional Laparoscopic Approach: A Single Institutional Retrospective Cohort Study. Surg Endosc. 2016; 12: 5444–52.CrossRef Nakauchi M, Suda K, Susumu S et al. Comparison of the Long-Term Outcomes of Robotic Radical Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer and Conventional Laparoscopic Approach: A Single Institutional Retrospective Cohort Study. Surg Endosc. 2016; 12: 5444–52.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Son T, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, Noh SH, Hyung WJ. Robotic Spleen-Preserving Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Procedure. Surg Endosc. 2014; 9: 2606–15.CrossRef Son T, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, Noh SH, Hyung WJ. Robotic Spleen-Preserving Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Procedure. Surg Endosc. 2014; 9: 2606–15.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ et al. Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection Vs Open Resection of Stage II Or III Rectal Cancer On Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2015; 13: 1346–55.CrossRef Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ et al. Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection Vs Open Resection of Stage II Or III Rectal Cancer On Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2015; 13: 1346–55.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Keller DS, Senagore AJ, Lawrence JK, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP. Comparative Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Colorectal Resection. Surg Endosc. 2014; 1: 212–21.CrossRef Keller DS, Senagore AJ, Lawrence JK, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP. Comparative Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Colorectal Resection. Surg Endosc. 2014; 1: 212–21.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Park JY, Jo MJ, Nam BH et al. Surgical Stress After Robot-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and its Economic Implications. Br J Surg. 2012; 11: 1554–61.CrossRef Park JY, Jo MJ, Nam BH et al. Surgical Stress After Robot-Assisted Distal Gastrectomy and its Economic Implications. Br J Surg. 2012; 11: 1554–61.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Oncological, Cost, and Surgical Stress Analysis
Authors
Jun Lu
Hua-Long Zheng
Ping Li
Jian-Wei Xie
Jia-Bin Wang
Jian-Xian Lin
Qi-Yue Chen
Long-Long Cao
Mi Lin
Ru-Hong Tu
Ze-Ning Huang
Chang-Ming Huang
Chao-Hui Zheng
Publication date
01-07-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery / Issue 7/2018
Print ISSN: 1091-255X
Electronic ISSN: 1873-4626
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-3785-y

Other articles of this Issue 7/2018

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 7/2018 Go to the issue