Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Updates in Surgery 3/2020

01-09-2020 | Laparoscopy | Review Article

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence

Authors: Nobuaki Hoshino, Katsuhiro Murakami, Koya Hida, Shigeo Hisamori, Shigeru Tsunoda, Kazutaka Obama, Yoshiharu Sakai

Published in: Updates in Surgery | Issue 3/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Many systematic reviews have been published to evaluate the clinical benefits of robotic surgery for gastric cancer. However, these reviews have investigated various outcomes and differ considerably in quality. In this overview, we summarize the findings and quality of these reviews. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses that compared robotic surgery with laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer. We summarized the results of the meta-analyses and evaluated the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool. The literature search identified 14 eligible reviews. The reviews showed that estimated blood loss was significantly less and time to resumption of oral intake was significantly shorter in patients who underwent robotic surgery than in those who underwent laparoscopic surgery. However, no significant differences in other outcomes were found between the two types of surgery. The quality of the included reviews was judged to be critically low. In conclusion, the available evidence, albeit of critically low quality, suggests that robotic surgery decreases estimated blood loss and shortens the time to resumption of oral intake in patients with gastric cancer. There is currently no high-quality evidence that robotic surgery has clinical benefits for gastric cancer patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M et al (1994) Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4:146–148PubMed Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M et al (1994) Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4:146–148PubMed
2.
go back to reference Etoh T, Shiroshita H, Shiraishi N et al (2016) Ongoing clinical studies of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Japan. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 1:31PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Etoh T, Shiroshita H, Shiraishi N et al (2016) Ongoing clinical studies of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Japan. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 1:31PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Shinohara T, Satoh S, Kanaya S et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27:286–294PubMedCrossRef Shinohara T, Satoh S, Kanaya S et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27:286–294PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K et al (2002) A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery 131:S306–311PubMedCrossRef Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K et al (2002) A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery 131:S306–311PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Best LM, Mughal M, Gurusamy KS (2016) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD01389 Best LM, Mughal M, Gurusamy KS (2016) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD01389
6.
go back to reference Obama K, Sakai Y (2016) Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Today 46:528–534PubMedCrossRef Obama K, Sakai Y (2016) Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Today 46:528–534PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
go back to reference Chen K, Pan Y, Zhang B et al (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis. BMC Surg 17:93PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Chen K, Pan Y, Zhang B et al (2017) Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis. BMC Surg 17:93PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Chuan L, Yan S, Pei-Wu Y (2015) Meta-analysis of the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24:127–134PubMedCrossRef Chuan L, Yan S, Pei-Wu Y (2015) Meta-analysis of the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 24:127–134PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Duan BS, Zhao J, Xie LF et al (2017) Robotic verse laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a pooled analysis of 11 individual studies. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 27:147–153PubMedCrossRef Duan BS, Zhao J, Xie LF et al (2017) Robotic verse laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a pooled analysis of 11 individual studies. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 27:147–153PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Guerra F, Giuliani G, Formisano G et al (2018) Pancreatic complications after conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy versus robotic radical gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28:1207–1215PubMedCrossRef Guerra F, Giuliani G, Formisano G et al (2018) Pancreatic complications after conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy versus robotic radical gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28:1207–1215PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hu LD, Li XF, Wang XY et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma: a meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17:4327–4333PubMedCrossRef Hu LD, Li XF, Wang XY et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma: a meta-analysis of efficacy and safety. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17:4327–4333PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ et al (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg 100:1566–1578PubMedCrossRef Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kim HJ et al (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic and open resections for gastric carcinoma. Br J Surg 100:1566–1578PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Liao GX, Xie GZ, Li R et al (2013) Meta-analysis of outcomes compared between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 14:4871–4875PubMedCrossRef Liao GX, Xie GZ, Li R et al (2013) Meta-analysis of outcomes compared between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 14:4871–4875PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Marano A, Young Choi Y, Hyung WJ et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy: a meta-analysis. J Gastr Cancer 13:136–148CrossRef Marano A, Young Choi Y, Hyung WJ et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy: a meta-analysis. J Gastr Cancer 13:136–148CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Pan JH, Zhou H, Zhao XX et al (2017) Long-term oncological outcomes in robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 31:4244–4251PubMedCrossRef Pan JH, Zhou H, Zhao XX et al (2017) Long-term oncological outcomes in robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 31:4244–4251PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Shen WS, Xi HQ, Chen L et al (2014) A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 28:2795–2802PubMedCrossRef Shen WS, Xi HQ, Chen L et al (2014) A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 28:2795–2802PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Wang Y, Zhao X, Song Y et al (2017) A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Medicine (Baltimore) 96:e8797CrossRef Wang Y, Zhao X, Song Y et al (2017) A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Medicine (Baltimore) 96:e8797CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of short outcomes. Surg Oncol 21:274–280PubMedCrossRef Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of short outcomes. Surg Oncol 21:274–280PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Xiong J, Nunes QM, Tan C et al (2013) Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of 2495 patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:965–976PubMedCrossRef Xiong J, Nunes QM, Tan C et al (2013) Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of 2495 patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:965–976PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Zong L, Seto Y, Aikou S et al (2014) Efficacy evaluation of subtotal and total gastrectomies in robotic surgery for gastric cancer compared with that in open and laparoscopic resections: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9:e103312PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Zong L, Seto Y, Aikou S et al (2014) Efficacy evaluation of subtotal and total gastrectomies in robotic surgery for gastric cancer compared with that in open and laparoscopic resections: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 9:e103312PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62:e1–34PubMedCrossRef Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62:e1–34PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Green S (editors) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic review of intervention 5. 1. 0. The Cochrane Collaboration Higgins JPT, Green S (editors) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic review of intervention 5. 1. 0. The Cochrane Collaboration
25.
go back to reference Uyama I, Suda K, Nakauchi M et al (2019) Clinical advantages of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional prospective single-arm study. Gastric Cancer 22:377–385PubMedCrossRef Uyama I, Suda K, Nakauchi M et al (2019) Clinical advantages of robotic gastrectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer: a multi-institutional prospective single-arm study. Gastric Cancer 22:377–385PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK et al (2016) Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 263:103–109PubMedCrossRef Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK et al (2016) Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 263:103–109PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Kumar A, Tandon S, Samavedi S et al (2016) Current status of various neurovascular bundle-sparing techniques in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg 10:187–200PubMedCrossRef Kumar A, Tandon S, Samavedi S et al (2016) Current status of various neurovascular bundle-sparing techniques in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg 10:187–200PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Shiroki R, Fukami N, Fukaya K et al (2016) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: superiority over laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol 23:122–131PubMedCrossRef Shiroki R, Fukami N, Fukaya K et al (2016) Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: superiority over laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. Int J Urol 23:122–131PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Biffi R, Luca F, Bianchi PP et al (2016) Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: current status and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 22:546–556PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Biffi R, Luca F, Bianchi PP et al (2016) Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: current status and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 22:546–556PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Hoshino N, Sakamoto T, Hida K et al (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence. Surg Today 49:556–570PubMedCrossRef Hoshino N, Sakamoto T, Hida K et al (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence. Surg Today 49:556–570PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence
Authors
Nobuaki Hoshino
Katsuhiro Murakami
Koya Hida
Shigeo Hisamori
Shigeru Tsunoda
Kazutaka Obama
Yoshiharu Sakai
Publication date
01-09-2020
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Updates in Surgery / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 2038-131X
Electronic ISSN: 2038-3312
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00793-8

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

Updates in Surgery 3/2020 Go to the issue