Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 1/2021

01-01-2021 | Gastrectomy

Does three-dimensional surgery affect recurrence patterns in patients with gastric cancer after laparoscopic R0 gastrectomy? Results from a 3-year follow-up phase III trial

Authors: Jun Lu, Bin-bin Xu, Zhi-fang Zheng, Jian-wei Xie, Jia-bin Wang, Jian-xian Lin, Qi-yue Chen, Long-long Cao, Mi Lin, Ru-hong Tu, Ze-ning Huang, Chao-hui Zheng, Chang-ming Huang, Ping Li

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Numerous studies have shown that the short-term efficacy of three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic radical gastrectomy (LG) is comparable to that of two-dimensional (2D)-LG. Whether 3D-LG affects the recurrence patterns of gastric cancer (GC) patients has not been investigated.

Methods

From January 2015 to April 2016, a total of 419 patients were recruited for a phase III clinical trial (NCT02327481), which compared the short-term outcomes between the 2D and 3D groups. The long-term efficacy including recurrence patterns was compared between the 2D and 3D groups in this retrospective study. Multivariate analyses were performed to determine whether 3D-LG affects the recurrence patterns.

Results

Ultimately, 401 patients were analyzed (197 in the 2D-LG group and 204 in the 3D-LG group), and no differences were observed in the clinicopathological data between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the recurrence types, first recurrence time or recurrence-free survival (RFS) (all p > 0.05). According to the 7th American Joint Committee on Cancer tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system, both groups were stratified into pathological stages I, II, and III. The stratified analysis showed no significant differences in RFS or overall survival (OS) among patients in each subgroup (all p > 0.05). The multivariate analysis of RFS showed that tumor diameter, pTNM stage, lymphovascular invasion, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent factors (all p < 0.05). The multivariate analysis of post-recurrence survival (PRS) showed that adjuvant chemotherapy was an independent protective factor (p = 0.043).

Conclusions

3D-LG for GC did not differ significantly from 2D-LG in the effects on 3-year recurrence patterns, RFS and OS, which provides more tumor-related evidence for 3D technology. And due to the technological similarity, it may have certain reference value for robotic-assisted gastrectomy. Further multicenter, large-scale clinical trials are warranted.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M et al (1994) Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4(2):146–148PubMed
2.
Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Uyama I et al (2007) A multicenter study on oncologic outcome of laparoscopic gastrectomy for early cancer in Japan. Ann Surg 245(1):68–72PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
3.
Kawamura H, Okada K, Isizu H et al (2008) Laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer targeting as a less invasive procedure. Surg Endosc 22(1):81–85PubMedCrossRef
4.
Katai H, Mizusawa J, Katayama H et al (2016) Short-term surgical outcomes from a phase III study of laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA/IB gastric cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG0912. Gastric Cancer 20(4):699–708PubMedCrossRef
5.
Hu Y, Huang C, Sun Y et al (2016) Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic versus open D2 Distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 34(12):1350–1357PubMedCrossRef
6.
Lee JH, Han HS, Lee JH (2005) A prospective randomized study comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy in early gastric cancer: early results. Surg Endosc 19(2):168–173PubMedCrossRef
7.
Hayashi H, Ochiai T, Shimada H et al (2005) Prospective randomized study of open versus laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with extraperigastric lymph node dissection for early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 19(9):1172–1176PubMedCrossRef
8.
Storz P, Buess GF, Kunert W et al (2011) 3D HD versus 2D HD: surgical task efficiency in standardised phantom tasks. Surg Endosc 26(5):1454–1460PubMedCrossRef
9.
Chiu CJ, Lobo Prabhu K, Tan-Tam CC et al (2015) Using three-dimensional laparoscopy as a novel training tool for novice trainees compared with two-dimensional laparoscopy. Am J Surg 209(5):824–827 (e1; discussion 827)PubMedCrossRef
10.
Blavier A, Gaudissart Q, Cadiere GB et al (2007) Comparison of learning curves and skill transfer between classical and robotic laparoscopy according to the viewing conditions: implications for training. Am J Surg 194(1):115–121PubMedCrossRef
11.
Aykan S, Singhal P, Nguyen DP et al (2014) Perioperative, pathologic, and early continence outcomes comparing three-dimensional and two-dimensional display systems for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy–a retrospective, single-surgeon study. J Endourol 28(5):539–543PubMedCrossRef
12.
Ohuchida K, Kenmotsu H, Yamamoto A et al (2009) The effect of CyberDome, a novel 3-dimensional dome-shaped display system, on laparoscopic procedures. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 4(2):125–132PubMedCrossRef
13.
Agrusa A, di Buono G, Chianetta D et al (2016) Three-dimensional (3D) versus two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic adrenalectomy: a case-control study. Int J Surg 28(Suppl 1):S114–S117PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zheng CH, Lu J, Zheng HL et al (2018) Comparison of 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy with a 2D procedure for gastric cancer: a phase 3 randomized controlled trial. Surgery 163(2):300–304PubMedCrossRef
15.
Lu J, Zheng CH, Zheng HL et al (2017) Randomized, controlled trial comparing clinical outcomes of 3D and 2D laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an interim report. Surg Endosc 31(7):2939–2945PubMedCrossRef
16.
Lu J, Xu BB, Zheng ZF et al (2019) CRP/prealbumin, a novel inflammatory index for predicting recurrence after radical resection in gastric cancer patients: post hoc analysis of a randomized phase III trial. Gastric Cancer 22(3):536–545PubMedCrossRef
17.
Xu BB, Lu J, Zheng ZF et al (2019) The predictive value of the preoperative C-reactive protein-albumin ratio for early recurrence and chemotherapy benefit in patients with gastric cancer after radical gastrectomy: using randomized phase III trial data. Gastric Cancer 22(5):1016–1028PubMedCrossRef
18.
Washington K (2010) 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: stomach. Ann Surg Oncol 17(12):3077–3079PubMedCrossRef
19.
Sano T, Aiko T (2011) New Japanese classifications and treatment guidelines for gastric cancer: revision concepts and major revised points. Gastric Cancer 14(2):97–100PubMedCrossRef
20.
Lu J, Xu Y, Wu Y et al (2019) Tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells combined with tumor-associated CD68+ macrophages predict postoperative prognosis and adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in resected gastric cancer. BMC Cancer 19(1):920PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Lee JH, Chang KK, Yoon C et al (2018) Lauren histologic type is the most important factor associated with pattern of recurrence following resection of gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 267(1):105–113PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Lee D, Son SY, Kim YB et al (2018) Neural invasion is a significant contributor to peritoneal recurrence in signet ring cell gastric carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 25:1167–1175PubMedCrossRef
23.
Jin LX, Moses LE, Squires MH 3rd et al (2015) Factors associated with recurrence and survival in lymph node-negative gastric adenocarcinoma: A 7-institution study of the US gastric cancer collaborative. Ann Surg 262(6):999–1005PubMedCrossRef
24.
Xu BB, Lu J, Zheng ZF et al (2019) Comparison of short-term and long-term efficacy of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy in high-risk patients with gastric cancer: a propensity score-matching analysis. Surg Endosc 33(1):58–70PubMedCrossRef
25.
Fock KM (2014) Review article: the epidemiology and prevention of gastric cancer. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 40(3):250–260PubMedCrossRef
26.
Buess G, Theiss R, Günther M et al (1985) Endoscopic surgery in the rectum. Endoscopy 17(1):31–35PubMedCrossRef
27.
Herron DM, Lantis JC 2nd, Maykel J et al (1999) The 3-D monitor and head-mounted display. A quantitative evaluation of advanced laparoscopic viewing technologies. Surg Endosc 13(8):751–755PubMedCrossRef
28.
Game X, Binhazzaa M, Soulie M et al (2017) Three-dimensional laparoscopy for living-donor nephrectomy with vaginal extraction: the first case. Int J Surg Case Rep 34:87–89PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Tang FJ, Qi L, Jiang HC et al (2016) Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of 3D and 2D imaging systems for laparoscopic radical cystectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection. J Int Med Res 44(3):613–619PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
30.
Kinoshita H, Nakagawa K, Usui Y et al (2015) High-definition resolution three-dimensional imaging systems in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: randomized comparative study with high-definition resolution two-dimensional systems. Surg Endosc 29(8):2203–2209PubMedCrossRef
31.
Velayutham V, Fuks D, Nomi T et al (2015) 3D visualization reduces operating time when compared to high-definition 2D in laparoscopic liver resection: a case-matched study. Surg Endosc 30(1):147–153PubMedCrossRef
32.
Chang JS, Kim KH, Yoon HI et al (2017) Locoregional relapse after gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer. Br J Surg 104(7):877–884PubMedCrossRef
33.
Takahashi Y, Takeuchi T, Sakamoto J et al (2003) The usefulness of CEA and/or CA19-9 in monitoring for recurrence in gastric cancer patients: a prospective clinical study. Gastric Cancer 6(3):142–145PubMedCrossRef
34.
Wang W-J, Li H-T, Yu J-P et al (2018) Severity and incidence of complications assessed by the Clavien–Dindo classification following robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective and propensity score-matched study. Surg Endosc 33(10):3341–3354PubMedCrossRef
35.
Tokunaga M, Sugisawa N, Kondo J et al (2014) Early phase II study of robot-assisted distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 17(3):542–547PubMedCrossRef
36.
Tokunaga M, Makuuchi R, Miki Y et al (2016) Late phase II study of robot-assisted gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage I gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 30(8):3362–3367PubMedCrossRef
37.
Yang K, Cho M, Roh CK et al (2019) Robotic spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymph node dissection during total gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 33:2357–2363PubMedCrossRef
38.
Jiang Y, Zhao Y, Qian F et al (2018) The long-term clinical outcomes of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large-scale single institutional retrospective study. Am J Transl Res 10(10):3233–3242PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Lu J, Zheng HL, Li P et al (2018) A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Oncological, Cost, and Surgical Stress Analysis. J Gastrointest Surg 22(7):1152–1162PubMedCrossRef
40.
Eto K, Hiki N, Kumagai K et al (2018) Prophylactic effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in gastric cancer patients with postoperative complications. Gastric Cancer 21(4):703–709PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Does three-dimensional surgery affect recurrence patterns in patients with gastric cancer after laparoscopic R0 gastrectomy? Results from a 3-year follow-up phase III trial
Authors
Jun Lu
Bin-bin Xu
Zhi-fang Zheng
Jian-wei Xie
Jia-bin Wang
Jian-xian Lin
Qi-yue Chen
Long-long Cao
Mi Lin
Ru-hong Tu
Ze-ning Huang
Chao-hui Zheng
Chang-ming Huang
Ping Li
Publication date
01-01-2021
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 1/2021
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07367-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Surgical Endoscopy 1/2021 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Impact of fragmentation on rehospitalization after bariatric surgery

OriginalPaper

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic full-thickness resection in the colon and rectum using an over-the-scope device: a meta-analysis

OriginalPaper

Efficacy and safety of palliative endobiliary radiofrequency ablation using a novel temperature-controlled catheter for malignant biliary stricture: a single-center prospective randomized phase II TRIAL

OriginalPaper

Retrograde artery first approach for “shoulder” pancreatic cancers in minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy

New Technology

EUS-guided fine needle tattooing (EUS-FNT) for preoperative localization of small pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (p-NETs): a single-center experience

OriginalPaper

Benchmarking patient satisfaction scores in a colorectal patient population