z-logo
Premium
Assessing the safety and efficacy of full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot‐sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer: A randomized clinical trial
Author(s) -
Wang Gang,
Jiang Zhiwei,
Zhao Jian,
Liu Jiang,
Zhang Shu,
Zhao Kun,
Feng Xiaobo,
Li Jieshou
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of surgical oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.201
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1096-9098
pISSN - 0022-4790
DOI - 10.1002/jso.24146
Subject(s) - medicine , gastrectomy , anastomosis , surgery , complication , lymph node , cancer , randomized controlled trial , robotic surgery
Background Robotic gastrectomy is increasingly used in gastric cancer patients. This study assessed the safety and efficacy of full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot‐sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer. Methods Three hundred and eleven patients were randomized into an open gastrectomy group or a robotic gastrectomy group, and digestive restorations were performed under direct vision and with intracorporeal robot‐sewn anastomosis, respectively. Length of postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph node dissections, surgical duration, blood loss, and complication rate after surgery were recorded. Results There were no significant differences in the number of lymph node dissections (30.9 ± 10.4 vs. 29.3 ± 9.7 days, P  = 0.281) or complication rates (10.3 vs. 9.3%, P  = 0.756) between the two groups. Surgical duration was significantly longer in the robotic gastrectomy group than in the open gastrectomy group (242.7 ± 43.8 vs. 192.4 ± 31.5 min, P  = 0.002), whereas blood loss was less (94.2 ± 51.5 vs. 152.8 ± 76.9 ml, P  < 0.001), length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter (5.6 ± 1.9 vs. 6.7 ± 1.9 days, P  = 0.021), and postoperative restoration of bowel function was earlier (2.6 ± 1.1 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2 days, P  = 0.028). Conclusion Full robotic gastrectomy with intracorporeal robot‐sewn anastomosis for gastric cancer is safe and does not increase the complication risk during or after surgery. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;113:397–404 . © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here