Objective:
The aim of the study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of KLASS-02-RCT, a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) with D2 lymphadenectomy with open distal gastrectomy (ODG).
Summary Background Data:
Although several benefits of laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery have been reported, strong evidence is still limited, especially in locally advanced gastric cancer which requires extensive lymph node dissection.
Methods:
Enrollment criteria included histologically confirmed cT2-4a and N0-1 gastric adenocarcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, 90-day mortality, postoperative pain, and recovery were compared between LDG and ODG groups.
Results:
A total of 1050 patients were randomly assigned to LDG (n = 526) or ODG group (n = 524) between November 2011 and April 2015. After excluding patients who received bypass or no surgery, 1011 patients were analyzed as actual treatment group. Mean number of totally retrieved lymph nodes was similar in both groups (LDG = 46.6 vs ODG = 47.4, P = 0.451). Early morbidity rate was significantly lower after LDG (16.6%) than after ODG (24.1%; P = 0.003). Postoperative analgesics use and patients’ reported pain score were significantly lower after LDG. First day of flatus was earlier after LDG (3.5 vs 3.7 d, P = 0.025) and postoperative hospital stay was shorter in LDG group (8.1 vs 9.3 d, P = 0.005). Ninety days’ mortality rate was similar in both groups (LDG = 0.4% vs ODG = 0.6%, P = 0.682).
Conclusions:
Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer shows benefits in terms of lower complication rate, faster recovery, and less pain compared with open surgery.
The use of robotic systems is assumed to provide a technically superior operative environment for minimally invasive surgery. However, our analysis of perioperative surgical outcomes indicated that robotic gastrectomy is not superior to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Clinical trials identification: NCT01309256.
PURPOSE It is unclear whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy. The noninferiority of laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer compared with open surgery in terms of 3-year relapse-free survival rate was evaluated. PATIENTS AND METHODS A phase III, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted for patients with histologically proven locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma suitable for distal subtotal gastrectomy. The primary end point was the 3-year relapse-free survival rate; the upper limit of the hazard ratio (HR) for noninferiority was 1.43 between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups. RESULTS From November 2011 to April 2015, 1,050 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopy (n = 524) or open surgery (n = 526). After exclusions, 492 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 482 underwent open surgery and were included in the analysis. The laparoscopy group, compared with the open surgery group, suffered fewer early complications (15.7% v 23.4%, respectively; P = .0027) and late complications (4.7% v 9.5%, respectively; P = .0038), particularly intestinal obstruction (2.0% v 4.4%, respectively; P = .0447). The 3-year relapse-free survival rate was 80.3% (95% CI, 76.0% to 85.0%) for the laparoscopy group and 81.3% (95% CI, 77.0% to 85.0%; log-rank P = .726) for the open group. Cox regression analysis after stratification by the surgeon revealed an HR of 1.035 (95% CI, 0.762 to 1.406; log-rank P = .827; P for noninferiority = .039). When stratified by pathologic stage, the HR was 1.020 (95% CI, 0.751 to 1.385; log-rank P = .900; P for noninferiority = .030). CONCLUSION Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was comparable to open surgery in terms of relapse-free survival for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy could be a potential standard treatment option for locally advanced gastric cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.