Open, laparoscopic, and robotic gastrectomy exhibited different incidences and causes of surgical failure. Robotic gastrectomy produced the best surgical outcomes, although the approach method itself was not an independent factor for success.

No abstract

Surgical techniques have evolved tremendously over this past century. To maximize the efficacy and minimize the invasiveness of laparoscopic surgery, researchers have sought to implement wider application of robotics. Nevertheless, both optimism without sound evidence and fear of new technology obscure the appropriate uses of robotic surgery. In the present review, we attempted to provide a balanced perspective on the current state of robotic gastrectomy, outlining evidence and opportunities for the use thereof. Although evidence is limited, the use of robotics is feasible for gastric cancer surgery, and less than 10 cases of robotic surgery are needed to become proficient therein. Compared to the clinical impact of laparoscopy on gastric cancer surgery, the additional benefits of robotic surgery to patients seem to be limited. Despite additional costs and longer surgeries, robotic surgery reportedly does not offer surgical outcomes superior to those for laparoscopic surgery, according to a recent multicenter study.Meanwhile, however, our in-depth review of retrospective and prospective reports revealed that robots could expand the indications of minimally invasive gastrectomy for patients requiring total gastrectomy and D2 lymph node dissection. Moreover, we found that robotic gastrectomy is associated with a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes, less bleeding, fewer complications, and shorter hospital stay, compared to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Accordingly, new surgical approaches using advanced technologies, such as near infrared detectors, the Tilepro ® multi-input display, dual consoles, and the Single-Site ® system, are under investigation. In conclusion, measuring the additional benefits of robotic over laparoscopic surgery would be difficult and clinically insignificant. Thus, developing new surgical procedures that extend the benefits of conventional laparoscopic surgery to patients in whom minimally invasive surgery would not be possible is necessary to justify the greater use of robotic surgery.

No abstract

Purpose:Recent studies have shown that the procedure of laparoscopic appendectomy requires a learning curve before mastering. The aim of this study was to investigate the question of whether a surgeon who has been working as a first assistant for training in laparoscopic colorectal surgery can perform laparoscopic appendectomy without previous experience as an operator in laparoscopic appendectomy.Methods: Ninety consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy by a single surgeon were retrospectively enrolled in this study. The operating surgeon completed fellowship training of the colorectal cancer division as a first assistant for two years. The patients were divided into two groups by consecutive order: Group (A) included the initial 45 patients and Group (B) included the next 45 patients. The clinical patient demographics, histological diagnosis, and outcome variables including operation time, conversion to open surgery, complications, and length of hospital stay were compared between the two groups.Results: No difference in operation time was observed between the groups (mean: 58.22 min vs 66.6 min, p=0.097). Open conversion rate and drain insertion rate were similar between the two groups. There was no difference in length of hospital stay. Overall complication rate did not differ between the two groups. Moving average curve showed no specific time shortening point within these 90 enrolled patients.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that laparoscopic appendectomies performed by a surgeon who had achieved a training course as an assistant in laparoscopic colorectal surgery were performed safely without any difficulties during the learning period. This finding needs further validation in additional large-scale studies.