Comparison of Laparoscopy and Laparotomy Staging of Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer: A Study with 12-Year Experience

qiang lu,zhen zhang,cong liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2014.08.068

IF: 4.314

2014-01-01

Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

Abstract:The aim of this study was to compare the safety and morbidity of laparoscopic comprehensive staging of apparent early stage ovarian cancer with those undergone comprehensive staging via laparotomy.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

[Comparison of Surgery for Staging Using Laparoscopy and Laparotomy in Patients with Endometrial Cancer].

Xiao-na Lin,Xiao-mei Tong,Hai-yan Zhu,Dong Huang,Lin Kuang,Xiao-feng Zhao,Guang-hui Song,Min-zhen Wang,Su-hua Fang,Song-ying Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2010.35.012

2010-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To compare the surgical outcomes for staging by laparoscopy and laparotomy in patients with endometrial cancer, evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic surgical treatment of endometrial cancer, compare the difference between clinical and surgical staging of endometrial cancer and elucidate the advantages and feasibility of its surgical staging.METHODS:Fifty-six patients diagnosed pre-operatively as stage I endometrial cancer were reviewed for surgery for staging. They were assigned into laparoscopic group (n = 34) and laparotomic (open) group (n = 22). The operative parameters including operating time, intra-operative blood loss, the number of lymph nodes removed, gastrointestinal recovery time, urinary catheterization time, complications and post-operative hospital stay were compared.RESULTS:The pre-operative clinical characteristics before operation between two groups were similar. No significant differences were found in age and body mass index between two groups. As compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group had a longer operation time (213 min ± 49 min vs 162 min ± 30 min, P < 0.05), less hemoglobin change (12 g/L ± 8 g/L vs 19 g/L ± 8 g/L, P < 0.05), shorter hospital stay (6.3 d ± 1.7 d vs 9.5 d ± 1.8 d, P < 0.01) and shorter gastrointestinal recovery time (1.8 d ± 0.6 d vs 2.7 d ± 1.2 d, P < 0.01). While there was no significant difference between two groups in the number of lymph nodes removed, urinary catheterization time, costs and complications. The total coincidence was 57.14% between clinical and surgical staging.CONCLUSION:Laparoscopic staging surgery is both feasible and safe in the treatment of endometrial cancer. And the surgical staging truly reflects the extent of cancer invasion and it is thus necessary for early-stage endometrial cancer.
Comparison of Laparoscopic and Laparotomic Staging of Early-stage Ovarian Cancer

Hao Ting,Li Meng,Xiong Guangwu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-6604.2010.03.006

2010-01-01

Abstract:Objective To investigate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopy and laparotomy in surgical staging of early-stage ovarian cancer(EOC).Methods The outcomes of 44 patients with EOC who underwent laparoscopic(LPS group,n=19)or laparotomic(LPT group,n=25)surgical staging at Peking University Third Hospital from May 2006 to July 2009 were retrospectively estimated.The parameters including operation time,intraoperative blood loss,number of resected lymph nodes,gastrointestinal recovery time,postoperative complications,and hospital stay were compared between the two groups.Results LPS group had less intraoperative blood loss [(161.1±97.7)ml vs(398.0±278.6)ml,t=-3.945,P=0.000] and shorter gastrointestinal recovery time [(1.7±0.8)d vs(2.7±1.0)d,t=-3.389,P=0.002] when compared with LPT group.No significant difference was found in operation time [(283.0±74.7)min vs(266.6±65.5)min],rate [84.2%(16/19)vs 96.0%(24/25)] and numbers of resected lymph nodes(20.8±6.5 vs 20.7±13.8),and postoperative rate of complications [10.5%(2/19)vs 20.0%(5/25)] and hospital stay [(13.4±4.9)d vs(13.2±6.6)d] between the two groups(P>0.05).Conclusions Laparoscopy and laparotomy had similar surgical staging adequacy and accuracy,whereas laparoscopy shows more favorable operative outcomes.Laparoscopic surgical staging is feasible and safe for EOC in a short term,and its long-term outcomes are to be further investigated.
Comparison of single-port laparoscopy and laparotomy in early ovarian cancer surgical staging

Kyu Hee Cho,Yeon Ju Lee,Kyung Jin Eoh,Yong Jae Lee,Jung-Yun Lee,Eun Ji Nam,Sunghoon Kim,Young Tae Kim,Sang Wun Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.20216

2021-01-15

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: s The aims of this study were to assess the feasibility of single-port laparoscopic surgical staging (SPLS) in early ovarian cancer and to compare the surgical outcomes of SPLS with those of staging laparotomy.METHODS: Between January 2014 and December 2018, 40 patients underwent SPLS and 41 patients underwent staging laparotomy at Yonsei Cancer Center. The patients were diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I ovarian cancer. Variables such as patient age, body mass index (BMI), tumor size, FIGO stage, and perioperative surgical outcomes and survival outcomes of SPLS and laparotomy were compared.RESULTS: The total operation time was similar between the 2 groups (SPLS: 201.4 vs. laparotomy: 203.0 minutes, P=0.806). The median tumor diameters in the SPLS and laparotomy groups were 11.0 (2.5-28 cm) and 15.4 (6-40 cm), respectively (P=0.001). The SPLS group had lower tumor spillage rate (5.0% vs. 19.5%, P=0.047), less intraoperative blood loss (102.0 vs. 371.5 mL, P<0.001), less postoperative pain, and shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 9.5 days, P<0.001). The intraoperative major complication rate was similar between groups (2.5% vs. 4.9%, P=0.571). There was no significant difference in progression-free survival between the 2 groups (P=0.945). There were no deaths in either group.CONCLUSION: SPLS is feasible in early ovarian cancer and has better perioperative surgical outcomes, in some aspects, than staging laparotomy without compromising survival outcomes. SPLS could be performed in patients suspected to have early ovarian cancer.
Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Open Resection in Patients with Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Hanchu Xiong,Ji Wang,Yunlu Jia,Chenyang Ye,Yi Lu,Cong Chen,Jianguo Shen,Yongxia Chen,Wenhe Zhao,Linbo Wang,Jichun Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.03.042

2017-01-01

Abstract:Purposes: The contemporary surgery has reported the safety of laparoscopic surgery (LAP) for patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). However, its use is still debated due to suspicion of the oncologic equivalence to open surgery (OPEN). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of updated original articles to investigate the short-and long-term clinical outcomes of LAP compared with OPEN for GISTs. Methods: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and CNKI. Comparative studies of laparoscopic and open surgery for GISTs were published before November 2016. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was utilized to conduct quality assessment. The Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.0 was used for meta-analysis. Results: Twenty-four studies involving 2140 patients were included for the meta-analysis. The metaanalysis results showed that, compared with OPEN, LAP indicated potentially favorable outcomes in terms of operative time (WMD, -30.71; 95% CI, -58.48 to -2.95; P =0.03); intraoperative blood loss (WMD, -60.90; 95% CI, -91.53 to -30.28; P < 0.0001); time to flatus (WMD, -1.10; 95% CI, -1.41 to 0.79; P < 0.00001); time to oral intake (WMD, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.64 to 0.86; P < 0.00001); length of hospital stay (WMD, -3.42; 95% CI, -4.37 to -2.46; P < 0.00001); overall complications (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.54; P < 0.00001); and recurrence (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.66; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible for the treatment of GISTs including less operative time and intraoperative blood loss, earlier postoperative recovery, shorter hospital stay, and lower rate of overall complications and recurrence. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Outcome of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy vs. open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a retrospective comparative study.

Wen-Jun Chen,Chao-Yang Xu,Jiang-Guo Shen,Shu-Duo Xie,Xiao-Ming Yuang,Linbo Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5754/hge11039

2012-01-01

Abstract:Background/Aims: Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy is still controversial because of scant evidence of safety and feasibility. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of using the laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy in treating gastric cancer and evaluate its outcome compared with conventional open gastrectomy. Methodology: Between November 2005 and November 2007, 31 patients underwent laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy and 95 patients underwent open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Clinicopathological characteristics, total number of lymph nodes retrieved and overall survival were retrospectively compared between the two groups. Results: No significant differences were found in the total number of retrieved lymph nodes (26.3 +/- 11.6 vs. 27.6 +/- 10.4) between the two groups. The mean follow-up and overall survival time after surgery was 30.8 (range 4-47) months and 40.9 months (95% confidence interval, 38.5-43.2 months), respectively. The mean survival time in patients of the laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy group was 42.4 months vs. 40.3 months in patients of the open surgery alone group (p=0.457). A logistic regression model revealed that node invasion (hazard ratio 1.149, p<0.001) and serosal invasion (hazard ratio 4.623, p=0.044) were associated with overall survival of gastric cancer patients. Conclusions: Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection is a safe and feasible procedure with adequate lymphadenectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer.
Comparison of the survival outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Qingduo Kong,Hongyi Wei,Jing Zhang,Yilin Li,Yongjun Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-021-00793-1

2021-01-01

Journal of Ovarian Research

Abstract:Background Laparoscopy has been widely used for patients with early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer (eEOC). However, there is limited evidence regarding whether survival outcomes of laparoscopy are equivalent to those of laparotomy among patients with eEOC. The result of survival outcomes of laparoscopy is still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to analyze the survival outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the treatment of eEOC. Methods According to the keywords, Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for studies from January 1994 to January 2021. Studies comparing the efficacy and safety of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for patients with eEOC were assessed for eligibility. Only studies including outcomes of overall survival (OS) were enrolled. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata software (Version 12.0) and Review Manager (Version 5.2). Results A total of 6 retrospective non-random studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated that there was no difference between two approaches for patients with eEOC in OS (HR = 0.6, P = 0.446), progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.6, P = 0.137) and upstaging rate (OR = 1.18, P = 0.54). But the recurrence rate of laparoscopic surgery was lower than that of laparotomic surgery (OR = 0.48, P = 0.008). Conclusions Laparoscopy and laparotomy appear to provide comparable overall survival and progression-free survival outcomes for patients with eEOC. Further high-quality studies are needed to enhance this statement.
Comparison of the prognosis and recurrence of apparent early-stage ovarian tumors treated with laparoscopy and laparotomy: a meta-analysis of clinical studies

Ying Zhang,Shuying Fan,Yang Xiang,Hua Duan,Li Sun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1604-3

IF: 4.638

2015-01-01

BMC Cancer

Abstract:Background This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the prognosis and recurrence of apparent early-stage ovarian tumors treated with laparoscopy compared with laparotomy. Methods Clinical studies published in English were retrieved from the computerized databases Medline and Embase. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the differences in the efficacy and safety of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in terms of postoperative complications, lengths of hospital stay, recurrence rates, and disease-free survival times using the random effects model. The studies were independently reviewed by two investigators. Data from the eligible studies were extracted, and the meta-analysis was performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis program, version 2 (CMA-2; Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA). Results A total of 8 studies were included in the analysis. The results showed that laparoscopic surgery was significantly associated with lower rates of complications (OR = 0.433, P = 0.019) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.974, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the rates of recurrence (OR = 0.707, P = 0.521) between patients with apparent early-stage ovarian tumors who were treated using laparoscopy and those who underwent laparotomy. No publication bias was detected. Conclusions Laparoscopic surgery shows favorable prognostic outcomes in terms of postoperative complication rates and postoperative hospital stay durations. Further studies with longer follow-up periods are required to confirm recurrence and survival outcomes after laparoscopic surgery in patients with apparent early-stage ovarian tumors.
Laparoscopic Comprehensive Surgical Staging of Apparent Early-Stage Ovarian Malignant Tumor: A Nine-Case Report

李萌,熊光武,张璐芳,韩劲松,郭文萍,李莉,郭红燕

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-0904.2008.04.012

2008-01-01

Abstract:Objective:To investigate the feasibility and short-term effectiveness of laparoscopic comprehensive surgical staging of apparent early-stage ovarian malignant tumor.Methods:8 patients with apparent stage Ia-Ic ovarian epithelial carcinoma and 1 patient with apparent stage Ia ovarian granulosa cell tumor were underwent laparoscopic comprehensive surgical staging according to the FIGO guideline.The clinical pathology and follow-up data of them were analyzed retrospectively.Results:All operative procedures were completed successfully with no conversion to open surgery and no major intraoperative complications.Operative room time averaged 311.11±34.26min,intraoperative bleeding loss was 183.33±111.80ml,hemoglobin decline after surgery was 4.00±7.95g/L,number of pelvic lymph nodes was 22.78±8.18,gastrointestinal function recovered in 2.11±0.33 days after surgery,postoperative morbidity was 4/9,one case developed septicemia,hospital stay was 14.67±4.00 days.No recurrence developed after 8-22 months' follow-up.Conclusion:Laparoscopic comprehensive surgical staging of apparent early-stage ovarian malignant tumor is safe and feasible.The recovery by laparoscopy is faster than traditional methods.However,the oncological treatment outcomes need further investigation.
Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Surgeries for Early-stage Endometrial Carcinoma

Song Xiaochen,Li Meng,Xiong Guangwu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-6604.2011.05.009

2011-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopy for endometrial carcinoma in an early stage.Methods From August 2003 to October 2010,79 patients with early-stage endometrial carcinoma who underwent laparoscopic(LPS group,n=56) or laparotomic(LPT group,n=23) surgeries were retrospectively analyzed.The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,number of resected pelvic lymph nodes,gastrointestinal recovery time,and postoperative complications,hospital stay,morbidity and recurrence rate were recorded and compared between the two groups. Results LPS group showed significantly less intraoperative blood loss,and shorter gastrointestinal recovery time and hospital stay [(157.1±111.2) ml vs.(221.7±169.8) ml,t=1.349,P=0.049;t=4.055,P=0.000;and t=2.310,P=0.028,respectively].No significant difference was found in the number of resected pelvic lymph nodes,postoperative complications and morbidity(P>0.05).The patients were followed up until February 2011.The mean follow-up in the LPS group(50 cases) was 28.7 months(ranged from 4 to 82 months),and that in the LPT group was 39.0 months(ranged from 17 to 64 months).In the LPS group,1 patient showed recurrence in 24 months,and 1 patient developed metastasis at the puncture site at month 31,but no patient died.In the LPT group,1 patient showed recurrence in 27 months,and 1 patient died at month 59.No significant difference was found in the recurrent rate between the two groups(P=0.493).Conclusions Compared with open surery,laparoscopic surgery has the advantages of less blood and quick recovery in the treatment of early-stage endometrial carcinoma.It may be another choice for endometrial carcinoma,but its clinical value needs to be confirmed by long-term research.
Characteristics, Complications, and Outcomes of Early-Stage Cervical Stump Carcinoma: Laparoscopy Versus Laparotomy

Zhiying Lu,Chenyan Guo,Ting Wang,Junjun Qiu,Keqin Hua

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060521992247

2021-01-01

Journal of International Medical Research

Abstract:Objective To compare the characteristics, surgical complications, and overall survival between patients undergoing laparoscopy versus laparotomy for treatment of early-stage cervical stump carcinoma. Methods Patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO, 2009) stage IA2 to IIA2 cervical stump carcinoma who underwent laparoscopy or laparotomy in the Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital of Fudan University from January 2000 to June 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients’ clinical characteristics, pathological features, complications, and follow-up data were retrieved. Results Seventy-two patients were included in the analysis; 58 underwent laparoscopy and 14 underwent laparotomy. With respect to surgical complications, laparoscopy was associated with a significantly lower complication rate, less blood loss, a shorter operative time, and a higher hospitalization fee than laparotomy. Survival was not significantly different between the laparoscopy and laparotomy groups. Conclusions Although survival was not significantly different between the two surgical approaches, the rate of surgical complications was much lower in the laparoscopy than laparotomy group.
Comparison of robotic approach, laparoscopic approach and laparotomy in treating epithelial ovarian cancer

Ching-Hui Chen,Li-Hsuan Chiu,Huang-Hui Chen,Cindy Chan,Wei-Min Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1655

2015-03-25

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of robotic surgery and compare its surgical outcomes with those of laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy, with regard to performing staging surgery to manage ovarian cancer.METHODS: One hundred and thirty-eight women who received surgical staging procedures for treatment of stage IA-IIIC epithelial ovarian cancer and borderline tumours were retrospectively included in the study. All enrolled cases were reviewed for patient demographics, peri-operative parameters, complications and survival.RESULTS: The operation time and blood loss was significantly reduced in the robotic and laparoscopic groups. Moreover, robotic surgery was associated with decreased postoperative pain score. The length of hospital stay and time to full diet resumption were also shortened for those who underwent robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Survival analysis and complication rates were similar between the two groups.CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery is a feasible alternative in managing ovarian cancer as long as there is careful consideration given to patient selection. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

surgery
Case-matched Comparison of Laparoscopy-Assisted and Open Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

Wei Wang,Ke Chen,Xiao-Wu Xu,Yu Pan,Yi-Ping Mou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i23.3672

IF: 5.374

2013-01-01

World Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract:AIM:To compare short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.METHODS:A retrospective study was performed by comparing the outcomes of 54 patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with those of 54 patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy (ODG) between October 2004 and October 2007. The patients' demographic data (age and gender), date of surgery, extent of lymphadenectomy, and differentiation and tumor-node-metastasis stage of the tumor were examined. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, complications, pathological findings, and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LADG group than in the ODG group (259.3 ± 46.2 min vs 199.8 ± 40.85 min; P < 0.05), whereas intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were significantly lower (160.2 ± 85.9 mL vs 257.8 ± 151.0 mL; 13.0% vs 24.1%, respectively, P < 0.05). In addition, the time to first flatus, time to initiate oral intake, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the LADG group than in the ODG group (3.9 ± 1.4 d vs 4.4 ± 1.5 d; 4.6 ± 1.2 d vs 5.6 ± 2.1 d; and 9.5 ± 2.7 d vs 11.1 ± 4.1 d, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no signiﬁcant difference between the LADG group and ODG group with regard to the number of harvested lymph nodes. The median follow-up was 60 mo (range, 5-97 mo). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 94.3%, 90.2%, and 76.7%, respectively, in the LADG group and 89.5%, 84.7%, and 82.3%, respectively, in the ODG group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.0%, 91.9%, and 81.1%, respectively, in the LADG group and 91.5%, 86.9%, and 82.1%, respectively, in the ODG group. There was no signiﬁcant difference between the two groups with regard to the survival rate.CONCLUSION:LADG is suitable and minimally invasive for treating distal gastric cancer and can achieve similar long-term results to ODG.
Laparoscopic Vs. Open Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Single-Institution, Propensity Score Matching Study in China

Zhen Yuan,Dongyan Cao,Jie Yang,Mei Yu,Keng Shen,Jiaxin Yang,Ying Zhang,Huimei Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.01107

IF: 4.7

2019-01-01

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:Study Objective: To compare the surgical and oncologic outcomes between open abdomen radical hysterectomy (ARH) and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) for cervical cancer. Methods: Retrospective observational study with propensity score matching was used to ensure balanced groups for ARH and LRH. One-hundred-and-ninety-eight women with cervical cancer, 99 treated using ARH and 99 using LRH, between January 2012 and December 2014. Outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), intra-operative factors, post-operator recovery, urinary retention, and adverse events. Moreover, the inverse probability of the treatment weighting (IPTW) method was also used. Main Results: Compared with ARH, LRH was associated with a lower volume of blood loss (P < 0.001) and transfusion rate (P < 0.001), with a broader resection of the parametrium (P < 0.001). Post-operatively, the time to first flatus was shorter for LRH than ARH (P < 0.001) but the rate of urinary retention was higher for LRH (22.2%) than ARH (8.1%; P = 0.009). DFS and OS were similar between groups. By IPTW, laparoscopy was also not associated with poorer survival in terms of DFS (HR 1.52, CI 0.799-2.891, P = 0.202) or OS (HR 0.942, HR 0.425-2.09, P = 0.883). Conclusion: Compared with ARH, LRH provided better intra-operative and post-operative outcomes, with no significant difference in oncologic outcomes and survival. Urinary retention remains a clinical issue to improve with LRH. The technology of LRH has been improved in China to address the inconsistent results of oncologic outcomes in previous studies. Whether these improvements could be effective needs to be investigated in the future.
Systematic review of laparoscopy-assisted versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

Long-yun Ye,Da-ren Liu,Chao Li,Xiao-wen Li,Ling-na Huang,Sheng Ye,Yi-xiong Zheng,Li Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B1200197

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective The study compared laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) with open gastrectomy (OG) in the management of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Methods Literature search was performed in the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify control studies that compared LAG and OG for AGC. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the surgical safety and oncologic adequacy, using the random-effect model. Results Seven eligible studies including 815 patients were analyzed. LAG was associated with less blood loss, less use of analgesics, shorter time of flatus and periods of hospital stay, but longer time of operation. The incidence of most complications was similar between the two groups. However, LAG was associated with a lower rate of pulmonary infection (odds ratio (OR) 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.68; P <0.05). No significant differences were noted in terms of the number of harvested lymph nodes (weighted mean difference (WMD) 1.165; 95% CI–2.000 to 4.311; P >0.05), overall mortality (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.10; P >0.05), cancer-related mortality (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.25; P >0.05), or recurrence (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.33 to 1.16; P >0.05). Conclusions LAG could be performed safely for AGC with adequate lymphadenectomy and has several short-term advantages compared with conventional OG. No differences were found in long-term outcomes. However, these results should be validated in large randomized controlled studies (RCTs) with sufficient follow-up.
Laparoscopic versus laparotomic surgical treatment in apparent stage I ovarian cancer: a multi-center retrospective cohort study

Jing Zhang,Meiyan Li,Lan Feng,Yinjun Zhai,Lin Wang,Yuancao Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-024-03345-1

2024-02-22

World Journal of Surgical Oncology

Abstract:Laparoscopic treatment shows non-inferior survival outcomes and better surgical outcomes in apparent stage I ovarian cancer (OC) in some studies but has not been well defined.

oncology,surgery
Clinical analysis of laparoscopic restaging surgery for ovarian malignancies(report of 38 cases)

Ya-li SHI,Hua-mao LIANG,Ying YAO

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-4020.2018.03.11

2018-01-01

Abstract:Objective To analyze the characteristics and clinical values of laparoscopic restaging surgery of ovarian malignancies.Methods Thirty-eight patients who underwent laparoscopic restaging surgery in Peking University Third Hospital from 2005 to 2016 were analyzed retrospectively,according to the surgical -pathological staging after the re -staging surgery, adjuvant therapy and regular follow -up were given.Results All the operations were completed successfully and among them, 16 patients underwent total staging surgery with reproductive function retained.The mean operative time was 244.7 min(114~521 min),and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 114.7 mL(10~500 mL).Dense adhesion was detected in 8 cases.No significant correlation was found between the adhesion degree and the interval of the two procedures, the primary operation approach and the primary operation extent.About 18.2 pelvis lymph nodes(7 ~33)and 4.7 paraaortic lymph nodes(1 ~16)were excised.No intraoperative and postoperative complications occurred, no laparotomy cases.The upstaging rate was 15.8%(6/38)after re -staging surgery.The median follow-up was 32 months(8~79 months).Two patients relapsed.The overall survival was 100%, and progression -free survival was 94.7%.Conclusion Laparoscopic restaging surgery is safe and feasible,and is an alternative for restaging of the early stage of ovarian malignancies.
A Comparison of Laparoscopies and Laparotomies for Radical Hysterectomy in Stage IA1-IB1 Cervical Cancer Patients: A Single Team With 18 Years of Experience

Meng Qin,Li Siyi,Hui-Fang Huang,Yan Li,Yu Gu,Wei Wang,Ying Shan,Jie Yin,Yong-Xue Wang,Yan Cai,Jia-Yu Chen,Ying Jin,Ling-Ya Pan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.01738

IF: 4.7

2020-08-28

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of abdominal radical hysterectomy (ARH) and laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) in managing early-stage cervical cancer.METHODS: This retrospective study comprised patients with FIGO stage IA1 with lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI), IA2, and IB1 cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy performed by a single gynecologic oncology team at Peking Union Medical College Hospital from 2000-2018. The clinicopathological characteristics, surgical outcomes, and survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.RESULTS: The ARH and LRH groups consisted of 84 and 172 patients, respectively. The 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 89.3 and 95.9% in the ARH and LRH groups (P = 0.122, adjusted HR = 0.449, 95% CI: 0.162-1.239), respectively, while the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 95.2 and 98.8%, respectively (P = 0.578, adjusted HR = 0.650, 95% CI: 0.143-2.961). The presence of more than two comorbidities led to poor OS (P = 0.011). For patients with a BMI greater than 24 kg/m2, LRH was associated with better PFS (P = 0.039). Compared with ARH, LRH was associated with a shorter operation time (248.8 vs. 176.9 min, P < 0.001), less blood loss (670.2 vs. 200.9 ml, P < 0.001), and lower postoperative ileus rates (2.4% vs. 0%, P = 0.042). No significant differences were observed in PFS and OS between 2006-2012, 2013-2015, and 2016-2018 in the LRH group (P = 0.126 and P = 0.583).CONCLUSION: Compared with ARH, LRH yields similar survival and improved surgical outcomes in patients with early-stage cervical cancer. LRH is not inferior to ARH for select cervical cancer patients treated by a single team with adequate laparoscopy experience.

oncology
Clinical Study of Laparoscopic Vs Open Right Hemicolectomy for Right Colon Cancer

Min Zheng

2004-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the results of laparoscopic and open right hemicolectomy in the management of colon carcinoma Methods We compared operation safety,recovery,complications,expenditure, oncological clearance and short term outcome for the two groups of patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open right hemicolectomy for colon cancer Results Between September 2000 and January 2003, 30 patients underwent a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy; 34 patients were treated via an open approach 2 patients in the laparoscopic group were converted to open surgery The mean operative time,blood loss, complications and expenditure were comparable in the two groups ( P 0 05); Flatus, time to resume early activity and hospital stay in laparoscopic group were 2 24±0 56、 3 94±1 64、 13 94±6 5 days respectively, which was significantly shorter than those in open group ( P 0 05) No significant difference between the two groups was observed for the oncological clearance, in terms of the number of lymph nodes removed and length of specimen ( P 0 05) The mean follow up time of the two groups were 23 15±7 95 and 22 19±7 46 months, respectively Local recurrence rate,metachronous metastases rate and cumulative survival probability at 36 months were similar for the two groups Conclusion These results suggest that laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer can be performed safely, effectively and economically with the advantages of minimal invasiveness
Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes between totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a 10-y single-center experience with meta-analysis

Ke Chen,Yi-Ping Mou,Xiao-Wu Xu,Yu Pan,Yu-Cheng Zhou,Jia-Qin Cai,Chao-Jie Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.10.020

IF: 2.417

2015-01-01

Journal of Surgical Research

Abstract:Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) and totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) are two commonly used methods of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. This study aimed to compare the short-term surgical outcomes of these two methods.A prospectively maintained gastric cancer database between October 2004 and February 2014 was reviewed and 115 patients underwent LADG and 198 patients underwent TLDG were included. The clinical characteristics and perioperative clinical outcomes of two groups were compared. Moreover, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted.The mean operation time and blood loss were similar in two groups, as was the number of retrieved lymph nodes. There was no significant difference in time to first flatus, the time to restart oral intake, the length of the hospital stay after surgery, and postoperative complications. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in the operative time, surgical margin, time to first flatus, length of hospital stay, mortality, overall, and anastomosis-related complications among the groups. However, the intraoperative blood loss was lower in TLDG (weighted mean difference = 21.50 mL; 95% confidence interval: 9.79-33.22; P < 0.01), and number of retrieved lymph nodes was higher in TLDG (weighted mean difference = -1.56; 95% confidence interval: -2.69 to -0.44; P < 0.01).TLDG is safe and feasible compared with LADG. However, it is difficult to identify the clinical advantages of TLDG over LADG based on our study. Thus, the choice of surgical approach mainly depends on the patient conditions and the preference of the patients or surgeons.
[Comparison of the Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Surgery and Open Surgery for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer].

H Y He,Z J Yang,D Y Zeng,D S Yao,J T Fan,R F Zhao,J Q Zhang,X,Z Lin,Y M Jiang,L Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3766.2017.06.011

2017-01-01

Abstract:Objective: To evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery compared with traditional laparotomy in cases of stage ⅠA2-ⅡA2 cervical cancer. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on the clinical data of 1 863 patients diagnosed as FIGO stages ⅠA2-ⅡA2 cervical cancer in 6 third-grade class-A hospitals in Guangxi province between January 2007 and May 2014. One thousand and seventy-one received laparoscopy, and 792 received laparotomy. T-test, U-test and χ(2) test were used to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes. The short-term outcomes included surgical related outcomes and operative complications, and the long-term outcomes included quality of life (pelvic floor functions and sexual functions), survival and recurrence. Pelvic floor function and sexual function were assessed with the International Consultation on Incontinence Quesonnaire Female Lower Urinary tract(ICIQ-FLUTS) and the Female Sexual Function Inventory (FSFI), respectively. Survival rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. The survival curves were compared with Log-rank test. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluaterisk factors for prognosis. Results: (1)The short-term outcomes : There were significant difference in operative time([(257±69) vs(238±56)min], estimated blood loss[(358±314) vs(707±431)ml], anus exhausting time[(2.5±0.9) vs (2.9±0.8)d], preserved days of catheter[(15±7) vs(18±9)d], and post-operative length of stay[(19±16) vs (30±21)d] between the laparoscopic surgery group and the opensurgery group(P<0.05). There was no significant difference in lymph nodes yielded[(21±9) vs (21±11)], left parametrial width[(2.5±0.8) vs (2.7±0.7)cm], right parametrial width [(2.6±0.3) vs (2.7±0.2)cm], vaginal cuff length[(2.4±0.7) vs (2.2±0.7)cm] between the laparoscopic surgery group and the opensurgery group(P>0.05). The intra-operative complications occurred in 8.1%(87/1 071)in the laparoscopic surgery group and in 10.7%(85/792)in the open surgery group(P>0.05). However, the complications of vascular injury in the laparoscopic surgery group[2.6%(28/1 071)]was lower than that in the open surgery group[7.7%(61/792), P<0.001]. The laparoscopic surgery exhibited lower post- operative complication rate [33.8%(362/1 071)vs 40.2%(318/792), P<0.05] and poorer wound healing rate [0.7%(7/1 071)vs 4.0%(32/792), P<0.05]. (2)The long-term outcomes(Hierarchical analysis): The overall incontinence in ICIQ-FLUTS questionnaire in nerve-sparing laparoscopic group [28.4%(67/236)] was lower than that in the open surgery group [35.9%(71/198), P=0.004] . However, There was no significant difference in degree of incontinence between the two groups(P>0.05). The overall sexual dysfunction in FSFI questionnaire after 12 months of postoperative in the nerve-sparing laparoscopic group [47.0%(111/236)]was lower than that in the open surgery group [58.6%(116/198), P=0.001], and the six different dimension scores in the laparoscopic surgery group were higher than that in the open surgery group (P<0.05). The recurrence rate was 3.5%(35/1 007)in the laparoscopicsurgery group and 4.7%(35/740)in the open surgery group(P>0.05). The 5-year OS was 94.0% for the laparoscopic surgery group and 90.2% for the open surgery group(P>0.05), and the 5-year DFS was 93.9% for the laparoscopic surgery group and 89.1% for the open surgery group(P>0.05). (3) Prognostic fators: In univariate analysis, tumor dimension, clinical stage, deep stromal invasion, LVSI, and retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis signficantly affected 5-year OS and 5-year DFS(P<0.05); In multivariate analyses, LVSI, deep stromal invasion and LN metastasis were independent prognostic factors(P<0.05). Conclusions: Laparoscopy can reduceestimated blood loss, accelerate postoperative recovery and improve the quality of life after surgery compared to laparotomy, and it ensures the same oncological results as open surgery. Laparoscopic approach is a safe and effective treatment for early-stage cervical cancer.

Comparison of Laparoscopy and Laparotomy Staging of Early-Stage Ovarian Cancer: A Study with 12-Year Experience

[Comparison of Surgery for Staging Using Laparoscopy and Laparotomy in Patients with Endometrial Cancer].

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Laparotomic Staging of Early-stage Ovarian Cancer

Comparison of single-port laparoscopy and laparotomy in early ovarian cancer surgical staging

Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Open Resection in Patients with Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Outcome of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy vs. open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a retrospective comparative study.

Comparison of the survival outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treatment of early-stage ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comparison of the prognosis and recurrence of apparent early-stage ovarian tumors treated with laparoscopy and laparotomy: a meta-analysis of clinical studies

Laparoscopic Comprehensive Surgical Staging of Apparent Early-Stage Ovarian Malignant Tumor: A Nine-Case Report

Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Surgeries for Early-stage Endometrial Carcinoma

Characteristics, Complications, and Outcomes of Early-Stage Cervical Stump Carcinoma: Laparoscopy Versus Laparotomy

Comparison of robotic approach, laparoscopic approach and laparotomy in treating epithelial ovarian cancer

Case-matched Comparison of Laparoscopy-Assisted and Open Distal Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

Laparoscopic Vs. Open Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Single-Institution, Propensity Score Matching Study in China

Systematic review of laparoscopy-assisted versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

Laparoscopic versus laparotomic surgical treatment in apparent stage I ovarian cancer: a multi-center retrospective cohort study

Clinical analysis of laparoscopic restaging surgery for ovarian malignancies(report of 38 cases)

A Comparison of Laparoscopies and Laparotomies for Radical Hysterectomy in Stage IA1-IB1 Cervical Cancer Patients: A Single Team With 18 Years of Experience

Clinical Study of Laparoscopic Vs Open Right Hemicolectomy for Right Colon Cancer

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes between totally laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a 10-y single-center experience with meta-analysis

[Comparison of the Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Surgery and Open Surgery for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer].