Minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. A pooled analysis of two European randomized controlled trials

Nicole van der Wielen,Hylke Brenkman,Maarten Seesing,Freek Daams,Jelle Ruurda,Arjen van der Veen,Donald L. van der Peet,Jennifer Straatman,Richard van Hillegersberg,STOMACH and LOGICA study group
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27578
2024-01-05
Journal of Surgical Oncology
Abstract:Introduction Minimally invasive techniques have shown better short term and similar oncological outcomes compared to open techniques in the treatment of gastric cancer in Asian countries. It remains unknown whether these outcomes can be extrapolated to Western countries, where patients often present with advanced gastric cancer. Materials and Methods A pooled analysis of two Western randomized controlled trials (STOMACH and LOGICA trial) comparing minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) and open gastrectomy (OG) in advanced gastric cancer was performed. Postoperative recovery (complications, mortality, hospital stay), oncological outcomes (lymph node yield, radical resection rate, 1‐year survival), and quality of life was assessed. Results Three hundred and twenty‐one patients were included from both trials. Of these, 162 patients (50.5%) were allocated to MIG and 159 patients (49.5%) to OG. A significant difference was seen in blood loss in favor of MIG (150 vs. 260 mL, p
oncology,surgery
What problem does this paper attempt to address?