Comparison of Short-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Meta-analysis of 2495 Patients

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is being increasingly used to treat gastric cancer. However, there are still several technical disadvantages limiting its use. Robotic gastrectomy (RG) is an emerging minimally invasive technique that overcomes some of these limitations. This study compares RG with LG in the treatment of gastric cancer by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Comparative studies published between January 1991 and April 2013 in the major databases were systematically searched. Evaluated end points were operative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes. Pooled odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using either the fixed-effects model or random-effects model. RESULTS: Nine nonrandomized comparative studies with 2495 patients were included, of which 736 procedures were robotic and 1759 were laparoscopic. RG was associated with a lower intraoperative blood loss and a shorter time to oral intake compared with LG. However, it was associated with a significantly longer operative time and shorter distal resection margin. In addition, there was no significant difference in the number of retrieved lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, rate of conversion to open surgery, overall morbidity, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stenosis, intestinal obstruction, time to first flatus, length of hospital stay, and perioperative mortality rates between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: RG is comparable to LG, with respect to safety, technical feasibility, and oncological effectiveness in the treatment of gastric cancer. However, there is a need for well-designed prospective randomized controlled studies comparing the two procedures with long-term follow-up, to inform future practice.