Robotic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

PLoS One. 2013 Dec 3;8(12):e81946. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081946. eCollection 2013.

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge was performed. Systematic review was carried out to identify studies comparing robotic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy in gastric cancer. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were also analyzed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the surgery. A fixed effects model or a random effects model was utilized according to the heterogeneity.

Results: Four studies involving 5780 patients with 520 (9.00%) cases of robotic gastrectomy and 5260 (91.00%) cases of open gastrectomy were included in this meta-analysis. Compared to open gastrectomy, robotic gastrectomy has a significantly longer operation time (weighted mean differences (WMD) =92.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 55.63 to 129.12, P<0.00001), lower blood loss (WMD: -126.08, 95% CI: -189.02 to -63.13, P<0.0001), and shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.87; 95% CI: -4.17 to -1.56; P<0.0001). No statistical difference was noted based on the rate of overall postoperative complication, wound infection, bleeding, number of harvested lymph nodes, anastomotic leakage and postoperative mortality rate.

Conclusions: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that robotic gastrectomy is a better alternative technique to open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. However, more prospective, well-designed, multicenter, randomized controlled trials are necessary to further evaluate the safety and efficacy as well as the long-term outcome.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Meta-Analysis
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Gastrectomy / adverse effects
  • Gastrectomy / methods*
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay
  • Postoperative Complications / etiology
  • Robotics / methods*
  • Stomach Neoplasms / surgery*
  • Time Factors

Grants and funding

This work was supported by a Natural Science Foundation of China grant (81272508) and key applied and basic projects of Guangzhou science and technology program (11C22120714). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.