Abstract
Introduction Aim of this metanalysis was to compare short term outcomes of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Material and methods EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and the Cochrane Database were searched for randomized control trials comparing outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomies with those patients undergoing open gastrectomies. The primary outcome was 30 days morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes studied included length of stay, blood loss, d2gastrectomies, lymph node retrieval, operative time, distal gastrectomy, wound complications and intraabdominal complications Systemic review and Metanalysis were done according to MOOSE and PRISMA guidelines.
Results Morbidity was significantly low in laparoscopic group (P=0.003).There was no significant difference between mortality between the two groups. (P=0.75). There fewer wound complications in laparoscopic group, no difference intra-abdominal complications in both the groups. Blood loss was significantly lesser in laparoscopic group.(p <0.001). Hospital stay was similar in laparoscopic group. (P=0.30). Operative time was significantly higher in laparoscopic group. (P< 0.001). Laparoscopic group patients had less number of lymph node retrieval compared to laparoscopic group.(p = 0.002). Laparoscopic group also contained similar advanced staged gastric cancer than open gastrectomies. (p= 0.64)
Conclusions Laparoscopic gastrectomies were associated with better short term outcomes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
no funding received
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.