The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of this trial with respect to morbidity and mortality. Laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) is rapidly gaining popularity. However, there is limited evidence regarding its oncologic safety. We therefore conducted a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized study comparing LADG with open gastrectomy (ODG). Patient eligibility criteria were pathologically-proven adenocarcinoma, 20 to 80 years of age, preoperative stage I, no history of other cancer, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy. The primary end point was to determine whether there is a difference in overall survival between 2 groups. The morbidity and mortality were compared to evaluate the safety of this trial. The time was decided on the hypothesis that the morbidity of this trial was not significantly different from that of previous reports on open gastric cancer surgeries (17%-20%). This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov and carries the following ID number: NCT00452751. A total of 342 patients were randomized (LADG, 179 patients; ODG, 161 patients) between January 1, 2006 and July 19, 2007. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in age, gender, and comorbidities. The postoperative complication rates of the LADG and ODG groups were 10.5% (17/179) and 14.7% (24/163), respectively (P = 0.137). Reoperations were required in 3 cases each group. The postoperative mortality was 1.1% (2/179) and 0% (0/163) in the LADG and ODG groups (P = 0.497), respectively. There was no significance difference in the morbidity and mortality between the 2 groups. Therefore, we conclude that this trial is safe and is thus ongoing.

Importance Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is gaining popularity over open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer because of better early postoperative outcomes. However, to our knowledge, no studies have proved whether laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is oncologically equivalent to open distal gastrectomy. Objective To examine whether the long-term survival among patients with stage I gastric cancer undergoing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is noninferior to that among patients undergoing open distal gastrectomy. Design The Korean Laparoendoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group, which includes 15 surgeons from 13 institutes, conducted a phase 3, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority, prospective randomized clinical trial (KLASS-01) of patients with histologically proven, preoperative clinical stage I gastric adenocarcinoma from January 5, 2006, to August 23, 2010. Survival and recurrence status of the patients was determined in December 2016. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (n = 705) or open distal gastrectomy (n = 711). Of these patients, 85 received a surgical approach opposite the one to which they were randomized (63 randomized to the open surgery group and 22 to the laparoscopic group). Main Outcomes and Measures Difference in 5-year overall survival between the laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy groups. The noninferiority margin was prespecified as −5% (corresponding hazard ratio of 1.54), with an assumed survival of 90% after 5 years in the open surgery group. Results Among the 1416 patients (mean [SD] age, 57.3 [11.1] years; 940 [66.4%] male) included in the study, the 5-year overall survival rates were 94.2% in the laparoscopic group and 93.3% in the open surgery group (log-rankP = .64). Intention-to-treat analysis confirmed the noninferiority of the laparoscopic approach compared with the open approach (difference, 0.9 percentage points; 1-sided 97.5% CI, −1.6 to infinity). The 5-year cancer-specific survival rates were similar between the 2 groups (97.1% in the laparoscopic group and 97.2% in the open surgery group, log-rankP = .91; difference, −0.03 percentage points; 1-sided 97.5% CI, −1.8 to infinity). Per-protocol analysis results were consistent with the intention-to-treat results for overall and cancer-specific survival rates. Conclusions and Relevance The KLASS-01 trial revealed similar overall and cancer-specific survival rates between patients receiving laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy. Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy is an oncologically safe alternative to open surgery for stage I gastric cancer. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT00452751

Purpose: The oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for the treatment of gastric cancer have not been evaluated. The aim of this study is to validate the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer in terms of long-term survival, morbidity, and mortality retrospectively. Patients and Methods: The study group comprised 2,976 patients who were treated with curative intent either by laparoscopic gastrectomy (1,477 patients) or open gastrectomy (1,499 patients) between April 1998 and December 2005. The long-term 5-year actual survival analysis in case-control and case-matched population was conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. The morbidity and mortality and learning curves were evaluated. Results: In the case-control study, the overall survival, disease-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival (median follow-up period, 70.8 months) were not statistically different at each cancer stage with the exception of an increased overall survival rate for patients with stage IA cancer treated via laparoscopy (laparoscopic group; 95.3%, open group: 90.3%; P < .001). After matching using a propensity scoring system, the overall survival, disease-specific survival, and recurrence-free survival rates were not statistically different at each stage. The morbidity of the case-matched group was 15.1% in the open group and 12.5% in the laparoscopic group, which also had no statistical significance (P = .184). The mortality rate was also not statistically significant (0.3% in the open group and 0.5% in the laparoscopic group; P = 1.000). The mean learning curve was 42. Conclusion: The long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with gastric cancer were comparable to those of open gastrectomy in a large-scale, multicenter, retrospective clinical study.

To compare short-term surgical outcomes including financial cost of robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy. Despite a lack of supporting evidence, robotic surgery has been increasingly adopted as a minimally invasive modality for the treatment of gastric cancer because of its assumed technical superiority over conventional laparoscopy. A prospective, multicenter comparative study was conducted. Patients were matched according to the surgeon, extent of gastric resection, and sex. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat and per-protocol basis. A total of 434 patients were enrolled for treatment with either robotic (n = 223) or laparoscopic (n = 211) gastrectomy for intention-to-treat analysis, and a total of 370 patients (n = 185 per treatment) were compared in per-protocol analysis. Results were similar between both analyses. In per-protocol analysis, both groups showed similar overall complication rates (robotic = 11.9% vs laparoscopic = 10.3%) and major complication rates (robotic = 1.1% vs laparoscopic = 1.1%) with no operative mortality in either group. Patients treated with robotic surgery showed significantly longer operative time (robotic = 221 minutes vs laparoscopic = 178 minutes; P < 0.001) and significantly higher total costs (robotic = US$13,432 vs laparoscopic = US$8090; P < 0.001), compared with those who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy. No significant differences between groups were noted in estimated blood loss, rates of open conversion, diet build-up, or length of hospital stay. The use of robotic systems is assumed to provide a technically superior operative environment for minimally invasive surgery. However, our analysis of perioperative surgical outcomes indicated that robotic gastrectomy is not superior to laparoscopic gastrectomy. Clinical trials identification: NCT01309256.

Objective: To evaluate the technical feasibility, effectiveness, and safety of robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) with lymphadenectomy, using the da Vinci system through analyses of our initial series of 100 consecutive patients. Summary Background Data: The application of robotic surgery was proven to be one of the best cutting-edge technologies for successful minimally invasive surgery by providing solutions to the many drawbacks of laparoscopic surgery, yet few reports have studied robotic surgery in gastric cancer. Methods: A review of a prospectively designed database at our institute from July 2005 to October 2007 revealed a series of 100 consecutive RAG patients with a preoperative diagnosis of early gastric cancer. Clinicopathologic characteristics and surgical outcomes were analyzed. Results: All operations were performed successfully without open or laparoscopic conversion. There were 33 total gastrectomies and 67 subtotal gastrectomies with D1+β or extended lymphadenectomy (D2). The mean total operation time and console time were 231 and 150 minutes, respectively. There were 13 postoperative morbidities and 1 postoperative mortality. The first flatus was noted on postoperative day 2.9, soft diet was started on postoperative day 4.2, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.8 days. Although all patients were diagnosed as early gastric cancer preoperatively, the final pathology report revealed that 19 patients exhibited a depth deeper than T2. The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 36.7 (range, 11–83). None of the specimens showed microscopic tumor involvement in the resection line. Conclusions: This study demonstrated that RAG with lymphadenectomy can be applied safely and effectively for patients with gastric cancer.