Objective. Laparoscopic surgery may offer advantages compared to open surgery, such as earlier mobilization, less pain and lower post-surgical morbidity. Surgical stress is thought to be associated with the postoperative immunological changes in the body as an impaired immune function, which may lead to an increased susceptibility to complications and morbidity. The aim of this review was to investigate if laparoscopic surgery reduces the immunological response compared to open surgery in gastric cancer. Methods. We conducted a literature search identifying relevant studies comparing laparoscopy or laparoscopic-assisted surgery with open gastric surgery. The main outcome was postoperative immunological status defined as surgical stress parameters, including inflammatory cytokines and blood parameters. Results. We identified seven studies that addressed the immunological status in patients undergoing laparoscopic or laparoscopy-assisted surgery compared to open surgery. IL-6 in circulation was found to be significantly reduced in laparoscopic patients. Furthermore, the plasma concentration of C-reactive protein was significantly lower in laparoscopic patients compared to patients undergoing laparotomy. Finally, most studies reported lower levels of white blood cell count in laparoscopic patients, although this result did not reach statistical significance in a small number of studies. Conclusions. Laparoscopy-assisted gastric surgery seems to attenuate the immune response compared to open surgery. Larger and prospective studies are needed to further evaluate if the immunological status is relatively preserved in minimal invasive surgery and if this may reduce the postoperative complications compared to open surgery.

Background: Patients undergoing major surgery are at risk of complications, so‐called serious adverse events (SAE). Continuous monitoring may detect deteriorating patients by recording abnormal vital signs. We aimed to assess the association between abnormal vital signs inspired by Early Warning Score thresholds and subsequent SAEs in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.Methods: Prospective observational cohort study continuously monitoring heart rate, respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, and blood pressure for up to 96 h in 500 postoperative patients admitted to the general ward. Exposure variables were vital sign abnormalities, primary outcome was any serious adverse event occurring within 30 postoperative days. The primary analysis investigated the association between exposure variables per 24 h and subsequent serious adverse events.Results: Serious adverse events occurred in 37% of patients, with 38% occurring during monitoring. Among patients with SAE during monitoring, the median duration of vital sign abnormalities was 272 min (IQR 110–447), compared to 259 min (IQR 153–394) in patients with SAE after monitoring and 261 min (IQR 132–468) in the patients without any SAE (p = .62 for all three group comparisons). Episodes of heart rate ≥110 bpm occurred in 16%, 7.1%, and 3.9% of patients in the time before SAE during monitoring, after monitoring, and without SAE, respectively (p < .002). Patients with SAE after monitoring experienced more episodes of hypotension ≤90 mm Hg/24 h (p = .001).Conclusion: Overall duration of vital sign abnormalities at current thresholds were not significantly associated with subsequent serious adverse events, but more patients with tachycardia and hypotension had subsequent serious adverse events.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, identifier NCT03491137.