Oncologic Outcomes after Laparoscopic and Open Distal Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: Propensity Score Matching Analysis

This study aimed to compare the oncologic and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). From July 2006 to November 2016, 384 patients underwent distal gastrectomy for AGC. Data on short- and long-term outcomes we...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of gastric cancer Vol. 19; no. 1; pp. 83 - 91
Main Authors Kim, Sang Hyun, Chung, Yoona, Kim, Yong Ho, Choi, Sung Il
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Korea (South) The Korean Gastric Cancer Association 01.03.2019
대한위암학회
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:This study aimed to compare the oncologic and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). From July 2006 to November 2016, 384 patients underwent distal gastrectomy for AGC. Data on short- and long-term outcomes were prospectively collected and reviewed. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare the LDG and ODG groups. The operative times were longer for the LDG group than for the ODG group. However, the time to resumption of diet and the length of hospital stay were shorter in the LDG group than in the ODG group (4.7 vs. 5.6 days, P=0.049 and 9.6 vs. 11.5 days, P=0.035, respectively). The extent of lymph node dissection in the LDG group was more limited than in the ODG group (P=0.002), although there was no difference in the number of retrieved lymph nodes between the 2 groups. The 3-year overall survival rates were 98% and 86.9% (P=0.018), and the 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were 86.3% and 75.3% (P=0.259), respectively, in the LDG and ODG groups. LDG is safe and feasible for AGC, with earlier recovery after surgery and long-term oncologic outcomes comparable to those of ODG.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
https://doi.org/10.5230/jgc.2019.19.e4
ISSN:2093-582X
2093-5641
DOI:10.5230/jgc.2019.19.e4