Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Distal Gastrectomy

Background

Laparoscopic distal gastrectomy has been increasingly utilized in the treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma. This study aims to compare the morbidity/mortality and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy since 2000.

Methods

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was conducted including studies published between 2000 and present.

Results

Seventeen studies with a total of 7,109 distal gastrectomies (3,496 lap vs 3,613 open) were included. Across all studies, postoperative morbidity rates for laparoscopic gastrectomy were lower than that of open [median (range) 10 (0–36)?% vs 17 (0–43)?%]. Meta-analysis of postoperative morbidity rates in prospective studies only yielded pooled odds ratio of 0.52 (95 % CI 0.33–0.81) (P?=?0.004). In-hospital mortality rates were comparable between the two (range: laparoscopic 0–3.3 vs open 0–6.7 %). The long-term oncological outcomes of resection were difficult to analyze given variable reporting but appeared similar between the two. Meta-analysis of prospective studies showed that laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy was associated with significantly shorter hospital length of stay [standard mean difference (SMD)?=??0.78 (95 % CI?=??1.0 to ?0.56)], comparable intraoperative bleeding [SMD?=?0.64 (95 % CI?=??1.3–0.0430) P?=?0.066] and longer operative time compared to open gastrectomy [1.9 (95 % CI 0.05–3.8) P?=?0.045, with P?Conclusion This study supports the use of laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy for treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma with evidence of comparable, if not better, short-term postoperative parameters when compared to open distal gastrectomy. The long-term oncological outcomes appear similar but may require more evaluation.