Completely laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy in stage I-III/C gastric cancer: safety, efficacy and five-year oncologic outcome.

AIM: Laparoscopic gastrectomy is becoming a minimally invasive procedure widely accepted by laparoscopic surgeons; yet, many doubts remain about its oncologic efficacy in treating malignant neoplasia. Aim of this study was to analyze our experience comparing completely laparoscopic total gastrectomy to its laparotomic counterpart, about safety, efficacy and five-year oncologic outcome. METHODS: From January 2003 to October 2009, 25 patients with stage I-III/C gastric cancer (TNM Seventh Edition, 2010) were operated on and retrospectively compared to an homogeneous group of patients, stratified for age, stage of disease and comorbidities. Length of surgery, estimated blood loss, postoperative ileus, resumption of oral intake, morbidity, 30 days mortality, number of lymph nodes harvested, five years overall and disease free survival were analyzed, comparing the two groups. RESULTS: There was no conversion. Thirty days mortality was zero for both groups, while morbidity was 16% in the lap group, 32% in the open group (P<0.05). Length of operation was 211±23 min for the lap group, and 185±19 min for the open group (P>0.05); the estimated blood loss was 250±150 mL for the lap group, 495±190 mL for the open group (P<0.05). Number of lymph nodes harvested was 35±18 for the lap group, 40±16 for the open group (P>0.05). No port site metastatic implantation occurred in any patient treated laparoscopically; five years overall and disease free survival were 55.7% and 54.2% for the lap group, 52.9% and 52.1% for the open group, respectively, with no statistical difference (P>0.05). Completely laparoscopic total gastrectomy represents a new challenge for the laparoscopic surgeon. In spite of clear advantage for patients, some debate remains about its oncologic efficacy in the middle and long period, even if many authors report comparable results to open total gastrectomy. In our experience, it is a safe and valid alternative to its open counterpart, with no statistically different number of lymph nodes harvested, five years overall and disease free survival in respect to the open gastrectomy. Yet, it remains a complex procedure requiring high laparoscopic skill. CONCLUSION: In our opinion, completely laparoscopic total gastrectomy is a safe and effective procedure, with long term oncologic results not statistically different from the open procedure; yet, it requires high laparoscopic experience, especially to carry out an extended lymphadenectomy and to fashion the anastomosis. More randomized prospective trials are needed to state this procedure as a new gold-standard in treating stage I-III/C non metastatic gastric cancer.

Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for stage I-III mid and low rectal cancer: a retrospective 5 years analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the cornerstone of a correct surgical therapy for extraperitoneal rectal cancer. Aim of the study is to evaluate our 5 years experience confronting retrospectively laparoscopic (lap) TME in respect to its laparotomic (open) counterpart. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 30 patients were treated laparoscopically for stage I-III extraperitoneal rectal cancer and retrospectively compared to a homogeneous group, stratified for sex, age, comorbidities and stage of disease. RESULTS: 30 days mortality was zero for both groups, while morbidity was 20% for the lap group and 36.6% for the open group. Mean lymph nodes harvested was 24 ± 12 for the lap group, 26 ± 14 for the open group (p > 0.05). Five years overall and disease free survival was respectively 82.2% and 81.4% in the lap group, 79.9% and 79.6% in the open group, without statistical significance (p>0.05). Discussion. Minimally invasive TME resulted a safe, effective and oncologically adequate procedure when retrospectively compared to its laparotomic counterpart, with 5 years overall survival and disease free survival reaching no statistical significance compared to the open approach, but with all the advantages of the laparoscopy such as less pain and blood loss, faster recovery, less morbidity and better cosmetics. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has retrospectively demonstrated that laparoscopic TME is feasible and oncologically effective, even if it remains a complex minimally invasive procedure, requiring adequate skill. More prospective, randomized studies are necessary to define such a procedure as the new gold standard in treatment of stage I-III extraperitoneal rectal cancer.

Laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy in T1-T2 renal carcinoma: personal 5-year experience about the oncologic outcome.

AIM: Since 1990 when it was firstly performed, radical laparoscopic nephrectomy has gained wide popularity because of its less morbidity and adequate oncologic outcome. The aim of this study was to report our experience about oncologic 5-year outcome of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. METHODS: Fifteen patients were treated laparoscopically and retrospectively compared to a group of patients treated laparotomically, omogeneous for age, stage of disease and comorbidities. RESULTS: There was no conversion in the laparoscopic group and duration of both procedure showed no statistical difference. Laparoscopic procedures showed less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative ileus, shorter hospitalization and less morbidity, all with statistical significance. Overall 5 years survival showed no statistical significant difference in the two groups (88.9% laparoscopic group vs. 86.2% laparotomic group). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy has clear advantages compared to the traditional surgery, especially about less morbidity, less blood loss, shorter hospitalization, with an oncologic outcome absolutely comparable to the laparotomic procedure. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is a safe and oncologically adequate surgical procedure with clear advantages compared to the its open counterpart, so it must be considered as a valid alternative to laparotomic surgery in case of non metastatic T1-T2 kidney cancer.

[Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with esophago-jejunal termino-lateral anastomosis by Or-Vil device for carcinoma. Our experience in ten consecutive patients]. / Gastrectomia totale totalmente laparoscopica con anastomosi esofago-digiunale termino-laterale (sistema Or-Vil) nel trattamento del cancro gastrico: nostra esperienza su 10 casi consecutivi.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic gastrectomy represents an alternative procedure for treatment of gastric cancer. Yet, some debate remains about its efficacy, basically from an oncologic point of view. Aim of this study is to analyze our experience with totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with termino-lateral esophago-jejunal anastomosis by Or-Vil device. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From February 2007 to February 2008, 10 patients underwent the procedure with Or-Vil device for the esophago-jejunal termino-lateral anastomosis. ASA score, UICC-AJCC stage, number of lymph nodes harvested, mortality and morbidity were analyzed. RESULTS: All procedures were concluded laparoscopically. No mortality was observed, morbidity was 20%. Median of lymph nodes harvested was 30+/-14. No port implantations were observed. Discussion. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, both partial and total, is a new challenge, with clear advantages for the patients, but it still must demonstrate its efficacy, especially from the oncologic point of view. In our experience, we can state that totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy is safe, effective and oncologically correct; yet, it is technically demanding and more studies are required to confirm its oncologic efficacy when compared with laparotomic gastrectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy with esophago-jejunal termino-lateral anastomosis by Or-Vil device represents, in our experience, a valid alternative to open procedure; yet, more prospective randomized trials are needed to define this procedure as a new standard for gastric cancer treatment.