LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN SURGERY IN GASTRIC GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS LARGER THAN 5 CM: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection represents the main treatment for resectable nonmetastatic gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Despite the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic resection, its standard use in gastric tumors larger than 5 cm is yet to be established. AIMS: This study aimed to compare the current evidence on laparoscopic resection with the classical open surgical approach in terms of perioperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes. METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were consulted. Articles comparing the approach to gastric gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm by open and laparoscopic surgery were eligible. A post hoc subgroup analysis based on the extent of the surgery was performed to evaluate the operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of nine studies met the eligibility criteria. In the study, 246 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and 301 patients undergoing open surgery were included. The laparoscopic approach had statistically significant lower intraoperative blood loss (p=0.01) and time to oral intake (p<0.01), time to first flatus (p<0.01), and length of hospital stay (0.01), compared to the open surgery approach. No significant differences were found when operative time (0.25), postoperative complications (0.08), R0 resection (0.76), and recurrence rate (0.09) were evaluated. The comparative subgroup analysis between studies could not explain the substantial heterogeneity obtained in the respective outcomes. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach in gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm compared to the open surgical approach is a technically safe and feasible surgical method with similar oncological results.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery in gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm: a systematic review and meta-analysis / Abordagem laparoscópica versus cirurgia aberta em tumores estromais gástricos superiores a 5 cm: revisão sistemática e meta-análise

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Surgical resection represents the main treatment for resectable nonmetastatic gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Despite the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic resection, its standard use in gastric tumors larger than 5 cm is yet to be established. AIMS: This study aimed to compare the current evidence on laparoscopic resection with the classical open surgical approach in terms of perioperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes. METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were consulted. Articles comparing the approach to gastric gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm by open and laparoscopic surgery were eligible. A post hoc subgroup analysis based on the extent of the surgery was performed to evaluate the operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: A total of nine studies met the eligibility criteria. In the study, 246 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and 301 patients undergoing open surgery were included. The laparoscopic approach had statistically significant lower intraoperative blood loss (p=0.01) and time to oral intake (p<0.01), time to first flatus (p<0.01), and length of hospital stay (0.01), compared to the open surgery approach. No significant differences were found when operative time (0.25), postoperative complications (0.08), R0 resection (0.76), and recurrence rate (0.09) were evaluated. The comparative subgroup analysis between studies could not explain the substantial heterogeneity obtained in the respective outcomes. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach in gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm compared to the open surgical approach is a technically safe and feasible surgical method with similar oncological results.

RESUMO RACIONAL: A resseção cirúrgica representa a principal forma de tratamento de tumores estromais gástricos não metastáticos ressecáveis. Apesar da viabilidade e segurança da ressecção laparoscópica, a sua utilização generalizada em tumores gástricos com mais de 5 centímetros ainda não foi estabelecida. OBJETIVOS: Comparar as evidências atuais sobre a resseção por via laparoscópica com a cirurgia aberta, em termos de resultados peri-, pós-operatórios e oncológicos. MÉTODOS: Foram consultadas as bases de dados PubMed, Scopus e Web of Science. Artigos que comparassem a abordagem de tumores estromais gástricos gástricos com tamanho superior a 5 centímetros por cirurgia aberta e por via laparoscópica foram incluídos. Uma análise de subgrupos post-hoc, com base na extensão da cirurgia, foi realizada para os outcomes tempo intra-operatório, perdas de sangue e tempo de hospitalização. RESULTADOS: Nove estudos cumpriram os critérios de elegibilidade, tendo sido incluídos 246 pacientes submetidos a cirurgia por via laparoscópica e 301 pacientes submetidos a cirurgia aberta. A abordagem laparoscópica apresentou perdas de sangue intra-operatórias (p=0,01) e tempos até alimentação oral (p<0,01), para primeiro flato (p<0,01) e de hospitalização (0,01) estatisticamente inferiores relativamente à abordagem por cirurgia aberta. Não foram encontradas diferenças significativas quando avaliados o tempo operatório (0,25), complicações pós-operatórias (0,08), resseção R0 (0,76) e taxa de recorrência (0,09). A análise de subgrupos comparativa não permitiu explicar a heterogeneidade substancial obtida nos respetivos outcomes. CONCLUSÕES: A via laparoscópica em tumores estromais gástricos superiores a 5 centímetros comparativamente com a abordagem por cirurgia aberta, constitui um método cirúrgico tecnicamente seguro e viável, com resultados oncológicos semelhantes.