Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Die minimal-invasive Gastrektomie etabliert sich weltweit zunehmend als Alternative zur offenen Gastrektomie (OG). Die Mehrzahl der hierzu verfügbaren Literatur bezieht sich jedoch auf die asiatische Population und auf frühe Stadien des Magenkarzinoms, wobei ein internationaler Vergleich der Ergebnisse aufgrund einer Diskrepanz der Patientenpopulationen, der Tumorbiologie und auch der Therapieansätze zwischen asiatischer und westlicher Welt schwierig ist. Wenig ist daher darüber bekannt, ob die laparoskopische Gastrektomie (LG) auch bei fortgeschrittenem Karzinom insbesondere hinsichtlich laparoskopischer D2-Lymphadenektomie hierzulande mit ausreichender Radikalität und Sicherheit durchführbar ist.
Material und Methoden
Es erfolgte die Analyse aller durchgeführten Gastrektomien zur Therapie eines fortgeschrittenen Magenkarzinoms im klinischen UICC-Stadium 2 und 3 zwischen 2005 und 2017. Zum Vergleich der operativen und früh-postoperativen Ergebnisse nach laparoskopischer und offener Gastrektomie erfolgte ein „case-matching“ nach Alter, Geschlecht und UICC-Stadium.
Ergebnisse
Insgesamt wurden 243 Patienten aufgrund eines fortgeschrittenen Magenkarzinoms eingeschlossen und analysiert. Hiervon erfolgte bei 81 Patienten (33,3 %) eine LG. Die Operationszeit der LG war im Mittel 74 min länger (279,2 vs. 353,4 min; OG vs. LG; p < 0,001), der stationäre Aufenthalt nach LG etwa 4 Tage kürzer (22,9 vs. 18,4 Tage; OG vs. LG; p < 0,001). Bei der LG wurden signifikant mehr Lymphknoten reseziert (24,1 vs. 28,8 Lymphknoten; OG vs. LG; p < 0,001). In Bezug auf die Morbidität und Mortalität zeigte sich kein Unterschied in den Operationsgruppen.
Schlussfolgerung
Die vorliegende Studie zeigt, dass die minimal-invasive Gastrektomie auch bei fortgeschrittenem Magenkarzinom bei westlicher Bevölkerung technisch sicher und mit vergleichbaren histopathologischen Ergebnissen zur offenen Operation durchgeführt werden kann. Größere Fallzahlen und Evidenz aus hochwertigen Studien hierzu sind jedoch insbesondere zur Beurteilung der Überlebensunterschiede dringend erforderlich.
Abstract
Background
Minimally invasive gastrectomy is increasingly becoming established worldwide as an alternative to open gastrectomy (OG); however, the majority of available articles in the literature refer to Asian populations and early stages of gastric cancer. This makes an international comparison difficult due to a discrepancy in patient populations and tumor biology as well as Asian and western treatment approaches. Little is known, therefore, whether laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) can be performed in advanced cancer, in particular with respect to laparoscopic D2 lymphadenectomy, with sufficient radicality and safety in this country.
Material and methods
All gastrectomies performed for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer with clinical UICC stages 2 and 3 between 2005 and 2017 were analyzed. A case match by age, gender and UICC stage was performed to compare the operative and early postoperative results of LG and OG.
Results
A total of 243 patients with advanced gastric cancer were analyzed. Of these 81 patients (33.3%) underwent LG. The operative time for LG was around 74 min longer (279.2 min vs. 353.4 min, OG vs. LG; p < 0.001), the hospital stay after LG was around 4 days shorter (22.9 days vs. 18.4 days, OG vs. LG; p < 0.001). Significantly more lymph nodes were resected by LG (24.1 lymph nodes vs. 28.8 lymph nodes, OG vs. LG; p < 0.001). In terms of morbidity and mortality there were no differences between the groups.
Conclusion
The present study showed that minimally invasive gastrectomy can be performed safely and with comparable histopathological results to open surgery, even in advanced gastric cancer in western populations; however, larger case series and evidence from high-quality studies are urgently needed especially to compare short-term and long-term survival.
Literatur
Al-Batran SE, Hofheinz RD, Pauligk C et al (2016) Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Oncol 17:1697–1708
Berlth F, Yang HK (2018) Minimal-invasive gastrectomy: what the west can learn from the east? Updates Surg 70(2):181-187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0547-z. Epub 2018 Jun 18
Best LM, Mughal M, Gurusamy KS (2016) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD11389
Brenkman HJ, Haverkamp L, Ruurda JP et al (2016) Worldwide practice in gastric cancer surgery. World J Gastroenterol 22:4041–4048
Brenkman HJF, Gisbertz SS, Slaman AE et al (2017) Postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy during the early introduction of minimally invasive gastrectomy in the Netherlands: a population-based cohort study. Ann Surg 266:831–838
Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP et al (2006) Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 355:11–20
De Steur WO, Hartgrink HH, Dikken JL et al (2015) Quality control of lymph node dissection in the Dutch Gastric Cancer Trial. Br J Surg 102:1388–1393
Eshuis WJ, Van Berge Henegouwen MI, Draaisma WA et al (2018) Compliance to D2 lymphadenectomy in laparoscopic gastrectomy. Updates Surg 70(2):197–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0553-1. Epub 2018 Jun 20
Gong J, Cao Y, Li Y et al (2014) Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus laparoscopy-assisted D2 radical gastrectomy: a prospective study. Surg Endosc 28:2998–3006
Hao Y, Yu P, Qian F et al (2016) Comparison of laparoscopy-assisted and open radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective study in a single minimally invasive surgery center. Medicine 95:e3936
Haverkamp L, Brenkman HJ, Seesing MF et al (2015) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer, a multicenter prospectively randomized controlled trial (LOGICA-trial). Bmc Cancer 15:556
Honda M, Hiki N, Kinoshita T et al (2016) Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for clinical stage I gastric cancer: the LOC‑1 study. Ann Surg 264:214–222
Hu Y, Huang C, Sun Y et al (2016) Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 34:1350–1357
Hu Y, Ying M, Huang C et al (2014) Oncologic outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a large-scale multicenter retrospective cohort study from China. Surg Endosc 28:2048–2056
Inaki N, Etoh T, Ohyama T et al (2015) A multi-institutional, prospective, phase II feasibility study of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer (JLSSG0901). World J Surg 39:2734–2741
Inokuchi M, Nakagawa M, Tanioka T et al (2018) Long- and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy in patients with clinically and pathological locally advanced gastric cancer: a propensity-score matching analysis. Surg Endosc 32:735–742
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2017) Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer 20:1–19
Kaito A, Kinoshita T, Shitara K et al (2017) Timing of initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: a case-matched comparison study of laparoscopic vs. open surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 43:801–807
Katai H, Mizusawa J, Katayama H et al (2017) Short-term surgical outcomes from a phase III study of laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA/IB gastric cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG0912. Gastric Cancer 20:699–708
Katai H, Sasako M, Fukuda H et al (2010) Safety and feasibility of laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with suprapancreatic nodal dissection for clinical stage I gastric cancer: a multicenter phase II trial (JCOG 0703). Gastric Cancer 13:238–244
Kim HH, Hyung WJ, Cho GS et al (2010) Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report—a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg 251:417–420
Kim W, Kim HH, Han SU et al (2016) Decreased morbidity of laparoscopic distal gastrectomy compared with open distal gastrectomy for stage I gastric cancer: short-term outcomes from a multicenter randomized controlled trial (KLASS-01). Ann Surg 263:28–35
Kinoshita T, Uyama I, Terashima M et al (2018) Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for clinical stage II/III gastric cancer: a multicenter cohort study in Japan (LOC‑A study). Ann Surg 269(5):887–894. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002768
Kitano S, Iso Y, Moriyama M et al (1994) Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4:146–148
Ludwig K, Schneider-Koriath S, Scharlau U et al (2018) Totally laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a matched pair analysis. Zentralbl Chir 143:145–154
Moehler M, Al-Batran SE, Andus T et al (2011) German S3-guideline “Diagnosis and treatment of esophagogastric cancer”. Z Gastroenterol 49:461–531
Nakamura K, Katai H, Mizusawa J et al (2013) A phase III study of laparoscopy-assisted versus open distal gastrectomy with nodal dissection for clinical stage IA/IB gastric Cancer (JCOG0912). Jpn J Clin Oncol 43:324–327
Robert Koch-Institut GDEKID (2017) Krebs in Deutschland 2013–2014, 11. Aufl., S 32–35 (Kapitel 3.4: Magen)
Ronellenfitsch U, Schwarzbach M, Hofheinz R et al (2013) Perioperative chemo(radio)therapy versus primary surgery for resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach, gastroesophageal junction, and lower esophagus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 31(5):CD008107. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008107.pub2
Russo A, Li P, Strong VE (2017) Differences in the multimodal treatment of gastric cancer: east versus west. J Surg Oncol 115:603–614
Shi Y, Xu X, Zhao Y et al (2018) Short-term surgical outcomes of a randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection for advanced gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 32:2427–2433
Shinohara T, Satoh S, Kanaya S et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open D2 gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27:286–294
Songun I, Putter H, Kranenbarg EM et al (2010) Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: 15-year follow-up results of the randomised nationwide Dutch D1D2 trial. Lancet Oncol 11:439–449
Strong VE, Song KY, Park CH et al (2010) Comparison of gastric cancer survival following R0 resection in the United States and Korea using an internationally validated nomogram. Ann Surg 251:640–646
Wei Y, Yu D, Li Y et al (2018) Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis based on high-quality retrospective studies and clinical randomized trials. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 42:577–590
Xu Y, Hua J, Li J et al (2019) Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a large cohort study. Am J Surg 217:750–756
Zhao Y, Yu P, Hao Y et al (2011) Comparison of outcomes for laparoscopically assisted and open radical distal gastrectomy with lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer. Surg Endosc 25:2960–2966
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Interessenkonflikt
J. Raakow, C. Denecke, S. Chopra, J. Fritz, T. Hofmann, A. Andreou, P. Thuss-Patience, J. Pratschke und M. Biebl geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.
Additional information
Die Autoren J. Raakow und C. Denecke haben zu gleichen Teilen zu der Arbeit beigetragen.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Raakow, J., Denecke, C., Chopra, S. et al. Laparoskopische vs. offene Gastrektomie bei fortgeschrittenem Magenkarzinom. Chirurg 91, 252–261 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-019-01053-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-019-01053-1