Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy

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.

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

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 < 0.001].

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.