Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 7  |  Page : 1450-1463

Effectiveness and safety of robotic versus traditional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

1 Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University; Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, China
2 Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, China
3 Department of Anesthesiology, Jiangxi Cancer Hospital, The Second People's Hospital of Jiangxi Province, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, China

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Ren-Feng Shan
Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17 Yongwai Zheng Street, Nanchang 330000, Jiangxi Province
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_798_18

Rights and Permissions

Gastrectomy is considered the gold standard treatment for gastric cancer patients. Currently, there are two minimally invasive surgical methods to choose from, robotic gastrectomy (RG) and laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). Nevertheless, it is still unclear which is superior between the two. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of RG and LG for gastric cancer. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases until September 2018 in studies that compared RG and LG in gastric cancer patients. Operative and postoperative outcomes analyzed were assessed. The quality of the evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations. Twenty-four English studies were analyzed. The meta-analysis revealed that the RG group had a significantly longer operation time, lower intraoperative blood loss, and higher perioperative costs compared to the LG group. However, there were no differences in complications, conversion rate, reoperation rate, mortality, number of lymph nodes harvested, days of first flatus, postoperative hospitalization time, and survival rate between the two groups. RG was shown to be associated with decreased intraoperative blood loss and increased perioperative cost and operation time compared to LG. Several higher-quality original studies and prospective clinical trials are required to confirm the advantages of RG.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded271    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 7    

Recommend this journal