Effects of robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy on short-term efficacy and prognosis in obese patients with gastric cancer
10.3760/cma.j.cn113855-20250517-00280
- VernacularTitle:机器人和腹腔镜胃癌根治术对肥胖胃癌患者近期疗效及预后的影响
- Author:
Cheng MENG
1
;
Qin YU
;
Zequn LI
;
Xiaodong LIU
;
Yulong TIAN
;
Yuqi SUN
;
Shougen CAO
;
Yanbing ZHOU
Author Information
1. 青岛大学附属医院胃肠外科，青岛 266000
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Stomach neoplasms;
Robot;
Gastrectomy;
Treatment outcomes;
Prognosis
- From:
Chinese Journal of General Surgery
2025;40(8):624-630
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the effects of robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy on short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis in obese patients with gastric cancer.Methods:Clinical data from 231 obese gastric cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic radical gastrectomy at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between Jan 2015 and Dec 2022 was analyzed. After propensity score matching, the patients were divided into robotic surgery group ( n=79) and laparoscopic surgery group ( n=79). The short-term clinical outcomes and long-term prognosis were compared. Results:Compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had a significantly greater number of dissected lymph nodes [(32±13) vs. (26±11), t=2.797, P=0.006], shorter operation time [(245±65) min vs. (272±62) min, t=-2.669, P=0.008], less intraoperative blood loss[(84±69) vs. (119±56) ml, t=-3.502, P=0.001], shorter postoperative hospital stay [(8.2±3.5) vs. (9.6±4.2) d, t=-2.363, P=0.019], and higher hospitalization cost [(102,139±18,303) vs. (77,857±18,325) yuan, t=8.333, P<0.001]. The 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were comparable between the robotic and laparoscopic groups (77.2% vs. 74.7%, P=0.684; and 73.4% vs. 68.4%, P=0.491, respectively). Conclusions:Robotic radical gastrectomy is a safe and feasible alternative for obese gastric cancer patients in experienced hands. It offers advantages in short-term clinical outcomes, however, it fails to provide a significant long-term survival benefit.
