Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: an update meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

Background: We carry out a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer.

Methods: We searched EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Science Citation Index (SCI), Chinese biomedicine literature database to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their inception to April 2012. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.0 software. It was in line with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. The quality of evidence was assessed by GRADEpro 3.6.

Results: Eight RCTs totaling 784 patients were analyzed. Compared with open gastrectomy group, no significant differences were found in postoperative mortality (OR = 1.49; 95 % CI 0.29-7.79), anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.02; 95 % CI 0.24-4.27) , overall mean number of harvested lymph nodes [weighed mean difference (MD) = -3.17; 95 % CI -6.39 to 0.05]; the overall postoperative complication morbidity (OR = 0.54; 95 % CI 0.36-0.82), estimated blood loss (MD = -107.23; 95 % CI -148.56 to -65.89,) frequency of analgesic administration (MD = -1.69; 95 % CI -2.18 to -1.21, P < 0.00001), incidence of pulmonary complications (OR = 0.43, 95 % CI 0.20-0.93, P = 0.03) were significantly less in LAG group; LAG had shorter time to start first flatus (MD = -0.23; 95 % CI -0.41 to -0.05) and decreased hospital stay (MD = -1.72; 95 % CI -3.40 to 0.04), but, LAG still had longer operation time (MD = 76.70; 95 % CI 51.54-101.87).

Conclusions: On the basis of this meta-analysis we conclude that although LAG was still a time-consuming and technically dependent procedure, it has the advantage of better short-term outcome. Long term survival data from other studies are urgently needed to estimate the survival benefit of this technique.