Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for serosa-invasive gastric cancer: A single-center retrospective cohort study

Background: Whether laparoscopic gastrectomy is suitable for patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer remains controversial. We performed this study to evaluate the short-and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic gastrectomy compared with after open gastrectomy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 906 consecutive patients with serosa-invasive gastric cancer from January 2004 to December 2014 in our center, who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy or open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. After propensity score matching, 334 patients were included in each group. Surgical conditions and short-and long-term results were compared. Results: Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with less estimated blood loss and longer operation time, while the number of harvested lymph nodes was not significantly different between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy. Patients who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy had an earlier time to first flatus, first diet, and first ambulation and were discharged earlier. Overall and pulmonary postoperative complication rates were lower in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group. With a minimum follow-up of 60 months, the 5-year overall survival was 39.3% in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group and 34.3% in the open gastrectomy group, and the 5-year disease-free survival was 36.4% in the laparoscopic gastrectomy group and 32.7% in the open gastrectomy group. Laparoscopic gastrectomy was associated with better 5-year overall survival in patients aged >60 years. The overall recurrence rates and patterns were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic gastrectomy is an alternative surgical approach for patients with serosainvasive gastric cancer in terms of short-term outcomes and long-term survival, and it might be more advantageous for certain populations. (c) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc.