Open versus laparoscopic versus robotic gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumour resections: A multicentre cohort study

Domenico D'Ugo, Maria Milone, Carmelo Maria Antonio Parisi, Leonardo Solaini, Davide Cavaliere, Marco Milone, Stefano De Pascale, Jacopo Desiderio, Giulia Vitali, Amilcare Parisi, Uberto Fumagalli Romario, Giovanni Domenico De Palma, Giorgio Ercolani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To present the outcomes of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) resection from five Italian centres, focussing the analysis on the comparison among open (OG), laparoscopic (LG) and robotic (RG) approaches. Methods: All consecutive gastric wedge resections for GIST between 2009 and 2019 were included. Results: In total 101 (OG = 14, LG = 63 and RG = 24) were included. No differences were seen in the preoperative characteristics among the groups. Robotic procedures were longer (RG 180 min vs. LG 100 vs. OG 110; p < 0.0001). Time-to-first flatus and length of hospital stay were significantly longer in the OG group. Complication rates were similar among the groups. A sub-analysis on minimally invasive (RG = 19 vs. LG = 20) wedge resections and hand/robot-sewn suture showed that operative time was longer in the RGs (p = 0.007). No conversions were recorded in the RG group versus three in the LG group (p = 0.231). Safety-related factors were similar. Conclusions: Gastric GIST can be safely treated with a minimally invasive approach which is also associated with improved postoperative outcomes.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-18
Number of pages18
JournalTHE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020

Keywords

  • gastrectomy
  • gastrointestinal stromal tumour
  • minimally invasive gastric resection
  • robotic gastrectomy
  • robotic surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Open versus laparoscopic versus robotic gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumour resections: A multicentre cohort study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this