Ongoing surgical clinical trials on minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: Korea.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lee JH
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5244744 | biostudies-literature | 2016
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Ongoing surgical clinical trials on minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: Korea.
Translational gastroenterology and hepatology 20160518
Since Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group was activated in 2003, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have finished or are ongoing in Korea to evaluate oncologic safety and feasibility of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer by KLASS group as well as other expert surgeons. MIS in gastric cancer is regarded as one of standard treatment modality for early gastric cancer (EGC) and the indication is going expansion with the accumulation of evidence. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Gastric cancer is the most common cancer in Korea. Because the incidence of gastric cancer is still high even with early detection and because of developments in surgical instruments and technological advances, minimally invasive surgery has rapidly become an accepted treatment for gastric cancer in Korea. Many Korean gastric surgeons have contributed to the rapid adaptation of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: not only the Korean Laparoscopic Gastrointestinal Surgery Study (KLASS) group, but also other expert surgeons after the 2000s. Thanks to their vigorous efforts involving active learning, education, workshops, academic communications, and international communications with active laparoscopic gastric surgeons in Korea, numerous results and well-designed large-scale clinical studies have been published or are actively ongoing, thus increasing its wide acceptance as an option for gastric cancer. Now, Korea has become one of the leading countries using minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer. This review article will summarize the current status and issues, as well as the clinical trials that have finished or are ongoing, regarding minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in Korea.
| S-EPMC4603086 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The interest in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has rapidly increased in recent decades and surgeons have adopted minimally invasive techniques due to its reduced invasiveness and numerous advantages for patients. With increased surgical experience and newly developed surgical instruments, MIS has become the preferred approach not only for benign disease but also for oncologic surgery. Recently, robotic systems have been developed to overcome difficulties of standard laparoscopic instruments during complex procedures. Its advantages including three-dimensional images, tremor filtering, motion scaling, articulated instruments, and stable retraction have created the opportunity to use robotic technology in many procedures including cancer surgery. Gastric cancer is one of the most common causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. While its overall incidence has decreased worldwide, the proportion of early gastric cancer has increased mainly in eastern countries following mass screening programs. The shift in the paradigm of gastric cancer treatment is toward less invasive approaches in order to improve the patient's quality of life while adhering to oncological principles. In this review, we aimed to summarize the operative strategy and current literature in laparoscopic and robotic surgery for gastric cancer.
| S-EPMC4379789 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Over the past decade, the surgical approach to treating thoracic disease has shifted to minimally invasive surgery. Without compromising the outcomes, this approach may lead to fewer resections and fewer incisions for those resections. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is a recent but major advancement that has become an established approach for major thoracic surgery. More recently, robotic surgery has been gaining recognition because it can overcome the limitations of VATS and encourage a minimally invasive approach. Indications and applications of many other innovative surgical techniques and strategies to improve overall survival have expanded rapidly. In this article, we do not represent all thoracic surgeries occurring in Korea and do not reflect the large active centers in the country. However, as one of the most innovative and active Korean centers for thoracic surgery and research, we reviewed our procedures and programs for thoracic surgery.
| S-EPMC5009074 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since Dr. Kitano introduced laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer in 1994, there have been remarkable advances in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for gastric cancer, including robotic surgery. With the efforts of many clinical researchers and consenting patients, medical knowledge and evidence for laparoscopic surgery in gastric cancer have accumulated. Although many gastric surgeons are comfortable with the clinical application of laparoscopic surgery for early gastric cancer, the adoption of MISs for advanced gastric cancer remains controversial. In this review article, we describe the current status and evidence of MIS from an evidence-based medicine viewpoint and explore the feasibility and effectiveness of MIS for advanced gastric cancer in the real world.
| S-EPMC9130905 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite high mortality rates from gastric cancer, surgical management remains critical for curative potential. Optimal outcomes of gastric cancer resection depend on a multitude of variables, including the extent of resection, scope of lymphadenectomy, method of reconstruction, and potential for a minimally invasive approach. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, compared with open gastrectomy, has been analyzed in numerous randomized control trials. Generally, those trials demonstrated statistically similar postoperative complication rates, mortality, and oncologic outcomes between the two approaches. Although laparoscopic gastrectomy requires longer operative times, significant improvements in estimated blood loss, postoperative length of stay, and return of bowel function have been noted in patients who undergo laparoscopic gastrectomy. These short-term benefits, along with equivalent oncologic results, have influenced national guidelines in both Eastern and Western countries to recommend laparoscopy, especially for early stage disease. Although robotic gastrectomy has not been as widely validated in effective trials, studies have reported equivalent oncologic outcomes and similar or improved postoperative complication and recovery rates after robotic gastrectomy compared with open gastrectomy. Comparing the two minimally invasive gastrectomy approaches, robotic surgery was associated with improved estimated blood loss, incidence of pancreatic sequela, and lymph node harvests in some studies, whereas laparoscopy resulted in lower operative times and hospital costs. Ultimately, when applying outcomes from the literature to clinical patient care decisions, it is imperative to recognize these studies' range of inclusion criteria, delineating between patients originating from Eastern or Western countries, the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the volume of surgeon experience, and the extent of gastrectomy, among others.
| S-EPMC9828344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimTo investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and determine surgical, clinical, and oncological outcomes.MethodsThis is a propensity score-matched case-control study, comparing three treatment arms: robotic gastrectomy (RG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), open gastrectomy (OG). Data collection started after sharing a specific study protocol. Data were recorded through a tailored and protected web-based system. Primary outcomes: harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications rate. Among the secondary outcomes, there are: operative time, R0 resections, POD of mobilization, POD of starting liquid diet and soft solid diet. The analysis includes the evaluation of type and grade of postoperative complications. Detailed information of anastomotic leakages is also provided.ResultsThe present analysis was carried out of 1026 gastrectomies. To guarantee homogenous distribution of cases, patients in the RG, LG and OG groups were 1:1:2 matched using a propensity score analysis with a caliper = 0.2. The successful matching resulted in a total sample of 604 patients (RG = 151; LG = 151; OG = 302). The three groups showed no differences in all baseline patients characteristics, type of surgery (P = 0.42) and stage of the disease (P = 0.16). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LG (95.93 ± 119.22) and RG (117.91 ± 68.11) groups compared to the OG (127.26 ± 79.50, P = 0.002). The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the RG (27.78 ± 11.45), LG (24.58 ± 13.56) and OG (25.82 ± 12.07) approach. A benefit in favor of the minimally invasive approaches was found in the length of hospital stay (P < 0.0001). A similar complications rate was found (P = 0.13). The leakage rate was not different (P = 0.78) between groups.ConclusionLaparoscopic and robotic surgery can be safely performed and proposed as possible alternative to open surgery. The main highlighted benefit is a faster postoperative functional recovery.
| S-EPMC5385404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Minimally invasive surgery, which has been extensively used to treat gastric adenocarcinoma, is now regarded as one of the standard treatments for early gastric cancer, and its suitability for advanced gastric cancer is being investigated. The use of cutting-edge techniques for minimally invasive surgery enables surgeons to deliver various treatment options to minimize a patient's distress and to maintain oncologic safety. Ongoing multicenter prospective studies aim to validate the efficacy of these surgical techniques and to expand the indications of minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer. In this review, we summarize the current status and issues regarding minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of gastric cancer.
| S-EPMC4026638 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs the US healthcare system moves towards value-based care, hospitals have increased efforts to improve quality and reduce unnecessary resource use. Surgery is one of the most resource-intensive areas of healthcare and we aim to compare health resource utilization between open and minimally invasive cancer procedures.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed cancer patients who underwent colon resection, rectal resection, lobectomy, or radical nephrectomy within the Premier hospital database between 2014 and 2019. Study outcomes included length of stay (LOS), discharge status, reoperation, and 30-day readmission. The open surgical approach was compared to minimally invasive approach (MIS), with subgroup analysis of laparoscopic/video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (LAP/VATS) and robotic (RS) approaches, using inverse probability of treatment weighting.ResultsMIS patients had shorter LOS compared to open approach: - 1.87 days for lobectomy, - 1.34 days for colon resection, - 0.47 days for rectal resection, and - 1.21 days for radical nephrectomy (all p < .001). All MIS procedures except for rectal resection are associated with higher discharge to home rates and lower reoperation and readmission rates. Within MIS, robotic approach was further associated with shorter LOS than LAP/VATS: - 0.13 days for lobectomy, - 0.28 days for colon resection, - 0.67 days for rectal resection, and - 0.33 days for radical nephrectomy (all p < .05) and with equivalent readmission rates.ConclusionOur data demonstrate a significant shorter LOS, higher discharge to home rate, and lower rates of reoperation and readmission for MIS as compared to open procedures in patients with lung, kidney, and colorectal cancer. Patients who underwent robotic procedures had further reductions in LOS compare to laparoscopic/video-assisted thoracoscopic approach, while the reductions in LOS did not lead to increased rates of readmission.
| S-EPMC9022614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of this study is to review the literature and report the various minimally invasive methods used to treat gastric cancer in the UK and compare it with worldwide practice. Published randomised studies, non-randomised studies and case series reporting the use of minimal invasive approach to treat gastric cancer were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and their outcomes were highlighted suggesting their effectiveness. Several randomised, controlled trials and meta-analyses have proven the clinical and oncological safety of the laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Similarly, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR (endoscopic mucosal resection) and ESD (endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection) have also been proven feasible and safe to treat gastric cancer of various stages in prospective and retrospective comparative studies. However, UK based studies on minimally invasive surgery to treat gastric cancer is scarce and the paucity of trials led to uncertain outcomes. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR and ESD are feasible procedures in terms of clinical and oncological safety but mainly being practiced in Asian countries with high prevalence of stomach cancer. The UK based practice is still small and limited but the introduction of MIGOCS and STOMACH trial might help to widen the application of this technique.
| S-EPMC5460175 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionSacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction has been shown to cause significant morbidity. Current treatment includes conservative management and surgical intervention. Previously published data reporting clinical and surgical outcomes reached conflicting conclusions. This protocol aims to conduct a meta-analysis to determine fusion rates and patient-reported outcomes of minimally invasive (MIS) SIJ fusions compared with conservative treatment.Methods and analysisWe drafted our protocol according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. We will search PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library, supplemented by manual search when necessary. Two independent reviewers will screen for eligibility by title/abstract, then full text, arbitrated by a third reviewer if necessary. The two reviewers will carry out a risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool for randomised controlled trial and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies tool for observational cohort studies. A third reviewer will arbitrate any disagreement. We will perform data synthesis using Review Manager (RevMan for Windows, V.5.4.1, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020) and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (V.3.3.070). Meta-bias will be evaluated and confidence determined using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval for this review will not be required as no patient data is being collected. The results of this study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals.Prospero registration numberCRD42021273481.
| S-EPMC9454064 | biostudies-literature