Background: Laparoscopic gastrectomy for early gastric cancer is widely accepted and routinely performed. However, it is still debated whether the laparoscopic approach is a valid alternative to open gastrectomy in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The aim of this study is to compare short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic (LG) and open (OG) total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in patients with AGC. Methods: A retrospective comparative study was conducted on patients who underwent LG and OG for ACG between January 2015 and December 2021. Primary endpoints were the following: recurrence rate, 3-year disease-free survival, 3-year and 5-year overall survival. Univariate and multivariate analysis was conducted to compare variables influencing outcomes and survival. Results: Ninety-two patients included: fifty-three OG and thirty-nine LG. No difference in morbidity and mortality. LG was associated with lower recurrence rates (OG 22.6% versus LG 12.8%, p = 0.048). No differences in 3-year and 5-year overall survival; 3-year disease-free survival was improved in the LG group on the univariate analysis but not after the multivariate one. LG was associated with longer operative time, lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. Lymph node yield was higher in LG. Conclusion: LG for AGC seems to provide satisfactory clinical and oncological outcomes in medium volume centers, improved postoperative results and possibly lower recurrence rates.

We read with great interest the article that retrospectively analyzed 814 patients with primary gastric cancer, who underwent minimally invasive R0 gastrectomy between 2009 and 2014 by grouping them in laparoscopic vs robotic procedures. The results of the study highlighted that age, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, gastrectomy type and pathological T and N status were the main prognostic factors of minimally invasive gastrectomy and showed how the robotic approach may improve long-term outcomes of advanced gastric cancer. According to most of the current literature, robotic surgery is associated with a statistically longer operating time when compared to open and laparoscopic surgery; however, looking at the adequacy of resection, defined by negative surgical margins and number of lymph nodes removed, it seems that robotic surgery gives better results in terms of the 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival. The robotic approach to gastric cancer surgery aims to overcome the difficulties and technical limitations of laparoscopy in major surgery. The three-dimensional vision, articulation of the instruments and good ergonomics for the surgeon allow for accurate and precise movements which facilitate the complex steps of surgery such as lymph node dissection, esophagus-jejunal anastomosis packaging and reproducing the technical accuracy of open surgery. If the literature, as well as the analyzed study, offers us countless data regarding the short-term oncological results of robotic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer, satisfactory data on long-term follow-up are lacking, so future studies are necessary.

BackgroundTraditionally, synchronous liver resection (LR), cytoreductive surgery (CRS), and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal liver and peritoneal metastases have been contraindicated. Nowadays, clinical practice has promoted this aggressive treatment in selected cases. This study aimed to review surgical and survival results of an extensive surgical approach including CRS with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and LR.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were matched to find the available literature on this topic. The search period was limited to 10 years (January 2010–January 2021). A threshold of case series of 10 patients or more was applied.ResultsIn the search period, out of 114 studies found about liver and peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer, we found 18 papers matching the inclusion criteria. Higher morbidity and mortality were reported for patients who underwent such an extensive surgical approach when compared with patients who underwent only cytoreductive surgery and HIPEC. Also, survival rates seem worse in the former than in the latter.ConclusionThe role of combined surgical strategy in patients with synchronous liver and peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer remains controversial. Survival rates and morbidity and mortality seem not in favor of this option. A more accurate selection of patients and more restrictive surgical indications could perhaps help improve results in this subgroup of patients with limited curative options.