鈴木 和光

PURPOSE: Reduced-port surgery has been utilized in gastric cancer surgery but is not predominantly used due to its high technical difficulty. A new single-port surgical robot named da Vinci™ SP System (DVSP) was launched and eventually approved for clinical use in Japan in November 2022. We initiated robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using DVSP in March 2023. Here, we report our initial experiences and assessments of the feasibility and safety of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer using DVSP. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study included 20 patients with gastric cancer who underwent robotic gastrectomy with DVSP from March 2023 to April 2024. The primary endpoint was the postoperative complication rate within 30 days postoperatively. Secondary endpoints were surgical outcomes, including intraoperative adverse events, operative time, blood loss, and the number of dissected nodes. RESULTS: Of the 20 patients, 6 (30.0%) were male. The median age was 74 years. Tumors in the middle to lower stomach were observed in 20 patients (100.0%), including 18 (90.0%) and 2 (10.0%) with clinical stages I and II diseases, respectively. All patients underwent distal gastrectomy. The postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II occurred in 3 (15%) patients. Intraoperative adverse events, including conversion to other approaches, were not observed. All patients underwent R0 resection. The median operative and console times were 289 and 240 min, respectively. The median blood loss was 11 mL with 50 dissected nodes. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the safe performance of robotic distal gastrectomy with standard lymphadenectomy for clinical stage I/II gastric cancer using DVSP.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the potentially serious complications after gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC). Drain amylase level is a predictor of POPF in open and laparoscopic gastrectomy, but no study has focused on minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including robotic gastrectomy (RG). This study assesses the effect of drain amylase levels for POPF in MIS and develop a prediction model in the MIS era. METHODS: This single-institutional retrospective study, conducted from January 2011 to December 2021, included 1,353 who underwent standard MIS for GC. We placed a drain in all patients undergoing MIS gastrectomy and measured the drain amylase level on the first postoperative day (D1Amy). The predictive accuracy of D1Amy for POPF was assessed. Additionally, the entire cohort was randomly categorized into the training (1,048 patients) and validation sets (305 patients) to establish the nomogram. RESULTS: Of the 1353 patients, 530 underwent a robotic approach. POPF and intraabdominal infectious complications of Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ II were observed in 80 (5.9%) and 145 (10.7%) patients, respectively. Median D1Amy was 812 U/L. The receiver operating characteristic analysis of D1Amy for POPF revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.888. Multivariate analysis revealed age, tumor location, splenectomy, and D1Amy as significant risk factors for POPF. The AUC of the nomogram was 0.8960, validated with AUC of 0.9259. CONCLUSIONS: We revealed the utility of D1Amy in predicting POPF in MIS gastrectomy. Furthermore, the nomogram, incorporating D1Amy and other clinical factors, was additionally used as a predictive model for POPF.

BACKGROUND: Advanced gastric cancer with gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) causes malnutrition and medication adherence issues, leading to a poor prognosis. We developed a novel multimodal, less invasive treatment approach for gastric cancer patients with symptomatic GOO: laparoscopic stomach-partitioning gastrojejunostomy (LSPGJ) combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), followed by minimally invasive gastrectomy with reuse of gastrojejunostomy. This study is a retrospective analysis of the safety and feasibility of our treatment strategy. METHODS: In this single-institution retrospective study, we enrolled 54 patients (NAC group, n = 26; upfront gastrectomy group, n = 28) who achieved R0 resection through a minimally invasive approach between 2007 and 2020 and evaluated their short- and long-term outcomes. RESULTS: After LSPGJ, the Gastric Outlet Obstruction Scoring System score significantly improved (p < 0.001). The median relative dose intensity of NAC was 88.2%. Regarding short-term outcomes, there were no differences in postoperative complications, length of postsurgical hospital stay, and adjuvant chemotherapy administration. Although overall survival and relapse-free survival showed trends toward improvement in the NAC group, these differences were not statistically significant. The cumulative incidence curve for recurrence in the NAC group was significantly lower than that of the upfront gastrectomy group (p = 0.041). Recurrence and hematogenous metastasis were significantly lower in the NAC group (p = 0.031 and 0.041, respectively) than in the upfront gastrectomy group. A forest plot revealed that NAC yielded favorable outcomes, particularly for patients with a body mass index (BMI) < 18.5 kg/m2, cT4, or cN1. CONCLUSIONS: LSPGJ combined with NAC followed by minimally invasive gastrectomy was a safe and feasible treatment strategy for patients with advanced gastric cancer with symptomatic GOO. This procedure may contribute to the early recovery of oral intake and help maintain NAC dose intensity, potentially improving prognosis, particularly for patients with low BMI and advanced-stage disease.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) performance of non-Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (ESSQS)-qualified surgeons under the ESSQS-qualified surgeon guidance and compare oncological outcomes of gastric cancer to LG performed by the ESSQS-qualified surgeons. METHODS: This study enrolled 1,030 patients diagnosed with both clinical and pathological stage ≤ III gastric cancer and undergoing LG from January 2009 to June 2019. ESSQS-qualified surgeons served as the operator or the instructive assistant in all LG procedures involving them. A propensity score-matched analysis was used to retrospectively compare the long-term outcomes between the ESSQS-qualified and non-ESSQS-qualified surgeons. RESULTS: Each group included 315 pairs after propensity score matching. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were 84.4% and 81.7% in the non-ESSQS and ESSQS groups, respectively. The difference was 2.7% (95% confidence interval: - 3.20%-8.44%, P < 0.001), and the non-ESSQS group statistically demonstrated noninferiority as the lower 95% confidence limit was greater than the prespecified margin of -10%, indicating the achieved primary endpoint. No significant differences in 5-year recurrence-free survival (non-ESSQS: 78.5% vs. ESSQS: 77.4%, P = 0.627) and 5-year overall survival (non-ESSQS: 80.9% vs. ESSQS: 79.3%, P = 0.475) were found between the two groups. The oncological outcomes stratified according to the presence of pathological stage I, II, and III disease did not significantly differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: LG performed by non-ESSQS-qualified surgeons achieved comparable oncological outcomes to the ESSQS-qualified surgeons, as long as ESSQS-qualified surgeons provided intraoperative instructions, in a high-volume center.