Published online Jan 27, 2024. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v16.i1.40
Peer-review started: September 5, 2023
First decision: September 14, 2023
Revised: September 22, 2023
Accepted: November 8, 2023
Article in press: November 8, 2023
Published online: January 27, 2024
Gastric cancer (GC) is a common malignancy with increasing incidence owing to lifestyle changes. This study compared the outcomes of open surgery and laparoscopic radical surgery (LRS), two different surgical techniques used to treat early-stage GC.
The need to find an effective and less invasive surgical method with less trauma, quick recovery, and minimal impact on immunity motivated this study.
The primary objectives of this study were to compare the effects of open surgery and LRS on operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, length of hospital stay, complications, and tumor marker levels in patients with GC.
A comparative study was conducted on two groups of patients: one group underwent open surgery and the other, LRS. Surgical time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative eating time, length of hospital stays, overall response rate, incidence of complications, tumor marker levels (carbohydrate antigen 19-9, cancer antigen 72-4, carcinoembryonic antigen, and cancer antigen 125), and survival and recurrence rates were compared.
Patients in the LRS group experienced shorter operation times, less intraoperative blood loss, earlier postoperative eating times, and shorter hospital stays, with a higher overall response rate, lower incidence of complications, and significantly decreased tumor marker levels compared with those in the open surgery group. However, no notable differences in three-year survival and recurrence rates were observed between the two groups.
LRS is an effective treatment for early-stage GC. It offers several advantages over open surgery, including reduced intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospital stays, fewer complications, and lower levels of tumor markers. Even in advanced GC, LRS can reduce postoperative complications and contribute to a favorable long-term prognosis.
Despite the promising results, the study has limitations, such as a reduced number of samples and a lack of long-term follow-up due to its retrospective nature. Future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are warranted to validate these findings.