Авторы
Греков Д.Н.1, 3, Кузьменко А.А.1, Петросян Т.В.1, Андрейцев И.Л.1, Титов К.С.1, 2, Якомаскин В.Н.1
1 ГБУЗ «Московский многопрофильный научно-клинический центр им. С.П. Боткина ДЗМ», Москва
2 ФГАОУ ВО «Российский университет дружбы народов», Москва
3 ФГБОУ ДПО «Российская медицинская академия непрерывного профессионального образования», Москва
Аннотация
Лечение больных раком желудка является одним из сложнейших разделов в онкологии и хирургии. В то время, как операция, по-прежнему является основным методом лечения больных раком желудка, анализ мировой литературы доказывает, что комбинированный подход с применением периоперационной химиотерапии улучшает отдаленный онкологический прогноз у пациентов с местнораспространенными формами рака желудка. Дискутабельным остается выбор хирургического доступа. В настоящее время мировой тенденцией в хирургии рака желудка является применение мини-инвазивных технологий. По данным литературы их применение в хирургии рака желудка позволяет снизить уровень операционной травмы, что в свою очередь приводит к меньшей кровопотере, снижению количества раневых осложнений и ранней активизации пациента и, соответственно, более раннего начала послеоперационного химиотерапевтического лечения. На сегодняшний день лапароскопический доступ в лечении ранних форм рака желудка является уже стандартом, при этом роль робот-ассистированных методик до конца не определена.
Целью настоящей работы является выявить преимущества и недостатки робот – ассистированной хирургии рака желудка, как части комбинированного лечения пациентов с раком желудка, основываясь на обзоре мировой научной литературы.
Ключевые слова: рак желудка, робот-ассистированная хирургия, гастрэктомия, резекция желудка, химиотерапия.
Список литературы
1. Biondi A, et al. Does a minimum number of 16 retrieved nodes affect survival in curatively resected gastric cancer? European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO). 2015; 41(6): 779-786. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.03.227.
2. Kitano S, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted billroth-I gastrectomy (LADG) for cancer: Our 10 years’ experience. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques. 2002; 12(3): 204-207. doi: 10.1097/ 00129689-200206000-00021.
3. Xia X, et al. Objective evaluation of clinical outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted pylorus-preserving gastrectomy for middle-third early gastric cancer. BMC Cancer. 2019; 19(1). doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5695-0.
4. Caruso S, et al. Laparoscopic and robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current considerations. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2016; 22(25): 5694. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i25.5694.
5. Jung DH, et al. The learning curve associated with laparoscopic total gastrectomy. Gastric Cancer. 2014; 19(1): 264-272. doi: 10.1007/s10120-014-0447-y.
6. Özer İ, et al. Changing trends in gastric cancer surgery. Balkan Medical Journal. 2017; 34(1): 10-20. doi: 10.4274/balkanmedj.2015.1461.
7. Hashizume M, Sugimachi K. Robot-assisted gastric surgery. Surgical Clinics of North America. 2003; 83(6): 1429-1444. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109 (03)00158-0.
8. van Boxel GI, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R. Robotic-assisted gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: A European perspective. Gastric Cancer. 2019; 22(5): 909-919. doi: 10.1007/s10120-019-00979-z.
9. Baral S, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: A mega meta-analysis. Frontiers in Surgery., 2022; 9. doi: 10.3389/ fsurg.2022.895976.
10. Strong VE, et al. Robotic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in the USA: Insights and oncologic outcomes in 220 patients. Annals of Surgical Oncology.2020; 28(2): 742-750. doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-08834-7.
11. Ma J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2020; 18(1). doi: 10.1186/s12957-020-02080-7.
12. Terashima M. The 140 years’ journey of Gastric cancer surgery: From the two hands of Billroth to the multiple hands of the robot. Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery. 2021; 5(3): 270-277. doi: 10.1002/ags3. 12442.
13. Yamashita K, et al. History and emerging trends in chemotherapy for Gastric cancer. Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery. 2021; 5(4): 446-456. doi: 10.1002/ags3.12439.
14. Marano L, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Updates in Surgery, 2021; 73(5): 1673-1689. doi: 10.1007/s13304-021-01059-7.
15. Rockall TA, Darzi A. Robot-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surgical Clinics of North America. 2003; 83(6): 1463-1468. doi: 10.1016/ s0039-6109(03)00156-7.
16. Gutt CN, et al. Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. British Journal of Surgery. 2004; 91(11): 1390-1397. doi: 10.1002/bjs.4700.
17. Федоров А.В., Кригер А.Г., Берелавичус С.В., Ефанов М.Г., Горин Д.С. Робот-ассистированные операции в абдоминальной хирургии // Хирургия. Журнал им. Н.И.Пирогова. – 2010. – №1. – С.16-21.
18. Park JY, et al. Surgical stress after robot-assisted distal gastrectomy and its economic implications. British Journal of Surgery. 2012; 99(11): 1554-1561. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8887.
19. Ojima T, et al. Short-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy vs laparoscopic gastrectomy for patients with Gastric Cancer. JAMA Surgery. 2021; 156(10): 954. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2021.3182.
20. Lu J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: A randomized phase 2 trial. Nature Communications. 2024; 15(1). doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-49013-6.
21. Liao G, et al. Comparative analysis of robotic gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer in terms of their long-term oncological outcomes: A meta-analysis of 3410 gastric cancer patients. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2019; 17(1). doi: 10.1186/s12957-019-1628-2.
22. Loureiro P, et al. Laparoscopic versus robotic gastric cancer surgery: Short-term outcomes–systematic review and meta-analysis of 25,521 patients. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques. 2023; 33(8): 782-800. doi: 10.1089/lap.2023.0136.
23. Ma J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for Gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis [Preprint]. 2020. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-84003/v1.
24. Woo Y. Robotic gastrectomy as an oncologically sound alternative to laparoscopic resections for the treatment of early-stage gastric cancers. Archives of Surgery. 2011; 146(9): 1086. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2011.114.
25. Song J, Hyung WJ. Reply to: 464-625: Re role of robotic gastrectomy using da vinci system compared with laparoscopic gastrectomy: Initial experience of 20 consecutive cases. Surgical Endoscopy. 2009; 24(1): 242-243. doi: 10.1007/s00464-009-0630-0.
26. Gu H, Li W, Zhou L. Application of hand-sewn esophagojejunostomy in laparoscopic total gastrectomy. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2024; 22(1). doi: 10.1186/s12957-024-03350-4.
27. Wei JP, et al. Comparing intracorporeal mechanical anastomosis vs. hand-sewn esophagojejunostomy after total laparoscopic gastrectomy for Esophagogastric Junction Cancer: A single-center study. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2023; 21(1). doi: 10.1186/s12957-023-02889-y.
28. Majewska K, et al. Comparison of postoperative outcomes of hand-sewn versus stapled Esophago-jejunal anastomosis during total gastrectomy for gastric cancer in 72 patients: A retrospective, single-center study in Poland. Medical Science Monitor. 2023; 29. doi: 10.12659/msm.938759.
29. Castro PM, et al. Hand-sewn versus stapler esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal ressection: Sistematic Review and meta-analysis. ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo). 2014; 27(3): 216-221. doi: 10.1590/s0102-67202014000300014.
30. Kawamura H, et al. Anastomotic complications after laparoscopic total gastrectomy with esophagojejunostomy constructed by Circular Stapler (orvilTM) versus Linear Stapler (overlap method). Surgical Endoscopy. 2017; 31(12): 5175-5182. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5584-z.
31. Yoshikawa K, et al. Usefulness of the Transoral anvil delivery system for esophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy: A single-institution comparative study of Transoral Anvil Delivery System and the overlap method. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques. 2018; 28(2). doi: 10.1097/sle.0000000000000495.
32. Sun D, et al. Comparison between linear stapler and circular stapler after laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer. Frontiers in Surgery. 2022; 9. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.858236.
33. Murakami K, et al. Linear or circular stapler? A propensity score-matched, multicenter analysis of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy following totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy. Surgical Endoscopy. 2019; 34(12): 5265-5273. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-07313-9.
34. Huang C, et al. A comparison of cervical delta-shaped anastomosis and circular stapled anastomosis after esophagectomy. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2017; 15(1). doi: 10.1186/s12957-017-1097-4.
35. Gong CS, Kim BS, Kim HS. Comparison of totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy using an endoscopic linear stapler with laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy using a circular stapler in patients with gastric cancer: A single-center experience’, World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2017; 23(48): 8553-8561. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i48.8553.
36. Son T. Laparoscopic Gastric Cancer Surgery: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2016; 22(2): 727. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i2.727.
37. Parisi A, et al. Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery. World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2017; 23(13): 2376. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i13.2376.
38. Okines A, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Annals of Oncology. 2010; 21: v50-v54. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq164.
39. Ajani JA, et al. Gastric cancer, version 3.2016, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2016; 14(10): 1286-1312. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2016.0137.
40. Noh SH, et al. Adjuvant Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin for gastric cancer after D2 gastrectomy (Classic): 5-year follow-up of an open-label, Randomised Phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. 2014; 15(12): 1389–1396. doi: 10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70473-5.
41. Cunningham D, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 2006; 355(1): 11-20. doi: 10.1056/nejmoa055531.
42. Ychou M, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy compared with surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: An FNCLCC and FFCD multicenter phase III trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2011; 29(13): 1715-1721. doi: 10.1200/jco.2010.33.0597.
43. Yoshikawa T, et al. Induction of a pathological complete response by four courses of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for gastric cancer: Early results of the randomized phase II compass trial. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2013; 21(1): 213-219. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3055-x.
44. Hashemzadeh S, et al. The effects of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on resectability of locally-advanced gastric adenocarcinoma: A clinical trial. International Journal of Surgery. 2014; 12(10): 1061-1069. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.08.349.
45. Kang Y-K, et al. Neoadjuvant docetaxel, Oxaliplatin, and S-1 plus surgery and adjuvant S-1 for resectable advanced gastric cancer: Final survival outcomes of the Randomized Phase 3 Prodigy trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2023; 41(16): 4067-4067. doi: 10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.4067.
46. Ji J, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy of Oxaliplatin combined with S-1 (SOX) versus postoperative chemotherapy of Sox or Oxaliplatin with Capecitabine (XELOX) in locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma with D2 gastrectomy: A randomized phase III trial (resolve trial). Annals of Oncology. 2019; 30: v877. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz394.033.
47. Wu L, et al. Postoperative morbidity and mortality after neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus upfront surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer: A propensity score matching analysis. Cancer Management and Research, 2019; 11: 6011-6018. doi: 10.2147/cmar.s203880.
48. Hu S-B, et al. Pathological evaluation of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Advanced gastric cancer. World Journal of Surgical Oncology. 2019; 17(1). doi: 10.1186/s12957-018-1534-z.
49. Al-Batran S-E, et al. Perioperative chemotherapy with docetaxel, Oxaliplatin, and Fluorouracil/leucovorin (FLOT) versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or Capecitabine (ECF/ECX) for resectable gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma (flot4-aio): A multicenter, Randomized Phase 3 trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2017; 35(15): 4004-4004. doi: 10.1200/jco.2017.35.15_suppl.4004.
50. Xu W, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus direct surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer with Serosal Invasion (ct4nxm0): A propensity score-matched analysis. Frontiers in Oncology. 2021; 11. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.718556.
51. Li Ziyu, et al. Correlation of pathological complete response with survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer treated with radical surgery: A meta-analysis. PLOS ONE. 2018; 13(1). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189294.
