SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016
Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04652986 (Mid- and Long-term Surgical and Oncological Outcomes of Total Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 66 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Mid- and Long-term Surgical and Oncological Outcomes of Total Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Study
Who cites it
66 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 134 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally Invasive and Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Comparisons of perioperative and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: an updated pooled analysis of eighteen studies.European journal of medical research · 2023Pooled it
- Short-and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Association of gestational diabetes mellitus with overall and type specific cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Pooled it
- Gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic abdominal surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Roux-en-Y versus Billroth-I reconstruction after distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- [Evidence in minimally invasive oncological gastric surgery].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2021Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: cost-effectiveness analysis.BJS open · 2020Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence.Updates in surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.World journal of surgical oncology · 2019Pooled it
- [Surgical management for early stage gastric cancer].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2018Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer.Medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Gases for establishing pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic abdominal surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer in North China: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Trial
- Comparison of oncological outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for gastric cancer: a multi-institutional cohort study in Japan.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026Article
- Top 5 Advances in the Last 50 Years: Malignant Gastric and Esophageal Surgery.World journal of surgery · 2026Review
- Comparison of the long-term impact of laparoscopy and open surgery on the prognosis of patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGastric cancer is the third most common cause of cancer-related mortality in the world. Currently there are two surgical options for potentially curable patients (i.e. people with non-metastatic gastric cancer), laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. However, it is not clear whether one of these options is superior.
objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic gastrectomy or laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for people with gastric cancer. In particular, we planned to investigate the effects by patient groups, such as cancer stage, anaesthetic risk, and body mass index (BMI), and by intervention methods, such as method of anastomosis, type of gastrectomy and laparoscopic or laparoscopically-assisted gastrectomy. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) until September 2015. We also screened reference lists from included trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Two review authors independently selected references for further assessment by going through all titles and abstracts. Further selection was based on review of full text articles for selected references. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted study data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for binary outcomes, the mean difference (MD) or the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. We performed meta-analyses where it was meaningful. MAIN
resultsIn total, 2794 participants were randomised in 13 trials included in this review. All the trials were at unclear or high risk of bias. One trial (which included 53 participants) did not contribute any data to this review. A total of 213 participants were excluded in the remaining trials after randomisation, leaving a total of 2528 randomised participants for analysis, with 1288 undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy and 1240 undergoing open gastrectomy. All the participants were suitable for major surgery.There was no difference in the proportion of participants who died within thirty days of treatment between laparoscopic gastrectomy (7/1188: adjusted proportion = 0.6% (based on meta-analysis)) and open gastrectomy (4/1447: 0.3%) (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.10; risk difference 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; participants = 2335; studies = 11; I(2) = 0%; low quality evidence). There were no events in either group for short-term recurrence (participants = 103; studies = 3), proportion requiring blood transfusion (participants = 66; studies = 2), and proportion with positive margins at histopathology (participants = 28; studies = 1). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life, time to return to normal activity or time to return to work. The differences in long-term mortality (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25; participants = 195; studies = 3; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), serious adverse events within three months (laparoscopic gastrectomy (7/216: adjusted proportion = 3.6%) versus open gastrectomy (13/216: 6%) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34; participants = 432; studies = 8; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), long-term recurrence (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.30; participants = 162; studies = 4; very low quality evidence), adverse events within three months (laparoscopic gastrectomy (204/268: adjusted proportion = 16.1%) versus open gastrectomy (253/1222: 20.7%) (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.01; participants = 2490; studies = 11; I(2) = 38%; very low quality evidence), quantity of perioperative blood transfused (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.38; participants = 143; studies = 2; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence), length of hospital stay (MD -1.82 days, 95% CI -3.72 to 0.07; participants = 319; studies = 6; I(2) = 83%; very low quality evidence), and number of lymph nodes harvested (MD -0.63, 95% CI -1.51 to 0.25; participants = 472; studies = 9; I(2) = 40%; very low quality evidence) were imprecise. There was no alteration in the interpretation of the results in any of the subgroups. AUTHORS'
conclusionsBased on low quality evidence, there is no difference in short-term mortality between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. Based on very low quality evidence, there is no evidence for any differences in short-term or long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. However, the data are sparse, and the confidence intervals were wide, suggesting that significant benefits or harms of laparoscopic gastrectomy cannot be ruled out. Several trials are currently being conducted and interim results of these trials have been included in this review. These trials need to perform intention-to-treat analysis to ensure that the results are reliable and report the results according to the CONSORT Statement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.