Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison of the 2 surgical methods between different tumor size after PSM

From: Short-term outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy for advanced gastric Cancer: a propensity score matching study

 

Size≥5 cm

Size< 5 cm

RATG(n = 56)

LATG(n = 43)

p

RATG(n = 70)

LATG(n = 83)

p

Age

61.77 ± 8.23

60.47 ± 8.09

0.433

59.17 ± 9.37

60.94 ± 9.55

0.251

Sex (male/female)

45/11

34/9

0.874

60/10

66/17

0.317

BMI (kg/m2)

21.74 ± 2.34

22.52 ± 3.20

0.218

22.38 ± 2.57

21.92 ± 2.62

0.277

Tumor location (non-EGJ/EGJ)

39/17

23/20

0.100

29/41

41/42

0.324

TNM (IB/IIA/IIB/IIIA/IIIB/IIIC)

3/2/8/20/11/12

1/0/8/17/9/8

0.959

0/4/16/32/10/8

7/1/14/33/19/9

0.950

Comorbidities (present/absent)

17/39

13/30

0.989

18/52

22/61

0.912

Operation time (min)

287.46 ± 56.87

278.33 ± 55.51

0.425

294.09 ± 61.20

266.20 ± 50.27

0.002

Estimated blood loss (ml)

159.82 ± 75.14

198.95 ± 110.76

0.132

150.00 ± 100.13

175.90 ± 86.03

0.087

No. of N2 tier

8.64 ± 4.63

8.14 ± 4.78

0.599

9.41 ± 5.86

7.25 ± 4.35

0.010

No. of Retrieved lymph nodes

36.70 ± 13.18

33.14 ± 11.66

0.165

33.46 ± 12.86

31.28 ± 12.88

0.298

R0/R1

53/3

40/3

1.000

63/7

78/5

0.362

Proximal margin (cm)

3.96 ± 1.62

3.85 ± 1.37

0.708

3.21 ± 1.69

3.57 ± 1.61

0.179

Postoperative complication (%)

15 (26.8)

16 (37.2)

0.268

15 (21.4)

20 (24.1)

0.696

Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa(%)

2 (3.6)

4 (9.3)

0.447

5 (7.1)

3 (3.6)

0.540

Postoperative hospital stay (d)

9.61 ± 1.99

10.58 ± 5.13

0.951

9.63 ± 3.41

9.48 ± 3.80

0.804

  1. RATG Robotic-assisted total gastrectomy, LATG Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy, BMI body mass index, TNM tumor-node-metastasis, EGJ esophagogastric junction, R Residual disease(R classification)