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)