• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • MIS Fellows Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
  • Opportunities
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs and Humanitarian Efforts
  • Search
    • Search the SAGES Site
    • Guidelines Search
    • Video Search
    • Search Images
    • Search Abstracts
  • OWLS/FLS
  • Login
You are here: Home / Abstracts / COMPARISION OF PERIOPERATIVE AND SURVIVAL OUTCOMES OF LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN GASTRECTOMY AFTER PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY:A PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED ANALYSIS

COMPARISION OF PERIOPERATIVE AND SURVIVAL OUTCOMES OF LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN GASTRECTOMY AFTER PREOPERATIVE CHEMOTHERAPY:A PROPENSITY SCORE-MATCHED ANALYSIS

Lin Chen, Hongqing Xi, Kecheng Zhang, Jiyang Li, Yunhe Gao, Wenquan Liang, Jianxin Cui, Bo Wei. Chinese People’s Liberation Army General Hospital

INTRODUCTION: Comparisons of laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) and open gastrectomy (OG) in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) are lacking. The present study was performed to investigate the short-term and long-term outcomes of LAG versus OG following preoperative chemotherapy.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES: A prospectively maintained database of patients with gastric cancer who underwent LAG or OG following NACT from February 2012 to December 2014 was retrospectively reviewed. Adjustment for potential selection bias in the surgical approach was made with propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis. Perioperative and survival outcomes were compared between the LAG and OG groups.

RESULTS: In total, 174 patients were identified from the database. After PSM analysis, 45 patients who underwent OG were one-to-one matched to 45 patients who underwent LAG in the setting of NACT. These two groups had similar outcomes in terms of intra- and postoperative complications and 3-year overall survival. However, the LAG group had a longer operation time (P = 0.031) and lower estimated blood loss (P=0.001). Moreover, compared with patients in the OG group, those in the LAG group had fewer days until first ambulation (P = 0.028), first flatus (P = 0.015), first liquid diet (P = 0.035), and first soft diet (P = 0.024) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.041). Additionally, despite an equivalent total number of retrieved lymph nodes between the two groups, the OG group had marginally more lymph nodes dissected from the splenic hilum (P = 0.032) and splenic artery area (P = 0.020).

CONCLUSION: The present study indicates that LAG performed by well-qualified surgeons for treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer after preoperative chemotherapy is as acceptable as OG in terms of oncological outcomes.

Figure 1. Kaplan–Meier survival curve by surgical approach after PSM


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 87682

Program Number: P756

Presentation Session: iPoster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

14


  • Foundation
  • SAGES.TV
  • MyCME
  • Educational Activities

Copyright © 2025 Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons