• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
www.sages.org

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
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • 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
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development 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
  • OWLS/FLS
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Minimally Invasive Surgery as a Treatment Option for Gastric Cancer Patients with Liver Metastasis: A Comparison with Open Surgery

Minimally Invasive Surgery as a Treatment Option for Gastric Cancer Patients with Liver Metastasis: A Comparison with Open Surgery

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

INTRODUCTION Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become the standard care of early gastric cancer worldwide. As the treatment of late-stage cancer going forward, MIS has emerged as an alternative modality for treating advanced gastric cancer. Liver is the most frequent site to which gastric cancer hematogenously metastasizes. With advances in minimally invasive techniques and devices and the accumulating experience of surgeons, MIS for gastric cancer with liver metastasis (GCLM) is the wave of the future. Accordingly, we conducted a nonrandomized, controlled trial to compare the short-term and long-term surgical outcomes of MIS with conventional open surgery for GCLM, evaluating its safety and effectiveness.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES A review of a prospectively designed database at our institute from January 2006 to December 2015 revealed a series of 97 consecutive GCLM patients who received gastrectomy with extended lymphadenectomy (open surgery, n=87 and MIS, n=10). All these patients accepted local treatments of liver metastases (MIS group: laparoscopic/robotic hepatectomy or laparoscopic/robotic gastrectomy combined with radiofrequency ablation or transarterial chemoembolization for liver metastases). Demographic, clinicopathologic characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS There was no difference of demographic characteristics between the open surgery group and the MIS group. And all other clinicopathological factors are equally comparable between groups except for histologic differentiation. MIS showed significantly less blood loss, shorter time to first sips of water and soft diet. However, total retrieved lymph nodes from open surgery was similar to MIS (mean 14.3 vs 19.0, respectively). Postoperative complication (19.5% vs 30.0%, P=0.321) between the two groups was not significantly different. The overall survival time between the two groups was also comparative (P=0.105 by log-rank test), with 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival rate 85%, 37% and 25% in the open surgery group, respectively; and 70%, 40% and 10% in the MIS group, respectively. Stratified analysis demonstrated that the difference of two survival curves increased in the stratum of well and moderately differentiation, indicating MIS may benefit the patients with high degree of histologic differentiation more. But this finding is still not statistically different (P=0.107 by log-rank test).

CONCLUSIONS Minimally invasive surgery could be a safe and effective alternative to conventional open surgery in treating gastric cancer patients with liver metastasis. Furthermore, MIS maintains its advantages as minimal invasiveness in the multidisciplinary synthetic therapy of GCLM.


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

Abstract ID: 79409

Program Number: S037

Presentation Session: Gastric

Presentation Type: Podium

21

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Related


sages_adbutler_leaderboard

Hours & Info

11300 West Olympic Blvd, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals