Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Observational study shows TPLDG improves recovery and reduces inflammation in gastric cancer patients, indicating its efficacy.
Background While reduced-port laparoscopic gastrectomy(RPLG) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative, its standardization and long-term efficacy remain underexplored. This study evaluates the comparative outcomes of three-port (TPLDG) versus five-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (FPLDG). Methods This prospective multicenter study enrolled 355 gastric cancer patients meeting selection criteria. Surgical procedures adhered to D2 lymphadenectomy guidelines, with TPLDG utilizing a left-sided approach without auxiliary ports. Primary endpoints included inflammatory markers, recovery parameters, and 3-year survival outcomes. Results The operative outcomes showed comparable results between groups, with similar operative times [140(125,160) vs. 135(120,150) minutes, p =0.068)] and total lymph node retrieved [(22(19,27) vs. 22(18,27) nodes, p =0.696)]. Notably, the TPLDG group demonstrated significant recovery advantages, including earlier flatus [(2(2,3) vs. 3(2,3) days, p <0.001)], shorter hospital stays [4(3,5) vs. 5.2(4.2,6.3) days, p <0.001)], and reduced inflammatory responses as evidenced by lower postoperative CRP [(48.2 ± 21.4) vs. (68.5 ± 25.6) mg/L, p <0.01)] and IL-6 levels [(82.3 ± 31.2) vs. (115.4 ± 38.5)pg/mL, p <0.01)]. Importantly, oncological outcomes remained equivalent between groups, with comparable 3-year disease-free survival (85.4% vs 85.8%, p =0.85) and overall survival rates (89.4% vs. 89.2%, p =0.70), which were consistently maintained across stage-stratified analyses. Conclusion TPLDG achieves comparable oncological outcomes to conventional FPLDG while offering significant advantages in postoperative recovery and inflammatory response reduction. The left-sided three-port technique represents a viable standardized approach for RPLG, particularly suited for D2 lymphadenectomy in Asian populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: