Comparison of short‑term outcomes and 3-year overall survival between robotic and laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matching analysis.

[BACKGROUND] Despite the increasing use of robotic gastrectomy (RG) as an alternative to laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) in treating gastric cancer, controversy remains over the advantages of RG compared to LG and there is a paucity of studies comparing the two techniques regarding patient survival.

[METHODS] In this retrospective cohort study, 675 patients undergoing minimally invasive gastrectomy were recruited from January 2016 to January 2018 (LG:  = 567; RG:  = 108). A one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was applied to minimize the selection bias due to confounding factors, yielding 104 patients in each of the RG and LG groups. After matching, the short-term outcomes and 3-year overall survival were compared in the two groups.

[RESULTS] The PSM cohort analysis showed a similar 3-year overall survival between RG and LG groups ( = .249). Concerning the short-term outcomes, the RG compared to LG resulted in lower blood loss ( = .01), lower postoperative complications ( = .001), lower postoperative pain ( = .016), earlier initiation of soft diet ( = .011), shorter hospital stay ‌( = .012), but higher hospitalization expenses ( = .001).

[CONCLUSION] Our findings suggest that RG may offer advantages in terms of blood loss, surgical complications, recovery time, and pain management compared to LG while maintaining similar overall survival rates. However, RG is associated with higher hospital costs, potentially limiting its wider adoption. Further research, including large, multi-center randomized controlled trials with longer patient follow-up, particularly for advanced gastric cancer, is needed to confirm these findings.