Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2026 Apr 25;29(4):510-517. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20251129-00455.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To investigate the surgical safety and oncological efficacy of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for primary gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) with a maximum diameter of ≤5 cm. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients undergoing radical local resection via MIS, pathologically confirmed primary gastric GISTs, maximum tumor diameter ≤5 cm, and complete available clinicopathological data, adjuvant therapy information and follow-up records. The exclusion criteria included multiple GISTs, a history of other malignant tumors, and distant metastasis or local invasion detected preoperatively or intraoperatively. Clinical data of 517 patients with gastric GISTs who underwent radical surgery at Renji Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from July 2018 to December 2024 were retrospectively collected. All patients were divided into four groups according to surgical approaches: laparoscopic surgery group (Lap group, n=411), robotic surgery group (Robot group, n=9), endoscopic surgery group (Endo group, n=44), and laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery group (LECS group, n=53). Partial gastrectomy was performed in the Lap, Robot and LECS groups, while endoscopic submucosal dissection was the only surgical method in the Endo group. The Lap group was further subdivided into the favorable anatomical location subgroup (Lap-F group, e.g., anterior wall, greater curvature) and the unfavorable anatomical location subgroup (Lap-C group, e.g., posterior wall, lesser curvature, cardia, pylorus) based on tumor location. The LECS group was divided into the laparoscopy-dominated resection subgroup (LECS-L group) and the endoscopy-dominated resection subgroup (LECS-E group) according to the resection modality. Perioperative outcomes and follow-up data of patients in different groups were observed and analyzed. Results: Among all the patients, 227(43.9%) were male , with a median age of 62.5 (55.0, 68.0) years. There were 105 cases with tumor diameter ≤2.0 cm and 412 cases with 2.1-5.0 cm. According to postoperative pathological risk stratification, 98 cases were very low-risk, 368 low-risk, 36 moderate-risk and 15 high-risk. Baseline data comparison showed no statistically significant differences in gender, age and mitotic count among the Lap, Robot, Endo and LECS groups (all P>0.05), while significant differences were found in tumor growth direction, tumor diameter and pathological risk grade (all P<0.001). No statistically significant baseline differences were observed between the Lap-F and Lap-C groups, nor between the LECS-L and LECS-E groups (all P>0.05). All surgeries were successfully completed in the four groups. R0 resection was achieved in all patients of the Lap, Robot and LECS groups, while the surgical margin could not be evaluated in the Endo group. The average operation time of the four groups was (91.4±40.8) minutes, (104.8±28.8) minutes, (60.2±40.5) minutes and (141.7±19.4) minutes, the numbers of patients with intraoperative blood loss ≤50 ml in each group were 356, 7, 44, and 46, respectively. The median time to resuming liquid diet was 4.0 (3.0,4.0) days, 4.0 (3.0,6.0) days, 3.0 (2.0,3.0) days and 4.0 (4.0,5.0) days, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 6.0 (5.0,7.0) days, 6.0 (5.0,8.5) days, 4.0 (4.0,6.0) days and 7.0 (5.0,8.0) days in the four groups, respectively. Intraoperative complications occurred in 13 cases of the Lap group (all with intraoperative bleeding, blood loss >200 ml), 1 case of intraoperative perforation in the Endo group, 1 case of intraoperative bleeding in the LECS group, and no intraoperative complications in the Robot group. Postoperative complications were observed in 17 cases of the Lap group, including 5 cases of gastroparesis, 10 cases of pulmonary infection, 1 case of pancreatic fistula and 1 case of incision bleeding; no relevant postoperative complications were found in the other three groups. Subgroup analysis revealed that the operation time in the Lap-F group was significantly shorter than that in the Lap-C group [(79.3±39.0) minutes vs. (98.1±40.4) minutes, t=-4.566, P<0.001], with no statistically significant differences in other intraoperative and postoperative outcomes (all P>0.05). No statistically significant differences were found in all intraoperative and postoperative indicators between the LECS-L and LECS-E groups (all P>0.05). The median follow-up duration of all patients was 34 (19, 53) months, and no tumor recurrence, metastasis or death was observed in any patient during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery, robotic laparoscopic surgery, endoscopic surgery and laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery all yield excellent surgical safety and oncological efficacy in the treatment of gastric GISTs with a maximum diameter of ≤5 cm. Tumor anatomical location has a certain impact on the operation time of laparoscopic surgery, but no significant effect on surgical safety and efficacy. In laparoscopic- endoscopic cooperative surgery, both endoscopy-dominated and laparoscopy-dominated tumor resection achieve comparable surgical safety and therapeutic efficacy.
PMID:42045716 | DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn441530-20251129-00455