LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN SURGERY IN GASTRIC GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS LARGER THAN 5 CM: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection represents the main treatment for resectable nonmetastatic gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Despite the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic resection, its standard use in gastric tumors larger than 5 cm is yet to be established.

AIMS: This study aimed to compare the current evidence on laparoscopic resection with the classical open surgical approach in terms of perioperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes.

METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were consulted. Articles comparing the approach to gastric gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm by open and laparoscopic surgery were eligible. A post hoc subgroup analysis based on the extent of the surgery was performed to evaluate the operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS: A total of nine studies met the eligibility criteria. In the study, 246 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and 301 patients undergoing open surgery were included. The laparoscopic approach had statistically significant lower intraoperative blood loss (p=0.01) and time to oral intake (p<0.01), time to first flatus (p<0.01), and length of hospital stay (0.01), compared to the open surgery approach. No significant differences were found when operative time (0.25), postoperative complications (0.08), R0 resection (0.76), and recurrence rate (0.09) were evaluated. The comparative subgroup analysis between studies could not explain the substantial heterogeneity obtained in the respective outcomes.

CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach in gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors larger than 5 cm compared to the open surgical approach is a technically safe and feasible surgical method with similar oncological results.