Totally Laparoscopic Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) has recently been accepted as a treatment strategy for gastric cancer (GC). Aim: In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and feasibility of TLG compared with laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) in GC. Methods: Feasible studies comparing the TLG and LAG published up to March 2019 were searched online. The data showing short-term and complication outcomes were extracted to be pooled and analyzed. Results: Thirty-four studies, including 7974 patients were eventually eligible. There was no statistically significant difference on operation time between the two groups (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.16 to 9.02, P = .47). The time of anvil insertion time was shorter in the TLG group compared with the LAG group (WMD = -1.87, 95% CI: -2.60 to -1.15, P  25 kg/m2 patients undergoing totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLGA) had a lower risk of overall complications (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.48-1.63, P = .69). The patients with early gastric cancer or Billroth-I anastomosis were suitable to undergo the TLG (a lower risk of anastomotic leakage [RR = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.23, P < .01] and gastralgia [RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.08-0.88, P = .03], respectively). Conclusions: The TLG was a safe and reliable procedure compared with the LAG with reduced trauma, faster recovery, and not more complications.