Research progress of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer

Since the first laparoscopic radical surgery for early gastric cancer 30 years ago, there has been a gradual shift from“open” to “minimally invasive” surgery for gastric cancer. This transition is due to advancements in refined anatomy, enlarged field of view, faster recovery, and comparable oncological outcomes. Several high-quality clinical studies have demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy in the treatment of both early and locally advanced gastric cancer. The role of perioperative chemotherapy in managing locally advanced gastric cancer has been widely recognized, and there have been continuous breakthroughs in the exploration of targeted therapy and immunotherapy for perioperative treatment. Additionally, the application of indocyanine green near-infrared imaging technology, 3D laparoscopic technology, and robotic surgery systems has further improved the accuracy and minimally invasive nature of gastric cancer surgeries. Looking ahead, the field of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is expected to become more standardized, resulting in a significant enhancement in the quality of life for gastric cancer patients.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery

AIM To investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and determine surgical, clinical, and oncological outcomes.METHODS This is a propensity score-matched case-control study, comparing three treatment arms: robotic gastrectomy(RG), laparoscopic gastrectomy(LG), open gastrectomy(OG). Data collection started after sharing a specific study protocol. Data were recorded through a tailored and protected web-based system. Primary outcomes: harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications rate. Among the secondary outcomes, there are: operative time, R0 resections, POD of mobilization, POD of starting liquid diet and soft solid diet. The analysis includes the evaluation of type and grade of postoperative complications. Detailed information of anastomotic leakages is also provided.RESULTS The present analysis was carried out of 1026 gastrectomies. To guarantee homogenous distribution of cases, patients in the RG, LG and OG groups were 1:1:2 matched using a propensity score analysis with a caliper = 0.2. The successful matching resulted in a total sample of 604 patients(RG = 151; LG = 151; OG = 302). The three groups showed no differences in all baseline patients characteristics, type of surgery(P = 0.42) and stage of the disease(P = 0.16). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LG(95.93 ± 119.22) and RG(117.91 ± 68.11) groups compared to the OG(127.26 ± 79.50, P = 0.002). The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the RG(27.78 ± 11.45), LG(24.58 ± 13.56) and OG(25.82 ± 12.07) approach. A benefit in favor of the minimally invasive approaches was found in the length of hospital stay(P < 0.0001). A similar complications rate was found(P = 0.13). The leakage rate was not different(P = 0.78) between groups.CONCLUSION Laparoscopic and robotic surgery can be safely performed and proposed as possible alternative to open surgery. The main highlighted benefit is a faster postoperative functional recovery.

Prognostic factors of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: Does robotic gastrectomy bring oncological benefit?

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide and surgical resection remains the sole curative treatment for gastric cancer.Minimally invasive gastrectomy including laparoscopic and robotic approaches has been increasingly used in a few decades.Thus far,only a few reports have investigated the oncological outcomes following minimally invasive gastrectomy.AIM To determine the 5-year survival following minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer and identify prognostic predictors.METHODS This retrospective cohort study identified 939 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer during the study period.After excluding 125 patients with non-curative surgery(n=77),other synchronous cancer(n=2),remnant gastric cancer(n=25),insufficient physical function(n=13),and open gastrectomy(n=8),a total of 814 consecutive patients with primary gastric cancer who underwent minimally invasive R0 gastrectomy at our institution between 2009 and 2014 were retrospectively examined.Accordingly,5-year overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log-rank test and Cox regression analyses,while factors associated with survival were determined using multivariate analysis.RESULTS Our analysis showed that age>65 years,American Society of Anesthesiologists(ASA)physical status 3,total or proximal gastrectomy,and pathological T4 and N positive status were independent predictors of both 5-year overall and recurrencefree survival.Accordingly,the included patients had a 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival of 80.3%and 78.2%,respectively.Among the 814 patients,157(19.3%)underwent robotic gastrectomy,while 308(37.2%)were diagnosed with pathological stage II or III disease.Notably,our findings showed that robotic gastrectomy was an independent positive predictor for recurrence-free survival in patients with pathological stage II/III[hazard ratio:0.56(0.33-0.96),P=0.035].Comparison of recurrence-free survival between the robotic and laparoscopic approach using propensity score matching analysis verified that the robotic group had less morbidity(P=0.005).CONCLUSION Age,ASA status,gastrectomy type,and pathological T and N status were prognostic factors of minimally invasive gastrectomy,with the robot approach possibly improving long-term outcomes of advanced gastric cancer.

Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND Ovarian cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in female reproductive system in the world,and the choice of its treatment is very important for the survival rate and prognosis of patients.Traditional open surgery is the main treatment for ovarian cancer,but it has the disadvantages of big trauma and slow recovery.With the continuous development of minimally invasive technology,minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia has been gradually applied to the treatment of ovarian cancer because of its advantages of less trauma and quick recovery.However,the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in the treatment of ovarian cancer are still controversial.AIM To explore the efficacy and safety of general anesthesia minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of ovarian cancer.METHODS The clinical data of 90 patients with early ovarian cancer in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively.According to the different surgical treatment methods,patients were divided into study group and control group(45 cases in each group).The study group received minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer,while the control group received traditional open surgery for ovarian cancer.The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire(EORTC QLQ-C30),clinical efficacy and safety of the two groups were compared.RESULTS The intraoperative blood loss,length of hospital stay,postoperative gas evacuation time,and postoperative EORTC QLQ-C30 score of the study group were significantly better than those of the control group(P<0.05).The incidence of postoperative complications in the study group was significantly lower than in the control group(P<0.05).The two groups had no significant differences in the preoperative adrenocorticotropic hormone(ACTH),androstenedione(AD),cortisol(Cor),cluster of differentiation 3 positive(CD3+),and cluster of differentiation 4 positive(CD4+)indexes(P>0.05).In contrast,postoperatively,the study group's ACTH,AD,and Cor indexes were lower,and the CD3+and CD4+indexes were higher than those in the control group(P<0.05).CONCLUSION Minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in patients with early ovarian cancer can significantly improve the efficacy and safety,improve the short-term prognosis and quality of life of patients,and is worth popularizing.

Present situation of minimally invasive surgical treatment for early gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery is a kind of surgical operation,which is performed by using professional surgical instruments and equipment to inactivate,resect,repair or reconstruct the pathological changes,deformities and wounds in human body through micro-trauma or micro-approach,in order to achieve the goal of treatment,its surgical effect is equivalent to the traditional open surgery,while avoiding the morbidity of conventional surgical wounds.In addition,it also has the advantages of less trauma,less blood loss during operation,less psychological burden and quick recovery on patients,and these minimally invasive techniques provide unique value for the examination and treatment of gastric cancer patients.Surgical minimally invasive surgical techniques have developed rapidly and offer numerous options for the treatment of early gastric cancer(EGC):endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR),underwater EMR(UEMR),endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD),endoscopic full-thickness resection(EFTR),endoscopic submu-cosal excavation(ESE),submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection,laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery(LECS);Among them,EMR,EFTR and LECS technologies have a wide range of applications and different modific-ations have been derived from their respective surgical operations,such as band-assisted EMR(BA-EMR),conven-tional EMR(CEMR),over-the-scope clip-assisted EFTR,no-touch EFTR,the inverted LECS,closed LECS,and so on.These new and improved minimally invasive surgeries are more precise,specific and effective in treating different types of EGC.

Impact of minimally invasive surgery on immune function and stress response in gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally.Traditional open surgery for gastric cancer is often associated with significant morbidity and prolonged recovery.AIM To evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery as an alternative to traditional open surgery for gastric cancer,focusing on its potential to reduce trauma,accelerate recovery,and achieve comparable oncological out-comes.METHODS This study retrospectively analyzed 203 patients with gastric cancer who underwent surgery at the Shanghai Health Medical College Affiliated Chongming Hospital from January 2020 to December 2023.The patients were divided into two groups:Minimally invasive surgery group(n=102),who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy,and open surgery group(n=101),who underwent traditional open gastrectomy.We compared surgical indicators(surgical incision size,intraop-erative blood loss,surgical duration,and number of lymph nodes dissected),recovery parameters(time to first flatus,time to start eating,time to ambulation,and length of hospital stay),immune function(levels of IgA,IgG,and IgM),intestinal barrier function(levels of D-lactic acid and diamine oxidase),and stress response(levels of C-reactive protein,interleukin-6,and procalcitonin).RESULTS The minimally invasive surgery group demonstrated significantly better outcomes in terms of surgical indicators,including smaller incisions,less blood loss,shorter surgery time,and more lymph nodes dissected(P<0.05 for all).Recovery was also faster in the minimally invasive surgery group,with earlier return of bowel function,earlier initiation of diet,quicker mobilization,and shorter hospital stays(P<0.05 for all).Furthermore,patients in the minimally invasive surgery group had better preserved immune function,superior intestinal barrier function,and a less pronounced stress response postoperatively(P<0.05 for all).CONCLUSION Laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer not only provides superior surgical indicators and faster recovery but also offers advantages in preserving immune function,protecting intestinal barrier function,and mitigating the stress response compared to traditional open surgery.These findings support the broader adoption of laparoscopic techniques in the management of gastric cancer.

Current clinical trials on gastric cancer surgery in China

Gastric cancer(GC)is the leading diagnosed malignancy worldwide,especially in China.Radical surgery is the cornerstone of GC treatment.We reviewed previous clinical trials and aimed to provide an update on the factors related to the surgical treatment of GC.The number of registered clinical trials in the field of GC surgery is rapidly increasing.With the development and popularization of endoscopic,laparoscopic,and robotic techniques,GC surgery has gradually entered a new era of precise minimally invasive surgery.Postoperative quality of life has become a major issue in addition to surgical oncological safety.Although great progress has been made in clinical research on GC in China,there are still deficiencies.Many studies enrolled large numbers of patients,but the research data were not of high quality.The characteristics of GC in China include a high incidence,large population,and large proportion of patients with advanced GC,which provides sufficient reason for studying this disease.There is still a need for well-designed,large,randomized clinical trials to improve our knowledge of the surgical treatment of GC.

Surgical specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure: A minimally invasive technique for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery

AIM To retrospectively evaluate the safety and feasibility of surgical specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure in patient with rectal cancer. METHODS We systematically reviewed 331 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer and prophylactic ileostomy in our institution from June 2010 to October 2016, including 155 patients who underwent specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure(experimental group), and 176 patients who underwent specimen extraction via a small lower abdominal incision(control group). Clinical data were collected from both groups andstatistically analyzed. RESULTS The two groups were matched in clinical characteristics and pathological outcomes. However, mean operative time was significantly shorter in the experimental group compared to the control group(161.3 ± 21.5 min vs 168.8 ± 20.5 min; P = 0.001). Mean estimated blood loss was significantly less in the experimental group(77.4 ± 30.7 mL vs 85.9 ± 35.5 mL; P = 0.020). The pain reported by patients during the first two days after surgery was significantly less in the experimental group than in the control group. No wound infections occurred in the experimental group, but 4.0% of the controls developed wound infections(P = 0.016). The estimated 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival rate were similar between the two groups.CONCLUSION Surgical specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure represents a secure and feasible approach to laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, and embodies the principle of minimally invasive surgery.

Minimally invasive surgery in gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer has rapidly gained popularity due to the early detection of early gastric cancer. As advances in instruments and the accumulation of laparoscopic experience increase, laparoscopic techniques are being used for less invasive but highly technical procedures. Recent evidence suggests that the short- and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for early gastric cancer and advanced gastric cancer are comparable to those of conventional open surgery. However, these results should be confirmed by large-scale multicenter prospective randomized controlled clinical trials.

Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer

Rectal cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide.Surgical resection for rectal cancer usually requires a proctectomy with respective lymphadenectomy(total mesorectal excision).This has traditionally been performed transabdominally through an open incision.Over the last thirty years,minimally invasive surgery platforms have rapidly evolved with the goal to accomplish the same quality rectal resection through a less invasive approach.There are currently three resective modalities that complement the traditional open operation:(1)Laparoscopic surgery;(2)Robotic surgery;and(3)Transanal total mesorectal excision.In addition,there are several platforms to carry out transluminal local excisions(without lymphadenectomy).Evidence on the various modalities is of mixed to moderate quality.It is unreasonable to expect a randomized comparison of all options in a single trial.This review aims at reviewing in detail the various techniques in regard to intra-/perioperative benchmarks,recovery and complications,oncological and functional outcomes.

Current status of minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer(PC)is the most lethal cancer among digestive system cancers.Although the only way to radically cure PC is surgical resection,complex surgical procedures and severe post-operative complications lead to high mortality.In recent years,minimally invasive surgery has become more common for PC.Minimally invasive pancreatic resection(MIPR)with the laparoscopic or robotic method has shown its superiority compared with traditional surgery.However,increasing evidence indicates that the long-term or even short-term outcomes of MIPR for PC patients remain controversial.Moreover,the indications and learning curve of MIPR require further assessment.This review aims to discuss the progress in current MIPR,analyze the specific problems and obstacles in the development of MIPR,and try to standardize MIPR procedures and improve the outcomes of MIPR.

Advances,breakthroughs,and challenges in gastric cancer surgery

Gastric cancer(GC)remains a substantial health burden worldwide,ranking fifth in incidence and third in mortality among all cancer types.Surgeons have persistently attempted to address this growing burden through surgical management of GC encompassing various aspects of surgery,including advances in surgical techniques and tools for minimally invasive surgery,novel technology for real-time image-guided surgery,and function-preserving and oncometabolic surgeries,aimed at improving patients’quality of life.The current perspective discusses the five most critical dimensions of the recent technical improvements and conceptual changes in GC surgery.We recommend further exploration of long-term benefits of these advancements,identification of breakthrough solutions to address current challenges,and delivery of the best quality of care.

Gastric cancer surgery in South Korea: Past, present, and future

Gastric cancer remains a significant global health concern and its surgical management approaches have undergone significant changes in South Korea and worldwide. Subtotal or total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection is well established as a standard surgical procedure for gastric cancer. With the active implementation of cancer screening in South Korea, the proportion of early gastric cancer cases has significantly increased over the past few decades, leading to a steady increase in the survival rate among patients. Furthermore, recent advances in surgical instruments and techniques have made minimally invasive surgery increasingly prevalent, not only for early but also for advanced gastric cancer. We aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution and current status of gastric cancer surgery in South Korea.

Laparoscopic gastric surgery for cancer: Where do we stand?

Gastric cancer poses a significant public health problem, especially in the Far East, due to its high incidence in these areas. Surgical treatment and guidelines have been markedly different in the West, but nowadays this debate is apparently coming to an end. Laparoscopic surgery has been employed in the surgical treatment of gastric cancer for two decades now, but with controversies about the extent of resection and lymphadenectomy. Despite these difficulties, the apparent advantages of the laparoscopic approach helped its implementation in early stage and distal gastric cancer, with an increase on the uptake for distal gastrectomy for more advanced disease and total gastrectomy. Nevertheless, there is no conclusive evidence about the laparoscopic approach yet. In this review article we present and analyse the current status of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of gastric cancer.

Current status and challenges in sentinel node navigation surgery for early gastric cancer

As an optimal surgical procedure to accurately evaluate lymph node(LN)metastasis during surgery with minimal surgical resection,we have been developing sentinel node(SN)biopsy for early gastric cancer since the 1990s.Twelve institutions from the Japanese Society of Sentinel Node Navigation Surgery(SNNS),including Keio University Hospital,conducted a multicenter prospective trial to validate the SN concept using the dual-tracer method with blue dye and a radioisotope.According to the results,397 patients were included in the final analysis,and the overall accuracy in detecting LN metastasis using SN biopsy was 99%(383 of 387).Based on the validation study,we are targeting cT1N0 with a primary tumor of≤4 cm in diameter as an indication for SN biopsy for gastric cancer.We are currently running a multicenter nonrandomized phaseⅢtrial to assess the safety and efficacy of SN navigation surgery.The Korean group has reported the result of a multicenter randomized phaseⅢtrial.Since meticulous gastric cancer in the remnant stomach was rescued by subsequent gastrectomy,the disease-specific survival was comparable between the two techniques,implying that SN navigation surgery can be an alternative to standard gastrectomy.With the development of SN biopsy procedure and treatment modalities,the application of SN biopsy will be expanded to achieve an individualized minimally invasive surgery.

Recent advances in the management of rectal cancer: No surgery, minimal surgery or minimally invasive surgery

Over the last decade,with the acceptance of the need for improvements in the outcome of patients affected with rectal cancer,there has been a significant increase in the literature regarding treatment options available to patients affected by this disease.That treatment related decisions should be made at a high volume multidisciplinary tumor board,after pre-operative rectal magnetic resonance imaging and the importance of total mesorectal excision(TME)are accepted standard of care.More controversial is the emerging role for watchful waiting rather than radical surgery in complete pathologic responders,which may be appropriate in 20%of patients.Patients with early T1 rectal cancers and favorable pathologic features can be cured with local excision only,with transanal minimal invasive surgery(TAMIS)because of its versatility and almost universal availability of the necessary equipment and skillset in the average laparoscopic surgeon,emerging as the leading option.Recent trials have raised concerns about the oncologic outcomes of the standard"top-down"TME hence transanal TME(Ta TME"bottom-up")approach has gained popularity as an alternative.The challenges are many,with a dearth of evidence of the oncologic superiority in the long-term for any given option.However,this review highlights recent advances in the role of chemoradiation only for complete pathologic responders,TAMIS for highly selected early rectal cancer patients and Ta TME as options to improve cure rates whilst maintaining quality of life in these patients,while we await the results of further definitive trials being currently conducted.

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on esophagectomies in esophageal cancer:The superiority of minimally invasive surgery

BACKGROUND Previous meta-analyses,with many limitations,have described the beneficial nature of minimal invasive procedures.AIM To compare all modalities of esophagectomies to each other from the results of randomized controlled trials(RCTs)in a network meta-analysis(NMA).METHODS We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE,EMBASE,Reference Citation Analysis(https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/)and CENTRAL databases to identify RCTs according to the following population,intervention,control,outcome(commonly known as PICO):P:Patients with resectable esophageal cancer;I/C:Transthoracic,transhiatal,minimally invasive(thoracolaparoscopic),hybrid,and robot-assisted esophagectomy;O:Survival,total adverse events,adverse events in subgroups,length of hospital stay,and blood loss.We used the Bayesian approach and the random effects model.We presented the geometry of the network,results with probabilistic statements,estimated intervention effects and their 95% confidence interval(CI),and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank the interventions.RESULTS We included 11 studies in our analysis.We found a significant difference in postoperative pulmonary infection,which favored the minimally invasive intervention compared to transthoracic surgery(risk ratio 0.49;95%CI:0.23 to 0.99).The operation time was significantly shorter for the transhiatal approach compared to transthoracic surgery(mean difference-85 min;95%CI:-150 to-29),hybrid intervention(mean difference-98 min;95%CI:-190 to-9.4),minimally invasive technique(mean difference-130 min;95%CI:-210 to-50),and robot-assisted esophagectomy(mean difference-150 min;95%CI:-240 to-53).Other comparisons did not yield significant differences.CONCLUSION Based on our results,the implication of minimally invasive esophagectomy should be favored.

Sentinel node navigation surgery for gastric cancer: Overview and perspective

The sentinel node(SN) technique has been established for the treatment of some types of solid cancers to avoid unnecessary lymphadenectomy. If node disease were diagnosed before surgery, minimal surgery with omission of lymph node dissection would be an option for patients with early gastric cancer. Although SN biopsy has been well ascertained in the treatment of breast cancer and melanoma, SN navigation surgery(SNNS) in gastric cancer has not been yet universal due to the complicated lymphatic flow from the stomach. Satisfactory establishment of SNNS will result in the possible indication of minimally invasive surgery of gastric cancer. However, the results reported in the literature on SN biopsy in gastric cancer are widely divergent and many issues are still to be resolved, such as the collection method of SN, detection of micrometastasis in SN, and clinical benefit. The difference in the procedural technique and learning phase of surgeons is also varied the accuracy of SN mapping. In this review, we outline the current status of application for SNNS in gastric cancer.

Current controversies in treating remnant gastric cancer: Are minimally invasive approaches feasible?

The incidence of remnant gastric cancer(RGC)is still increasing.Minimally invasive approaches including endoscopic resection,laparoscopic and robotic approaches,and function-preserving gastrectomy have been utilized as curative treatment methods for primary gastric cancer.However,adhesions and anatomical alterations due to previous gastrectomy make the use of minimally invasive approaches complicated and difficult for RGC.Application of these approaches for the treatment of RGC is still controversial.Endoscopic submucosal dissection is a favorable alternative therapy for the resection of early gastric cancer that occurs in the remnant stomach and can prevent unnecessary complications.The majority of retrospective studies have shown that endoscopic submucosal dissection is an effective and oncologically safe treatment modality for RGC.Subtotal gastrectomy could serve as a function-preserving gastrectomy for patients with early RGC and improve postoperative late-phase function.However,there are only two studies that demonstrate the feasibility and oncological efficacy of subtotal gastrectomy for RGC.The non-randomized controlled trials showed that compared to open gastrectomy,laparoscopic gastrectomy for RGC led to better short-term outcomes and similar oncologic results.Because of the rarity of RGC,future multicenter studies are required to determine the indications of minimally invasive treatment for RGC.

Survival after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer:Multicenter comparison between minimally invasive and open approaches

Objective:To investigate oncological outcomes in patients with bladder cancer who underwent minimally invasive radical cystectomy(MIRC)or open radical cystectomy(ORC).Methods:We identified patients with bladder cancer who underwent radical cystectomy(RC)in 13 centers of the Chinese Bladder Cancer Consortium(CBCC).Perioperative outcomes were compared between MIRC and ORC.The influence of surgical approaches on overall survival(OS)and cancer-specific survival(CSS)in the entire study group and subgroups classified according to pathologic stage or lymph node(LN)status was assessed with the log-rank test.Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association among OS,CSS and risk factors of interest.Results:Of 2098 patients who underwent RC,1243 patients underwent MIRC(1087 laparoscopic RC and 156 robotic-assisted RC,respectively),while 855 patients underwent ORC.No significant differences were noted in positive surgical margin rate and 90-day postoperative mortality rate.MIRC was associated with less estimated blood loss,more LN yield,higher rate of neobladder diversion,longer operative time,and longer length of hospital stay.There was no significant difference in OS and CSS according to surgical approaches(pZ0.653,and 0.816,respectively).Subgroup analysis revealed that OS and CSS were not significantly different regardless of the status of extravesical involvement or LN involvement.Multivariable Cox regression analyses showed that the surgical approach was not a significant predictor of OS and CSS.Conclusions:Our study showed that MIRC was comparable to conventional ORC in terms of OS and CSS.