Abstract
BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has emerged as a promising alternative compared to conventional laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) for treating gastric cancer (GC). However, evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of NOSES for GC surgery is limited. This study aimed to compare the safety and feasibility, in addition to postoperative complications of NOSES and LATG. AIM: To discuss the postoperative effects of two different surgical methods in patients with GC. METHODS: Dual circular staplers were used in Roux-en-Y digestive tract reconstruction for transvaginal specimen extraction LATG, and its outcomes were compared with LATG in a cohort of 51 GC patients with tumor size ≤ 5 cm. The study was conducted from May 2018 to September 2020, and patients were categorized into the NOSES group (n = 22) and LATG group (n = 29). Perioperative parameters were compared and analyzed, including patient and tumor characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and anastomosis-related complications, postoperative hospital stay, the length of abdominal incision, difference in tumor type, postoperative complications, and postoperative survival. RESULTS: Postoperative exhaust time, operation duration, mean postoperative hospital stay, length of abdominal incision, number of specific staplers used, and Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire score were significant in both groups (P < 0.01). In the NOSES group, the postoperative time to first flatus, mean postoperative hospital stay, and length of abdominal incision were significantly shorter than those in the LATG group. Patients in the NOSES group had faster postoperative recovery, and achieved abdominal minimally invasive incision that met aesthetic requirements. There were no significant differences in gender, age, tumor type, postoperative complications, and postoperative survival between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The application of dual circular staplers in Roux-en-Y digestive tract reconstruction combined with NOSES gastrectomy is safe and convenient. This approach offers better short-term outcomes compared to LATG, while long-term survival rates are comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic surgery.