ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06881043STARS-GC09Updated Aug 31, 2026

The Safety and Efficacy of Robotic Assisted Surgery Using Vessel Sealer Extend in Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer

An observational study in Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer and Gastric Adenocarcinoma, sponsored by The First Hospital of Jilin University. Recruiting at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 75 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-31.

Sponsored by The First Hospital of Jilin University · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Nov 2024; still recruiting 1 year 11 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
300
Ages
18 Years to 75 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common malignancy and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Surgical resection is the primary treatment, with laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LG) being a minimally invasive option. However, LG is limited by restricted instrument mobility and hand tremors, which affect precision. The Da Vinci robotic system enhances surgical precision with 3D magnification, improved hand-eye coordination, tremor filtration, and flexible instruments. It is especially beneficial in complex procedures like D2 lymph node dissection and lower mediastinal lymph node clearance. Unlike laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery offers superior flexibility and reduced pancreatic injury during dissection. Robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RG) offers advantages over LG, such as reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and improved lymph node dissection. However, its short-term benefits remain debated, and most studies focus on early gastric cancer. The safety and efficacy of RG for advanced gastric cancer are not well-established.

Vascular coagulation is crucial in minimally invasive surgery. Ultrasonic devices, though widely used, can cause thermal damage due to high temperatures. In contrast, the Vessel Sealer Extend (VSE) offers greater flexibility and precision. It allows 540° instrument rotation, coagulates vessels up to 7 mm in diameter with lower energy, and minimizes thermal injury. Retrospective studies show RG with VSE may have faster recovery and fewer complications than LG. However, further prospective, multicenter studies are needed to confirm these benefits for advanced gastric cancer.

The investigators propose a multicenter, observational study to evaluate RG with VSE in advanced gastric cancer, assessing safety, recovery, and oncological outcomes.

Read the detailed description

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common malignancy worldwide and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Surgical resection remains the primary treatment for the radical management of gastric cancer. Laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy (LG) has proven to be a minimally invasive and safe approach for both early-stage and advanced gastric cancer, offering significant advantages over open surgery. However, LG is still limited by factors such as the restricted range of motion of straight forceps and the impact of hand tremors on surgical precision. These challenges necessitate the development of more advanced techniques. The Da Vinci robotic surgical system plays a critical role in enhancing the precision of robotic surgeries. It provides a three-dimensional, ten-fold magnified view of the surgical area, promotes natural hand-eye coordination, filters hand tremors, and allows for greater freedom of movement with its articulated instruments. The benefits of the Da Vinci system have been proved in complex procedures such as D2 lymph node dissection for gastric cancer and lower mediastinal lymph node dissection. For example, during lower mediastinal lymph node dissection in adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction, the limited field of view of laparoscopic surgery restricts the use of linear instruments, whereas the flexibility of robotic surgery offers an advantage. Furthermore, peripancreatic lymph node clearance in radical gastric cancer surgery presents a challenge. LG is prone to causing pancreatic injury during dissection due to the fixed trocar positions and the rigidity of linear energy instruments, which can result in complications such as postoperative pancreatic fistulas and abdominal abscesses. The incidence of pancreatic fistulas after LG exceeds 5%, and higher amylase levels in drainage fluid suggest potential subclinical pancreatic injury. In contrast, robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RG) has evolved rapidly and offers advantages such as reduced pancreatic compression during dissection and a lower risk of thermal injury during lymph node removal. Retrospective studies suggest that RG is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and improved lymph node dissection compared to LG. However, the evidence regarding the superiority of RG in terms of short-term outcomes remains controversial, as some prospective studies and meta-analyses have not confirmed its benefits. Prospective studies mainly focused on early gastric cancer, whereas the safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of RG in advanced gastric cancer are still unclear.

Vascular coagulation is the key of minimally invasive surgery. In current robotic procedures, ultrasonic energy devices have been widely used. However, they lack flexibility and can generate high operating temperatures (up to 200°C), which risks thermal damage to surrounding tissues. Park et al. demonstrated that LG using bipolar energy devices resulted in lower postoperative C-reactive protein levels and reduced blood loss compared to ultrasonic scalpel use. The bipolar vascular closure system (Vessel Sealer Extend, VSE) is an advanced bipolar energy device with a fully articulated wrist joint, enabling 540° rotation and multi-directional access to vessels and target anatomical sites. The textured inner surface of the jaws enhances tissue grip, and it can coagulate vessels up to 7 mm in diameter with lower energy, minimizing thermal damage to adjacent structures. Retrospective studies have shown that robotic distal gastrectomy using VSE has earlier resumption of a semi-liquid diet (4.0 vs. 4.2 days, p=0.03) and a significantly lower incidence of postoperative intestinal obstruction (0% vs. 9.9%, p=0.03) compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. The VSE has also demonstrated benefits in other surgical procedure. Yang et al. found that VSE use in robotic thyroidectomy reduced the frequency of camera cleaning compared to the Harmonic energy device (0.55 ± 0.51 vs. 1.93 ± 1.71, p\<0.05). Additionally, a study comparing different robotic instrument combinations for adrenalectomy found that the VSE in combination with monopolar curved scissors offered the best performance. Based on these findings, the investigators believe that the VSE energy device could optimize RG, improving both safety and postoperative recovery.

There is a lack of prospective, multicenter, high-quality studies to verify the safety and recovery benefits associated with reduced thermal damage using this novel energy device. Therefore, the investigators propose a prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and potential benefits of RG with the VSE energy device in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer. This study will assess postoperative recovery, inflammatory response, and oncological outcomes.

02

Conditions studied

  • Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer
  • Gastric Adenocarcinoma

Keywords

  • Robot-assisted surgery
  • Vessel sealer extend
  • Gastrectomy
  • Laparoscopic-assisted surgery
  • Neoplasms
  • Gastrointestinal Neoplasms
  • Digestive System Neoplasms
  • Gastrointestinal Diseases
03

In context

Neoplasms

10,818 studies on the registry are indexed under Neoplasms; 2,324 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 300 is above the median of 200 across 2,638 observational studies indexed under Neoplasms.

Browse Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

The First Hospital of Jilin University is the lead sponsor of 185 studies on the registry; 96 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 75 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients with Primary gastric adenocarcinoma at the stage of cT2-4a, N-/+, M0.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age from over 18 to under 75 years
  • Primary gastric adenocarcinoma (papillary, tubular, mucinous, signet ring cell, or poorly differentiated) confirmed pathologically by endoscopic
  • cT2-4a, N-/+, M0 at preoperative evaluation according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Cancer Staging Manual 8th Edition
  • Preoperative abdominal enhanced CT and lung CT (or PET-CT) showed no distant
  • Performance status of 0 or 1 on (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) scale
  • ASA (American Society of Anesthesiology) class I to III
  • Written

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Gastric multiple primary carcinoma or multiple primary cancer
  • History of previous upper abdominal surgery (except laparoscopic cholecystectomy)
  • History of previous gastric surgery (except ESD/EMR (Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection/Endoscopic Mucosal Resection ) for gastric cancer)
  • Preoperative gastric CT evaluation and chest and abdominal imaging evaluation were not performed before surgery, and the clinical stage of the tumor was not comprehensively evaluated
  • Enlarged or bulky regional lymph node (diameter over 3cm)supported by preoperative imaging
  • History of other malignant disease within the past 5 years
  • History of previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy
  • History of unstable angina or myocardial infarction within the past 6 months
  • History of cerebrovascular accident within the past 6 months
  • History of continuous systematic administration of within 1 month
  • \<50% of the predicted values
  • Women during pregnancy or breast-feeding
  • Severe mental disorder
  • Emergency surgery due to complication (bleeding, obstruction or perforation) caused by gastric cancer
  • Preoperative evaluation requires combined organ resection
  • Requirement of simultaneous surgery for other disease
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(7)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Biopsy and archival tissue

A biopsy takes a small piece of tissue to examine. “Archival tissue” is a sample already taken, for example at diagnosis, and kept by the hospital.

Whether a stored sample will do depends on when it was taken, how much there is and what the study needs. Ask whether the study accepts your stored sample or needs a new biopsy.

Metastases

Cancer that has spread from where it began to other parts of the body. “Metastatic” cancer is cancer that has spread this way.

ECOG performance status

A scale of how much an illness limits everyday activity. For people being assessed to join a study, scores run from 0 (fully active) to 4; lower is more active.

0
Fully active, no restrictions.
1
Limited in strenuous activity, but walking and able to do light work, such as housework or office work.
2
Walking and able to look after yourself, but unable to work; up and about more than half of waking hours.
3
Able to look after yourself only in part; in bed or a chair more than half of waking hours.
4
Unable to look after yourself at all; in bed or a chair all day.

Studies most often ask for 0–1 or 0–2. Your doctor gives the score; the WHO scale uses the same steps. The full scale also has 5, which records death.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant

Neoadjuvant treatment is given before the main treatment (usually surgery), often to shrink a tumour. Adjuvant treatment is given after it, to lower the chance of the cancer coming back.

Corticosteroids (steroids)

Anti-inflammatory medicines such as prednisone, prednisolone and dexamethasone — not the anabolic steroids used for muscle.

Studies differ in what they allow: check which steroid medicines, routes (tablets, injections, creams, inhalers, eye drops) and doses this study accepts.

FEV1

From a breathing test (spirometry): how much air you can blow out in the first second. Often given as a percentage of what is expected for your age, height and sex.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
300 participants (estimated)
Target follow-up
3 Years
Patient registry
Yes

Groups and cohorts

  • Robot-assisted radical gastrectomy using VSE for locally advanced gastric cancer.

    The surgeon performed robot-assisted radical gastrectomy using VSE for locally advanced gastric cancer.

  • laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer

    The surgeon performed laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Overall postoperative morbidity rates

    Overall complication rates within 30 days after surgery in patients.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

Secondary outcomes

  1. comprehensive complication index, CCI

    It was calculated according to the severity of surgical complications.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  2. Intraoperative morbidity rates

    The number of patients who received surgical treatment was used as the denominator, and the number of patients with intraoperative complications was used as the numerator.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  3. Overall postoperative serious morbidity rates

    According to the Clavien Dindo complication scoring system, IIIa and above were considered as severe complications, and when multiple complications occurred at the same time, the complication with the highest grade was considered.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  4. Number of retrieved lymph nodes

    The total number of harvested lymph nodes was confirmed by pathology.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  5. Postoperative recovery

    The recovery of patients after surgery, including physical and functional recovery, etc.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  6. Postoperative prealbumin

    Blood examination

    Time frame: 36 months

  7. Postoperative albumin

    Blood examination

    Time frame: 36 months

  8. Inflammatory reponses

    WBC, blood examination

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  9. Immune response

    IL-6, blood examination

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  10. Immune response

    IL-10, blood examination

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  11. Surgical costs

    The cost of the patient's surgical treatment.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  12. 3-years disease free survival rates

    The rate of 3-year disease free survival rates

    Time frame: Follow-up evaluations are performed up to 3 years postoperatively.

  13. 3-year overall survival rates

    The rate of 3-year overall survival rate

    Time frame: Follow-up evaluations are performed up to 3 years postoperatively.

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Nov 2024 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Dec 2026, 24 months after the start.

Of 1,098 non-industry observational studies under Neoplasms, half reached primary completion within 61 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 24 and three quarters within 227. This study's planned 24 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 1,246 studies reached it within 58 months; a quarter within 24 and three quarters within 210.

Neoplasms covers many different conditions, not one, so the studies compared here vary widely. Read these figures as a rough guide.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Mar 3, 2025
First posted
Mar 18, 2025
StartActual
Nov 20, 2024
Primary completionEst.
Dec 1, 2026
CompletionEst.
Dec 1, 2029
Last update
Aug 31, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 31, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06881043
Collaborators
Jiangsu Cancer Institute & Hospital, Beijing Tsinghua Changgeng Hospital, First People's Hospital of Hangzhou, Beijing Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical University
Responsible party
Quan Wang (Director, Clinical Professor, The First Hospital of Jilin University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 18, 2025
Start date
Nov 20, 2024
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 1, 2029 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 31, 2026

Study contacts

Quan Wang, Professor
Contact
wquan@jlu.edu.cn
+86 15843073207

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion