{"title":"微创手术与开腹手术治疗上皮性卵巢癌的有效性和安全性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Akira Yokoi, Hiroko Machida, Muneaki Shimada, Koji Matsuo, Shogo Shigeta, Shigenori Furukawa, Nobumichi Nishikawa, Hiroyuki Nomura, Kensuke Hori, Hideki Tokunaga, Tadahiro Shoji, Tsukasa Baba, Satoru Nagase","doi":"10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.08.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional abdominal surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), stratified by treatment type.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by an Expert Panel of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology Ovarian Cancer Committee. Several academic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and Ichushi were searched by the Japan Medical Library Association on November 11, 2023, using the keywords \"epithelial ovarian cancer\", \"minimally invasive surgery\", \"laparoscopic\", and \"robot-assisted\". Articles describing MIS treatment for EOC compared with conventional abdominal surgery were independently assessed by two authors. The primary outcomes were survival and perioperative adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After screening 1114 studies, 35 articles were identified, including primary staging surgery (PSS) for early-stage EOC EOC (n = 20) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy following interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS; n = 10) and upfront primary debulking surgery (PDS; n = 5) for advanced-stage EOC. These studies included 29,888 patients (7661 undergoing MIS and 22,227 undergoing abdominal surgery). Patients receiving MIS and abdominal surgery had similar overall survival (PSS: odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.37; NACT-IDS: OR 0.93, 95%CI 0.25-3.44 and PDS: OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.36-1.22, all P > 0.05). MIS showed perioperative complication rates comparable to those of abdominal surgery (intraoperative and postoperative, all treatment types P ≥ 0.05). However, the rate of lymph node dissection in early-stage EOC (PSS: OR 0.49, 95%CI0.26-0.91) and multivisceral resections in advanced-stage EOC (NACT-IDS: OR 0.27 95%CI 0.16-0.44 and PDS: OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.16-0.44) was lower in MIS than in abdominal surgery (all P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MIS did not negatively impact the survival and perioperative complications of patients with EOC compared to abdominal surgery. While MIS is a viable option, varied case selection and surgical procedures suggest potential bias, requiring further validation studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12853,"journal":{"name":"Gynecologic oncology","volume":"190 ","pages":"42-52"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery versus open laparotomy for epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Akira Yokoi, Hiroko Machida, Muneaki Shimada, Koji Matsuo, Shogo Shigeta, Shigenori Furukawa, Nobumichi Nishikawa, Hiroyuki Nomura, Kensuke Hori, Hideki Tokunaga, Tadahiro Shoji, Tsukasa Baba, Satoru Nagase\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.08.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional abdominal surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), stratified by treatment type.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by an Expert Panel of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology Ovarian Cancer Committee. Several academic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and Ichushi were searched by the Japan Medical Library Association on November 11, 2023, using the keywords \\\"epithelial ovarian cancer\\\", \\\"minimally invasive surgery\\\", \\\"laparoscopic\\\", and \\\"robot-assisted\\\". Articles describing MIS treatment for EOC compared with conventional abdominal surgery were independently assessed by two authors. The primary outcomes were survival and perioperative adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After screening 1114 studies, 35 articles were identified, including primary staging surgery (PSS) for early-stage EOC EOC (n = 20) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy following interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS; n = 10) and upfront primary debulking surgery (PDS; n = 5) for advanced-stage EOC. These studies included 29,888 patients (7661 undergoing MIS and 22,227 undergoing abdominal surgery). Patients receiving MIS and abdominal surgery had similar overall survival (PSS: odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.37; NACT-IDS: OR 0.93, 95%CI 0.25-3.44 and PDS: OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.36-1.22, all P > 0.05). MIS showed perioperative complication rates comparable to those of abdominal surgery (intraoperative and postoperative, all treatment types P ≥ 0.05). However, the rate of lymph node dissection in early-stage EOC (PSS: OR 0.49, 95%CI0.26-0.91) and multivisceral resections in advanced-stage EOC (NACT-IDS: OR 0.27 95%CI 0.16-0.44 and PDS: OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.16-0.44) was lower in MIS than in abdominal surgery (all P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MIS did not negatively impact the survival and perioperative complications of patients with EOC compared to abdominal surgery. While MIS is a viable option, varied case selection and surgical procedures suggest potential bias, requiring further validation studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gynecologic oncology\",\"volume\":\"190 \",\"pages\":\"42-52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gynecologic oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.08.011\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecologic oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2024.08.011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery versus open laparotomy for epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Objective: To examine the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional abdominal surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), stratified by treatment type.
Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by an Expert Panel of the Japan Society of Gynecologic Oncology Ovarian Cancer Committee. Several academic databases, including PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and Ichushi were searched by the Japan Medical Library Association on November 11, 2023, using the keywords "epithelial ovarian cancer", "minimally invasive surgery", "laparoscopic", and "robot-assisted". Articles describing MIS treatment for EOC compared with conventional abdominal surgery were independently assessed by two authors. The primary outcomes were survival and perioperative adverse events.
Results: After screening 1114 studies, 35 articles were identified, including primary staging surgery (PSS) for early-stage EOC EOC (n = 20) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy following interval debulking surgery (NACT-IDS; n = 10) and upfront primary debulking surgery (PDS; n = 5) for advanced-stage EOC. These studies included 29,888 patients (7661 undergoing MIS and 22,227 undergoing abdominal surgery). Patients receiving MIS and abdominal surgery had similar overall survival (PSS: odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.37; NACT-IDS: OR 0.93, 95%CI 0.25-3.44 and PDS: OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.36-1.22, all P > 0.05). MIS showed perioperative complication rates comparable to those of abdominal surgery (intraoperative and postoperative, all treatment types P ≥ 0.05). However, the rate of lymph node dissection in early-stage EOC (PSS: OR 0.49, 95%CI0.26-0.91) and multivisceral resections in advanced-stage EOC (NACT-IDS: OR 0.27 95%CI 0.16-0.44 and PDS: OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.16-0.44) was lower in MIS than in abdominal surgery (all P < 0.05).
Conclusion: MIS did not negatively impact the survival and perioperative complications of patients with EOC compared to abdominal surgery. While MIS is a viable option, varied case selection and surgical procedures suggest potential bias, requiring further validation studies.
期刊介绍:
Gynecologic Oncology, an international journal, is devoted to the publication of clinical and investigative articles that concern tumors of the female reproductive tract. Investigations relating to the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of female cancers, as well as research from any of the disciplines related to this field of interest, are published.
Research Areas Include:
• Cell and molecular biology
• Chemotherapy
• Cytology
• Endocrinology
• Epidemiology
• Genetics
• Gynecologic surgery
• Immunology
• Pathology
• Radiotherapy