在普通人群中,预防性输卵管切除术作为卵巢癌的预防策略:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Yuting Tang, Haiying Sun, Peiying Fu, Ting Zhou, Ronghua Liu
{"title":"在普通人群中,预防性输卵管切除术作为卵巢癌的预防策略:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yuting Tang, Haiying Sun, Peiying Fu, Ting Zhou, Ronghua Liu","doi":"10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The impact of prophylactic salpingectomy on the prevention of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains unclear, particularly in Asian populations where data is lacking. In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, we sought to assess whether prophylactic salpingectomy could reduce the incidence of ovarian cancer in the general population of multiple ethnicities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to assess the effectiveness of salpingectomy, bilateral salpingectomy (BS), and unilateral salpingectomy (US) in reducing the risk of EOC and evaluating postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final analyses included 6 eligible trials (5,747,056 patients), including 1 cohort study and 5 case-control studies. The analyses of these studies demonstrated that women who underwent salpingectomy had a significantly reduced risk of EOC compared to those who did not receive salpingectomy (odds ratio [OR]=0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.45-0.89; p=0.007). Five studies (5,746,469 patients) indicated a significant reduction in EOC risk among patients who underwent BS (OR=0.48; 95% CI=0.33-0.69; p<0.001). On the other hand, in the analysis of 4 studies (5,745,887 patients) that examined US, the association with EOC risk was not significant despite the protective trend (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.64-1.06; p=0.12).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results indicate BS is an effective strategy for reducing the risk of sporadic EOC, but the results did not lead to the same conclusion for patients who underwent US. When a candidate or patient is undergoing a hysterectomy or has other benign diseases, prophylactic BS may be a safe surgical procedure that carries future benefits in terms of EOC risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":15868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology","volume":"36 1","pages":"e8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11790999/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prophylactic salpingectomy as a preventative strategy for ovarian cancer in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yuting Tang, Haiying Sun, Peiying Fu, Ting Zhou, Ronghua Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The impact of prophylactic salpingectomy on the prevention of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains unclear, particularly in Asian populations where data is lacking. In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, we sought to assess whether prophylactic salpingectomy could reduce the incidence of ovarian cancer in the general population of multiple ethnicities.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to assess the effectiveness of salpingectomy, bilateral salpingectomy (BS), and unilateral salpingectomy (US) in reducing the risk of EOC and evaluating postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final analyses included 6 eligible trials (5,747,056 patients), including 1 cohort study and 5 case-control studies. The analyses of these studies demonstrated that women who underwent salpingectomy had a significantly reduced risk of EOC compared to those who did not receive salpingectomy (odds ratio [OR]=0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.45-0.89; p=0.007). Five studies (5,746,469 patients) indicated a significant reduction in EOC risk among patients who underwent BS (OR=0.48; 95% CI=0.33-0.69; p<0.001). On the other hand, in the analysis of 4 studies (5,745,887 patients) that examined US, the association with EOC risk was not significant despite the protective trend (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.64-1.06; p=0.12).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our results indicate BS is an effective strategy for reducing the risk of sporadic EOC, but the results did not lead to the same conclusion for patients who underwent US. When a candidate or patient is undergoing a hysterectomy or has other benign diseases, prophylactic BS may be a safe surgical procedure that carries future benefits in terms of EOC risk.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15868,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"e8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11790999/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gynecologic Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:预防性输卵管切除术对预防上皮性卵巢癌(EOC)的影响尚不清楚,特别是在缺乏数据的亚洲人群中。在这项系统回顾和荟萃分析研究中,我们试图评估预防性输卵管切除术是否可以降低多种族普通人群中卵巢癌的发病率。方法:采用PubMed/MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,评估输卵管切除术、双侧输卵管切除术(BS)和单侧输卵管切除术(US)在降低EOC风险和评估术后预后方面的有效性。结果:最终分析纳入6项符合条件的试验(5,747,056例患者),包括1项队列研究和5项病例对照研究。这些研究的分析表明,与未接受输卵管切除术的女性相比,接受输卵管切除术的女性发生EOC的风险显著降低(优势比[OR]=0.63;95%置信区间[CI]=0.45-0.89;p = 0.007)。五项研究(5,746,469例患者)表明,接受BS的患者EOC风险显著降低(OR=0.48;95%可信区间= 0.33 - -0.69;结论:我们的研究结果表明BS是降低散发性EOC风险的有效策略,但对于接受US的患者,结果并未得出相同的结论。当候选人或患者正在接受子宫切除术或患有其他良性疾病时,预防性BS可能是一种安全的外科手术,在EOC风险方面具有未来的益处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prophylactic salpingectomy as a preventative strategy for ovarian cancer in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: The impact of prophylactic salpingectomy on the prevention of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) remains unclear, particularly in Asian populations where data is lacking. In this systematic review and meta-analysis study, we sought to assess whether prophylactic salpingectomy could reduce the incidence of ovarian cancer in the general population of multiple ethnicities.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to assess the effectiveness of salpingectomy, bilateral salpingectomy (BS), and unilateral salpingectomy (US) in reducing the risk of EOC and evaluating postoperative outcomes.

Results: The final analyses included 6 eligible trials (5,747,056 patients), including 1 cohort study and 5 case-control studies. The analyses of these studies demonstrated that women who underwent salpingectomy had a significantly reduced risk of EOC compared to those who did not receive salpingectomy (odds ratio [OR]=0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.45-0.89; p=0.007). Five studies (5,746,469 patients) indicated a significant reduction in EOC risk among patients who underwent BS (OR=0.48; 95% CI=0.33-0.69; p<0.001). On the other hand, in the analysis of 4 studies (5,745,887 patients) that examined US, the association with EOC risk was not significant despite the protective trend (OR=0.82; 95% CI=0.64-1.06; p=0.12).

Conclusion: Our results indicate BS is an effective strategy for reducing the risk of sporadic EOC, but the results did not lead to the same conclusion for patients who underwent US. When a candidate or patient is undergoing a hysterectomy or has other benign diseases, prophylactic BS may be a safe surgical procedure that carries future benefits in terms of EOC risk.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology
Journal of Gynecologic Oncology ONCOLOGY-OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.60%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Gynecologic Oncology (JGO) is an official publication of the Asian Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Abbreviated title is ''J Gynecol Oncol''. It was launched in 1990. The JGO''s aim is to publish the highest quality manuscripts dedicated to the advancement of care of the patients with gynecologic cancer. It is an international peer-reviewed periodical journal that is published bimonthly (January, March, May, July, September, and November). Supplement numbers are at times published. The journal publishes editorials, original and review articles, correspondence, book review, etc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信