病理期T1B胆囊癌的简单与根治性胆囊切除术:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Lucas Monteiro Delgado, Bernardo Fontel Pompeu, Gabriel Henrique Acedo Martins, Caio Mendonça Magalhães, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo
{"title":"病理期T1B胆囊癌的简单与根治性胆囊切除术:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Lucas Monteiro Delgado, Bernardo Fontel Pompeu, Gabriel Henrique Acedo Martins, Caio Mendonça Magalhães, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo","doi":"10.1089/lap.2025.0049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the sixth most common gastrointestinal malignancy and the most prevalent cancer of the biliary tract. Although recent studies suggest that extended resection may be the optimal approach for managing T1b GBC, there is no clear consensus on whether simple cholecystectomy (SC) or radical cholecystectomy (RC) offers better outcomes. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two surgical techniques in the treatment of T1b GBC. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through June 20, 2024. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes and assessed heterogeneity using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We included 10 studies comprising 2,964 patients, of whom 51.5% underwent SC and 48.5% underwent RC. RC was associated with significantly higher 2 year (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.28-0.77; <i>P</i> < .01; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 51%) and five-year overall survival rates (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64-0.98; <i>P</i> = .03; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%), and higher 5-year disease-specific survival (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.35-0.99; <i>P</i> = .04; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%) compared with SC. However, we found no significant differences in 10-year overall survival (OR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.45-1.13; <i>P</i> = .15; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 43%) or recurrence rates (OR 1.44; 95% CI: 0.72-2.88; <i>P</i> = .30; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> RC provides a short- to medium-term survival advantage over SC in patients with T1b gallbladder cancer, but this benefit appears to diminish over time.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simple Versus Radical Cholecystectomy for Pathological Stage T1B Gallbladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Lucas Monteiro Delgado, Bernardo Fontel Pompeu, Gabriel Henrique Acedo Martins, Caio Mendonça Magalhães, Sérgio Mazzola Poli de Figueiredo\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/lap.2025.0049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the sixth most common gastrointestinal malignancy and the most prevalent cancer of the biliary tract. Although recent studies suggest that extended resection may be the optimal approach for managing T1b GBC, there is no clear consensus on whether simple cholecystectomy (SC) or radical cholecystectomy (RC) offers better outcomes. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two surgical techniques in the treatment of T1b GBC. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through June 20, 2024. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes and assessed heterogeneity using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic. <b><i>Results:</i></b> We included 10 studies comprising 2,964 patients, of whom 51.5% underwent SC and 48.5% underwent RC. RC was associated with significantly higher 2 year (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.28-0.77; <i>P</i> < .01; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 51%) and five-year overall survival rates (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64-0.98; <i>P</i> = .03; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%), and higher 5-year disease-specific survival (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.35-0.99; <i>P</i> = .04; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%) compared with SC. However, we found no significant differences in 10-year overall survival (OR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.45-1.13; <i>P</i> = .15; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 43%) or recurrence rates (OR 1.44; 95% CI: 0.72-2.88; <i>P</i> = .30; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> RC provides a short- to medium-term survival advantage over SC in patients with T1b gallbladder cancer, but this benefit appears to diminish over time.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2025.0049\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2025.0049","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:胆囊癌(GBC)是第六大最常见的胃肠道恶性肿瘤和最常见的胆道癌症。尽管最近的研究表明,延长切除可能是治疗T1b型GBC的最佳方法,但对于单纯胆囊切除术(SC)和根治性胆囊切除术(RC)哪个能提供更好的结果,目前还没有明确的共识。因此,我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较这两种手术技术治疗T1b GBC的效果。方法:我们系统地检索PubMed, Embase和Cochrane图书馆,截止到2024年6月20日。我们汇总了二元结果的优势比(ORs)和95%置信区间(CIs),并使用I2统计量评估异质性。结果:我们纳入了10项研究,包括2,964例患者,其中51.5%接受了SC, 48.5%接受了RC。2年生存率显著增高(OR: 0.46;95% ci: 0.28-0.77;P < 0.01;I2 = 51%)和5年总生存率(OR: 0.79;95% ci: 0.64-0.98;P = .03;I2 = 0%),以及更高的5年疾病特异性生存率(OR: 0.59;95% ci: 0.35-0.99;P = .04;I2 = 0%)。然而,我们发现10年总生存率无显著差异(OR: 0.71;95% ci: 0.45-1.13;P = .15;I2 = 43%)或复发率(or 1.44;95% ci: 0.72-2.88;P = .30;I2 = 0%)。结论:在T1b胆囊癌患者中,RC比SC提供了中短期生存优势,但这种优势似乎随着时间的推移而减弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Simple Versus Radical Cholecystectomy for Pathological Stage T1B Gallbladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is the sixth most common gastrointestinal malignancy and the most prevalent cancer of the biliary tract. Although recent studies suggest that extended resection may be the optimal approach for managing T1b GBC, there is no clear consensus on whether simple cholecystectomy (SC) or radical cholecystectomy (RC) offers better outcomes. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare these two surgical techniques in the treatment of T1b GBC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through June 20, 2024. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes and assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. Results: We included 10 studies comprising 2,964 patients, of whom 51.5% underwent SC and 48.5% underwent RC. RC was associated with significantly higher 2 year (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.28-0.77; P < .01; I2 = 51%) and five-year overall survival rates (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64-0.98; P = .03; I2 = 0%), and higher 5-year disease-specific survival (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.35-0.99; P = .04; I2 = 0%) compared with SC. However, we found no significant differences in 10-year overall survival (OR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.45-1.13; P = .15; I2 = 43%) or recurrence rates (OR 1.44; 95% CI: 0.72-2.88; P = .30; I2 = 0%). Conclusion: RC provides a short- to medium-term survival advantage over SC in patients with T1b gallbladder cancer, but this benefit appears to diminish over time.

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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.
×
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