A meta-analysis of treatment for early-stage cervical cancer: open versus minimally invasive radical trachelectomy

被引:2
|
作者
Lv, Zi [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Yu-ying [3 ]
Wang, Yu-wen [3 ]
He, Jun-jie [3 ]
Lan, Wen-wei [3 ]
Peng, Jia-ying [3 ]
Lin, Zi-han [3 ]
Zhu, Ruo-fei [4 ,5 ]
Zhou, Jie [4 ,5 ]
Chen, Zi-qi [3 ]
Jiang, Ying-hui [3 ]
Yuan, Yi [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Xiong, Jian [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Guangzhou Med Univ, Guangzhou Women & Childrens Med Ctr, Dept Obstet, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[2] Guangzhou Med Univ, Guangzhou Women & Childrens Med Ctr, Dept Obstet, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[3] Guangzhou Med Univ, Sch Pediat, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[4] Guangzhou Med Univ, Guangzhou Women & Childrens Med Ctr, Dept Gynecol, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
[5] Guangzhou Med Univ, Guangzhou Women & Childrens Med Ctr, Dept Obstet, Guangzhou, Peoples R China
关键词
Radical trachelectomy; Cervical cancer; Fertility-sparing surgery; Meta-analysis; FERTILITY-SPARING SURGERY; PREGNANCY; OUTCOMES; HYSTERECTOMY; LAPAROTOMY;
D O I
10.1186/s12884-023-06036-z
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Background:In previous systematic reviews, meta-analysis was lacking, resulting in the statistical difference between the data of different surgeries being impossible to judge. This meta-analysis aims to contrast the fertility results and cancer outcomes between open and minimally invasive surgery. Method:We systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus to collect studies that included open and minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. A random-effect model calculated the weighted average difference of each primary outcome via Review Manager V.5.4. Result:Eight studies (1369 patients) were incorporated into our study. For fertility results, the Open group excels MIS group in pregnancies-Third trimester delivery [OR = 2.68; 95% CI (1.29, 5.59); P = 0.008]. Nevertheless, there is no statistical difference in clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and second-trimester rate. Concerning cancer outcomes, no difference was detected in the overall survival [OR = 1.56; 95% CI (0.70, 3.45); P = 0.27] and recurrence [OR = 0.63; 95% CI (0.35, 1.12); P = 0.12]. Concerning surgery-related outcomes, the comprehensive effects revealed that the estimated blood loss of the Open group was higher than that of the MIS group[MD = 139.40; 95% CI (79.05, 199.75); P < 0.0001]. However, there was no difference between the postoperative complication rate in the two groups [OR = 1.52; 95% CI (0.89, 2.60); P = 0.12]. Conclusion:This meta-analysis suggested that the fertility result of the Open group may be better than the MIS group, while the MIS group has better surgery-related outcomes. Owing to the poor cases of our study, a more robust conclusion requires more relevant articles in the future.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Efficacy and safety of cervical conization combined with neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus radical trachelectomy in early-stage cervical cancer treatment
    Li, Hui
    Gao, Rui
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF GYNAECOLOGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2024, 45 (04) : 170 - 176
  • [22] Systematic comparison of radical vaginal trachelectomy and radical hysterectomy in the treatment of early-stage cervical cancer
    Han, Ling
    Yang, Xiao-Yun
    Zheng, Ai
    Wang, Li
    Chu, Yan-Xia
    Wang, Yu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2011, 112 (02) : 149 - 153
  • [23] Assessing the role of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer
    Bogani, Giorgio
    Di Donato, Violante
    Muzii, Ludovico
    Casarin, Jvan
    Ghezzi, Fabio
    Malzoni, Mario
    Greggi, Stefano
    Landoni, Fabio
    Bazzurini, Luca
    Zanagnolo, Vanna
    Multinu, Francesco
    Angioli, Roberto
    Plotti, Francesco
    Caruso, Giuseppe
    Fischetti, Margherita
    Ferrandina, Gabriella
    Palaia, Innocenza
    Panici, Pierluigi Benedetti
    Scambia, Giovanni
    Raspagliesi, Francesco
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2022, 275 : 64 - 69
  • [24] Modify or abandon: minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer
    Uppal, Shitanshu
    Spencer, Ryan
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2019, 29 (05) : 843 - 844
  • [25] Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer
    Melamed, Alexander
    Margul, Daniell J.
    Chen, Ling
    Keating, Nancy L.
    del Carmen, Marcela G.
    Yang, Junhua
    Seagle, Brandon-Luke L.
    Alexander, Amy
    Barber, Emma L.
    Rice, Laurel W.
    Wright, Jason D.
    Kocherginsky, Masha
    Shahabi, Shohreh
    Rauh-Hain, J. Alejandro
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2018, 379 (20): : 1905 - 1914
  • [26] Minimally-invasive hysterectomy versus open radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: a cost-effective analysis of the LACC trial
    Boitano, Teresa
    Dilley, Sarah
    Smith, Haller
    Leath, Charles
    Straughn, Michael
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2021, 162 : S36 - S36
  • [27] Fertility sparing surgery for treatment of early-stage cervical cancer: Open vs. robotic radical trachelectomy
    Nick, Alpa M.
    Frumovitz, Michael M.
    Soliman, Pamela T.
    Schmeler, Kathleen M.
    Ramirez, Pedro T.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2012, 124 (02) : 276 - 280
  • [28] Abdominal Radical Trachelectomy in Fertility-Sparing Treatment of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer
    Cibula, David
    Slama, Jiri
    Svarovsky, Jiri
    Fischerova, Daniela
    Freitag, Pavel
    Zikan, Michal
    Pinkavova, Iva
    Pavlista, David
    Dundr, Pavel
    Hill, Martin
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2009, 19 (08) : 1407 - 1411
  • [29] Comparison of the complications between minimally invasive surgery and open surgical treatments for early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Li, Yilin
    Kong, Qingduo
    Wei, Hongyi
    Wang, Yongjun
    PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (07):
  • [30] OPEN VS. MINIMALLY INVASIVE RADICAL TRACHELECTOMY IN EARLY STAGE CERVICAL CANCER: INTERNATIONAL MULTICENTER IRTA STUDY RESULTS
    Salvo, G.
    Ramirez, P. T.
    Wu, X.
    Leitao, M.
    Mosgaard, Bj
    Falconer, H.
    Perrotta, M.
    Rendon, G.
    Kucukmetin, A.
    Berlev, I.
    Persson, J.
    Vieira, M.
    Cibula, D.
    Fotopoulou, C.
    Liu, K.
    Ribeiro, R.
    Capilna, M. E.
    Kaidarova, D.
    Baiocchi, G.
    Li, X.
    Li, J.
    Pedra-Nobre, S.
    Palsdottir, K.
    Noll, F.
    Rundle, S.
    Ulrikh, E.
    Kocian, R.
    Saso, S.
    Hu, Z.
    Tsunoda, A.
    Gheorghe, M.
    Bolatbekova, R.
    Pitcher, B.
    Pareja, R.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGICAL CANCER, 2019, 29 : A13 - A14