Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis
Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery. Methods We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. A...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of gynecology and obstetrics 2023-01, Vol.160 (1), p.28-37 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 37 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 28 |
container_title | International journal of gynecology and obstetrics |
container_volume | 160 |
creator | Guo, Xinmeng Tian, Shuang Wang, Hui Zhang, Jinning Cheng, Yanfei Yao, Yuanqing |
description | Objective
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery.
Methods
We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All included observational studies used survival analyses to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing different radical hysterectomy types. All studies were assessed by the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale with scores of at least seven points. We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta‐analysis to compare clinical outcomes among five surgical approaches.
Results
Thirty studies (n = 11 353) were included. Robotic surgery had the lowest blood loss volume and hospitalization duration; open surgery had the shortest operative time. Vaginal assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with the highest number of resected lymph nodes and lowest rate of perioperative complications. Survival outcomes and tumor recurrence outcomes were similar among the approaches.
Conclusion
The current approaches to cervical cancer surgery have comparable efficacies. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/ijgo.14209 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2646943578</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2646943578</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3299-92f44e426e5e390fd8ba6fe23c0a1ca5228eceb2c8fa9fa8c411c1e9f962b7a53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtO5DAQhi0EgoaZzRwAeYmQwviRl9mhFk8h9WZmHVU7ZdpMEje2Qys7jsAROAtH4SSkaYYltSlV1adPqp-QX5ydcMbEb3t_5054KpjaIhNeFiqRaaG2yWQ8sqQQSuyR_RDuGWO84HyX7MlMFnKsCXma9VG7FgOFEJy2ELGmKxsXtLbGoMcu0tD7O6uhobBcegd6MdLRvb54qD_WiyHEkdTRtcMpPaNhPbcQraYeHy2uKHQ17TCunP9HW4zw9vQMHTRDsOEH2THQBPz52Q_I34vzP9Or5HZ2eT09u020FEolSpg0xVTkmKFUzNTlHHKDQmoGXEMmRIka50KXBpSBUqeca47KqFzMC8jkATnaeMcXHnoMsWpt0Ng00KHrQyXyNFepzIpyRI83qPYuBI-mWnrbgh8qzqp14tU68eoj8RE-_PT28xbrL_R_xCPAN8DKNjh8o6quby5nG-k7dD6RXw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2646943578</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Guo, Xinmeng ; Tian, Shuang ; Wang, Hui ; Zhang, Jinning ; Cheng, Yanfei ; Yao, Yuanqing</creator><creatorcontrib>Guo, Xinmeng ; Tian, Shuang ; Wang, Hui ; Zhang, Jinning ; Cheng, Yanfei ; Yao, Yuanqing</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery.
Methods
We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All included observational studies used survival analyses to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing different radical hysterectomy types. All studies were assessed by the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale with scores of at least seven points. We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta‐analysis to compare clinical outcomes among five surgical approaches.
Results
Thirty studies (n = 11 353) were included. Robotic surgery had the lowest blood loss volume and hospitalization duration; open surgery had the shortest operative time. Vaginal assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with the highest number of resected lymph nodes and lowest rate of perioperative complications. Survival outcomes and tumor recurrence outcomes were similar among the approaches.
Conclusion
The current approaches to cervical cancer surgery have comparable efficacies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-7292</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-3479</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.14209</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35373333</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>radical hysterectomy ; surgical approaches ; systematic review ; vaginal surgery</subject><ispartof>International journal of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023-01, Vol.160 (1), p.28-37</ispartof><rights>2022 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3299-92f44e426e5e390fd8ba6fe23c0a1ca5228eceb2c8fa9fa8c411c1e9f962b7a53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3299-92f44e426e5e390fd8ba6fe23c0a1ca5228eceb2c8fa9fa8c411c1e9f962b7a53</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5942-4121</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fijgo.14209$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fijgo.14209$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35373333$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Guo, Xinmeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tian, Shuang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Hui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Jinning</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Yanfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Yuanqing</creatorcontrib><title>Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis</title><title>International journal of gynecology and obstetrics</title><addtitle>Int J Gynaecol Obstet</addtitle><description>Objective
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery.
Methods
We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All included observational studies used survival analyses to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing different radical hysterectomy types. All studies were assessed by the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale with scores of at least seven points. We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta‐analysis to compare clinical outcomes among five surgical approaches.
Results
Thirty studies (n = 11 353) were included. Robotic surgery had the lowest blood loss volume and hospitalization duration; open surgery had the shortest operative time. Vaginal assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with the highest number of resected lymph nodes and lowest rate of perioperative complications. Survival outcomes and tumor recurrence outcomes were similar among the approaches.
Conclusion
The current approaches to cervical cancer surgery have comparable efficacies.</description><subject>radical hysterectomy</subject><subject>surgical approaches</subject><subject>systematic review</subject><subject>vaginal surgery</subject><issn>0020-7292</issn><issn>1879-3479</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kEtO5DAQhi0EgoaZzRwAeYmQwviRl9mhFk8h9WZmHVU7ZdpMEje2Qys7jsAROAtH4SSkaYYltSlV1adPqp-QX5ydcMbEb3t_5054KpjaIhNeFiqRaaG2yWQ8sqQQSuyR_RDuGWO84HyX7MlMFnKsCXma9VG7FgOFEJy2ELGmKxsXtLbGoMcu0tD7O6uhobBcegd6MdLRvb54qD_WiyHEkdTRtcMpPaNhPbcQraYeHy2uKHQ17TCunP9HW4zw9vQMHTRDsOEH2THQBPz52Q_I34vzP9Or5HZ2eT09u020FEolSpg0xVTkmKFUzNTlHHKDQmoGXEMmRIka50KXBpSBUqeca47KqFzMC8jkATnaeMcXHnoMsWpt0Ng00KHrQyXyNFepzIpyRI83qPYuBI-mWnrbgh8qzqp14tU68eoj8RE-_PT28xbrL_R_xCPAN8DKNjh8o6quby5nG-k7dD6RXw</recordid><startdate>202301</startdate><enddate>202301</enddate><creator>Guo, Xinmeng</creator><creator>Tian, Shuang</creator><creator>Wang, Hui</creator><creator>Zhang, Jinning</creator><creator>Cheng, Yanfei</creator><creator>Yao, Yuanqing</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5942-4121</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202301</creationdate><title>Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis</title><author>Guo, Xinmeng ; Tian, Shuang ; Wang, Hui ; Zhang, Jinning ; Cheng, Yanfei ; Yao, Yuanqing</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3299-92f44e426e5e390fd8ba6fe23c0a1ca5228eceb2c8fa9fa8c411c1e9f962b7a53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>radical hysterectomy</topic><topic>surgical approaches</topic><topic>systematic review</topic><topic>vaginal surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Guo, Xinmeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tian, Shuang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Hui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Jinning</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Yanfei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Yuanqing</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of gynecology and obstetrics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Guo, Xinmeng</au><au>Tian, Shuang</au><au>Wang, Hui</au><au>Zhang, Jinning</au><au>Cheng, Yanfei</au><au>Yao, Yuanqing</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis</atitle><jtitle>International journal of gynecology and obstetrics</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Gynaecol Obstet</addtitle><date>2023-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>160</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>28</spage><epage>37</epage><pages>28-37</pages><issn>0020-7292</issn><eissn>1879-3479</eissn><abstract>Objective
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of five different approaches to cervical cancer surgery.
Methods
We conducted a systematic search for comparative studies on different radical hysterectomy types for cervical cancer in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. All included observational studies used survival analyses to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing different radical hysterectomy types. All studies were assessed by the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale with scores of at least seven points. We extracted the relevant data and conducted a network meta‐analysis to compare clinical outcomes among five surgical approaches.
Results
Thirty studies (n = 11 353) were included. Robotic surgery had the lowest blood loss volume and hospitalization duration; open surgery had the shortest operative time. Vaginal assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with the highest number of resected lymph nodes and lowest rate of perioperative complications. Survival outcomes and tumor recurrence outcomes were similar among the approaches.
Conclusion
The current approaches to cervical cancer surgery have comparable efficacies.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>35373333</pmid><doi>10.1002/ijgo.14209</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5942-4121</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0020-7292 |
ispartof | International journal of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023-01, Vol.160 (1), p.28-37 |
issn | 0020-7292 1879-3479 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2646943578 |
source | Wiley Online Library All Journals |
subjects | radical hysterectomy surgical approaches systematic review vaginal surgery |
title | Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T04%3A11%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Outcomes%20associated%20with%20different%20surgical%20approaches%20to%C2%A0radical%20hysterectomy:%20A%20systematic%20review%20and%20network%20meta%E2%80%90analysis&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20gynecology%20and%20obstetrics&rft.au=Guo,%20Xinmeng&rft.date=2023-01&rft.volume=160&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=28&rft.epage=37&rft.pages=28-37&rft.issn=0020-7292&rft.eissn=1879-3479&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ijgo.14209&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2646943578%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2646943578&rft_id=info:pmid/35373333&rfr_iscdi=true |