0.81-2.33; P = .243), and operation time (MD = À1.37; 95% CI, À4.11 to 1.38; P = .33), RSL have comparable outcomes vs WGL.Ahmed 5 combined six RCTs involving ROLL versus WGL together with one RSL versus WGL for meta-analysis. RSL had favorable outcomes in operative time; however, it was inferior to WGL in volume of excised breast tissue. Lovrics 6 analyzed five RCTs and seven nonrandomized studies involving ROLL and RSL together versus WGL. RSL was found to be superior to WGL in surgical margins and re-operation rates. Chan BKY 7 combined six RCTs involving ROLL versus WGL together with two RSL versus WGL for meta-analysis. RSL demonstrated superior results in positive tumor margins, and re-operation rates over WGL, but neither had statistical significance. Besides,they also found that WGL had fewer postoperative complications to RSL, although this was also not statistically significant. Ahmed 8 combined one RCT and four nonrandomized studies involving RSL vs WGL for meta-analysis. RSL was found to be superior to WGL in terms of involved surgical margin status, re-operation rates, and operative time. However, there was no significant difference in volume of specimen excised.