Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Guo, Xinmeng; Tian, Shuang; Wang, Hui; Zhang, Jinning; Cheng, Yanfei; Yao, Yuanqing

doi:10.1002/ijgo.14209

Cited by 10 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Twenty studies compared the length of stay among different approaches and RH was associated with shorter hospitalization together with laparoscopy. Beyond stating superior results for robotics in terms of peri-operative course, the same paper found similar oncological outcomes among surgical approaches, in terms of both survival and tumor recurrence rates [17].…”

Section: Robotic Hysterectomymentioning

confidence: 81%

“…Another systematic review and network meta-analysis was released in 2022 by Guo et al [17], evaluating the outcomes of different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Thirty studies -including observational ones with survival analysis -accounting for more than 11,000 patients were evaluated and robotic surgery was confirmed to provide the lowest degree of blood loss [17]. Twenty studies compared the length of stay among different approaches and RH was associated with shorter hospitalization together with laparoscopy.…”

Section: Robotic Hysterectomymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Level 1 Evidence for Robotic Surgery for Urological and Gynecological Pelvic Cancers: Where do We Currently Stand?

Sighinolfi¹,

Gaia²,

Afonina³

et al. 2023

Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robotic surgery is used for the surgical removal of female pelvic malignancies and encompasses procedures as radical cystectomy and radical hysterectomy. The aim of this paper is to provide an update of level 1 literature evidence about the outcomes of robotic surgery compared to other surgical approaches for the treatment of bladder, endometrial and cervical cancer. A non-systematic search of the PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted to identify peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical approaches for radical cystectomy and hysterectomy. To the purpose of capturing the lastest updates, 2020-2022 literature was reviewed. In the field of radical cystectomy, two RCTs supported the implementation of robotics as a more beneficial approach than open surgery -in terms of faster recovery, less thromboembolic events, less infectious events. In gynecology, despite robotics is accepted for the treatment of early endometrial tumors, the role of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for the treatment of cervical cancer is still debated, with two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting conflicting results. Two-decades after the introduction of robotic surgery, there is still a number of current studies evaluating its role for the treatment of urological pelvic malignancies, especially for bladder cancer. The role of robotic surgery alone for the treatment of gynecological malignancies has been scarcely addressed with robotics being mostly evaluated as a part of MIS; updates about MIS for the treatment of cervical cancer continue to be ongoing.

show abstract

Section: Robotic Hysterectomymentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Robotic Hysterectomymentioning

confidence: 99%

Level 1 Evidence for Robotic Surgery for Urological and Gynecological Pelvic Cancers: Where do We Currently Stand?

Sighinolfi¹,

Gaia²,

Afonina³

et al. 2023

Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More inspection is still desirable to clarify these feasible influences. This was also emphasized in former investigations that utilized a correlated meta‐analysis procedure and originate equivalent values of the impact 77–84 . Although the meta‐analysis was incapable to discover if differences in these characteristics are related to the oomes being researched, properly‐led RCTs are vital to consider these aspects as well as the mixture of different ages, and ethnicities of females.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was also emphasized in former investigations that utilized a correlated meta‐analysis procedure and originate equivalent values of the impact. 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 Although the meta‐analysis was incapable to discover if differences in these characteristics are related to the oomes being researched, properly‐led RCTs are vital to consider these aspects as well as the mixture of different ages, and ethnicities of females. In conclusion, OSM had significantly lower WI and was compared to those with MIS in females with CC and.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A meta‐analysis examining the impact of open surgical therapy versus minimally invasive surgery on wound infection in females with cervical cancer

Yun,

Li,

Zhu

et al. 2024

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meta‐analysis study was executed to measure the effect of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgical management (OSM) on wound infection (WI) in female's cervical cancer (CC). A comprehensive literature study till February 2023 was applied and 1675 interrelated investigations were reviewed. The 41 chosen investigations enclosed 10 204 females with CC and were in the chosen investigations' starting point, 4294 of them were utilizing MIS, and 5910 were utilizing OSM. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were utilized to compute the value of the effect of MIS and OSM on WI in female's CC and by the dichotomous approaches and a fixed or random model. The MIS had significantly lower WI (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.15–0.35, p < 0.001) with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) and postoperative aggregate complications (PACs) (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37–0.64, p < 0.001) in females with CC and compared OSM. However, MIS compared with OSM in females with CC and had no significant difference in pelvic infection and abscess (PIA) (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.31–1.16, p = 0.13). The MIS had significantly lower WI, and PACs, though, had no significant difference in PIA in females with CC and compared with OSM. However, care must be exercised when dealing with its values because of the low sample size of some of the nominated investigations for the meta‐analysis.

show abstract

“…This was also suggested in a previous similar meta-analyses study that showed promising outcomes for laparotomy in improving intraoperative complications and reducing postoperative complications. [76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83] Wellconducted randomised controlled trials are needed to assess these factors and the combination of different ages, ethnicity, and other variants of subjects; since our metaanalysis study could not answer whether different gender, ages, and ethnicity are related to the results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer: A meta‐analysis

Zheng

Liu

Cheng

et al. 2022

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We performed a meta‐analysis to evaluate the effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer. A systematic literature search up to July 2022 was performed and 10 231 subjects with cervical cancer at the baseline of the studies; 4307 of them were using the minimally invasive surgery, and 5924 were using laparotomy. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer using the dichotomous methods with a random or fixed‐effect model. The minimally invasive surgery had significantly lower wound infection (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13–0.30, P < .001), and postoperative complications (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.37–0.64, P < .001) in subjects with cervical cancer compared laparotomy. However, minimally invasive surgery compared with laparotomy in subjects with cervical cancer had no significant difference in intraoperative complications (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80–1.36, P = 0.76). The minimally invasive surgery had significantly lower wound infection, and postoperative complications however, had no significant difference in intraoperative complications in subjects with cervical cancer compared with laparotomy. The analysis of outcomes should be with caution because of the low sample size of 22 out of 41 studies in the meta‐analysis and a low number of studies in certain comparisons.

show abstract

Outcomes associated with different surgical approaches to radical hysterectomy: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Cited by 10 publications

References 55 publications

Level 1 Evidence for Robotic Surgery for Urological and Gynecological Pelvic Cancers: Where do We Currently Stand?

Level 1 Evidence for Robotic Surgery for Urological and Gynecological Pelvic Cancers: Where do We Currently Stand?

A meta‐analysis examining the impact of open surgical therapy versus minimally invasive surgery on wound infection in females with cervical cancer

Effect of minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy on wound infection and postoperative and intraoperative complications in the management of cervical cancer: A meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About