Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare overall survival and disease-free survival after fertility sparing surgery (FSS) vs radical surgery in stage 1 epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).Methods
A systematic literature search of PubMed, BioMed Central, Scopus, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and Google scholar was carried out. Databases were searched for English language studies from inception to 1st November 2019. Adjusted hazard ratios (HR) were extracted and pooled for a meta-analysis. Meta-regression was performed for baseline patient characteristics.Results
Eight observational studies compared 2223 patients undergoing FSS with 5809 patients undergoing radical surgery. Overall survival was reported from all eight studies. The pooled HR was non-significant (HR, 1.03; 95%CI, 0.80-1.31; p?=?0.84) denoting no difference in overall survival between FSS and radical surgery. Data on disease-free survival was available from five studies. Our analysis indicated no difference in disease-free survival between EOC patients undergoing FSS or radical surgery (HR, 1.07; 95%CI, 0.73-1.58; p?=?0.72). On meta-regression, there was no a statistically significant effect of cancer stage, grade and histology on the pooled HR.Conclusion
On the basis of currently available observational studies there seems to be no difference in overall survival and disease-free survival with either surgical techniques for stage 1 EOC patients. Disease stage, tumor grade and histology does not appear to influence outcomes. Further homogenous studies shall improve the quality of evidence on this debatable subject.
SUBMITTER: Liu D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7161302 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
BMC cancer 20200415 1
<h4>Background</h4>The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare overall survival and disease-free survival after fertility sparing surgery (FSS) vs radical surgery in stage 1 epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic literature search of PubMed, BioMed Central, Scopus, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and Google scholar was carried out. Databases were searched for English language studies from inception to 1st November 2019. Adjust ...[more]