|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Full text
Comparison of the prognosis and recurrence of apparent early-stage ovarian tumors treated with laparoscopy and laparotomy: a meta-analysis of clinical studies
Article selection criteria
All clinical studies that explored the differences in prognosis and/or recurrence of apparent early-stage ovarian tumors (stage I and stage II, according to the FIGO classification) treated with laparotomy versus laparoscopy were considered eligible for the analysis......
....Nonetheless, studies examining the effects of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treating apparent early-stage ovarian cancer have involved limited numbers of patients, and randomized controlled trials are not available. The present review systematically combines existing clinical studies that compared the effects of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in treating apparent early-stage ovarian cancer to evaluate the prognosis and recurrence of laparoscopy and reach a conclusion with high credibility.
..... A limitation of the current study is the small number of studies and the limited numbers of participants involved. This reflects the paucity of high-quality clinical trials that address the efficacy of laparoscopic surgery for treating ovarian tumors. Generalizations of this study’s conclusions to all patients with early-stage ovarian tumors should be considered with caution, and there is still considerable need for higher quality studies with relatively larger sample sizes to address this topic.....
Conclusion
In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirms that laparoscopy has favorable prognostic
outcomes in terms of the postoperative complications rate and the lengths of post-operative
hospital compared with conventional laparotomy in the treatment of apparent early-stage
ovarian tumors. Laparoscopic surgery may be effective and feasible for treating apparent
early-stage ovarian tumors.
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.