Comparing endoscopic surgeries with open surgeries in terms of effectiveness and safety in salvaging residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer: Systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

Consensus has yet to be reached on the optimal operation for patients with residual or recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). To compare effectiveness and safety of open surgery and endoscopic surgery for patients with residual or recurrent NPC. Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for relevant publications from January 1, 2000 to May 1, 2017. Included studies reported specific residual or local recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer survival data. Proportional meta-analysis was performed on both outcomes with a random-effects model, and the 95% confidential intervals were calculated by Stata 12.0 software. For patients with different tumor classification, a downward trend of 2-year overall survival (OS) was observed for both surgical populations. Endoscopic surgeries achieved bigger rates than open surgeries in patients with recurrent tumor (rT) 1, rT2, and rT3 (93% vs 87%, 77% vs 63%, 67% vs 53%). As for patients with rT4, 2-year OS was similar (35% vs 35%).In addition, the former is less severe complications, lower local recurrence rates (27% vs 32%). Our study found that, compared to open surgery, endoscopic surgery was a safer and more effective treatment modality in managing patients with recurrent or residual NPC.