Abstract

BackgroundThe 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).MethodsA 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.ResultsEight 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.ConclusionOn 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.

Highlights

  • 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)

  • Outcomes Overall survival was reported from all eight studies

  • Our analysis indicated no difference in disease-free survival between EOC patients undergoing FSS or radical surgery (HR, 1.07; 95%confidence interval (CI), 0.73–1.58; p = 0.72) (Fig. 4)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

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). Liu et al BMC Cancer (2020) 20:320 fertility-sparing surgery (FSS) with young EOC patients who still wish to conceive. It is important to preserve the survival rate of cancer patients undergoing FSS. There has been a general consensus that FSS may be offered to patients with borderline, germ cell and stromal ovarian tumors [5]. A number of observational studies have demonstrated that FSS in stage 1 EOC may not decrease survival rates and it may be carried out in patients desirous of preserving fertility [5, 6]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call