Yongjun Wang

Surgical outcomes of single-port vs multi-port laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes in patients with endometrial cancer who underwent either single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (SPLH) or multi-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (MPLH). Methods We conducted a systematic literature search from the earliest records available up to May 2023. The databases searched included PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library. Results A total of 12 studies were included in the analysis. Both the SPLH and MPLH groups had similar operative times (MD = -4.27, 95% CI [-35.75, 27.22], p = 0.98), conversion rates (odds ratio [OR] = 1.43, 95% CI [0.57, 3.59], p = 0.44), blood transfusion rates, intraoperative complications (bladder injury, bowel injury, and vascular injury), and postoperative complications (umbilical hernia, fever, fistula, lymphocyst, and wound-related issues). However, the SPLH group showed significant advantages in certain areas. There was a notable reduction in estimated intraoperative blood loss (EBL) compared to the MPLH group (mean difference [MD] = -23.80, 95% CI [-42.99, -4.62], p = 0.02) and a shorter hospital stay duration (MD = -0.33, 95% CI [-0.46, -0.20], p < 0.00001). Although there was some debate about postoperative pain, SPLH tended to have more favorable outcomes. Despite these advantages, the SPLH group was less efficient in para-aortic lymph node clearance compared to the MPLH group (MD = -0.96, 95% CI [-1.57, -0.35], p = 0.002). No significant differences were observed in overall lymph node dissection (MD = -0.91, 95% CI [-2.52, 0.70], p = 0.27) and pelvic lymph node dissection (MD = -1.22, 95% CI [-3.82, 1.27], p = 0.36) between the two groups. Additionally, both groups showed similar therapeutic results, with no significant differences in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Conclusion SPLH and MPLH techniques are equally effective in treating endometrial cancer, with both showing low rates of surgical complications with similar rates of surgical complications and therapeutic outcomes. However, SPLH offers additional benefits, including smaller incisions, reduced estimated intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stays, making it an increasingly popular option for treating endometrial cancer.

Prognostic value and adverse events of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in primary advanced and platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The original meta-analysis of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is already outdated, owing to the latest trial results. This study aimed to clarify the efficacy and adverse events of cytoreductive surgery with HIPEC compared to conventional therapy for advanced and platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer (OC). In this meta-analysis, phase II/III controlled trials regarding 'HIPEC' and 'ovarian cancer' were searched for in electronic databases from inception to March 2022. Twenty-one studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. The pooled hazard ratio [HR] in the HIPEC group for progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.83, HIPEC-based regimens improved the clinical prognosis for primary advanced OC, whereas no significant value was elicited for recurrent OC.

Comparison of the complications between minimally invasive surgery and open surgical treatments for early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background This meta-analysis comprehensively compared intraoperative and postoperative complications between minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and laparotomy in the management of cervical cancer. Even though the advantages of laparotomy over MIS in disease-free survival and overall survival for management of gynecological diseases have been cited in the literature, there is a lack of substantial evidence of the advantage of one surgical modality over another, and it is uncertain whether MIS is justifiable in terms of safety and efficacy. Methods In this meta-analysis, the studies were abstracted that the outcomes of complications to compare MIS (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) and open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics classification stage IA1-IIB) cervical cancer. The primary outcomes were intraoperative overall complications, as well as postoperative aggregate complications. Secondary outcomes included the individual complications. Two investigators independently performed the screening and data extraction. All articles that met the eligibility criteria were included in this meta-analysis. Results The meta-analysis finally included 39 non-randomized studies and 1 randomized controlled trial (8 studies were conducted on robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) vs open radical hysterectomy (ORH), 27 studies were conducted on laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) vs ORH, and 5 studies were conducted on all three approaches). Pooled analyses showed that MIS was associated with higher risk of intraoperative overall complications (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.07–1.86, P<0.05) in comparison with ORH. However, compared to ORH, MIS was associated with significantly lower risk of postoperative aggregate complications (OR = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.34–0.48, P = 0.0143). In terms of individual complications, MIS appeared to have a positive effect in decreasing the complications of transfusion, wound infection, pelvic infection and abscess, lymphedema, intestinal obstruction, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and urinary tract infection. Furthermore, MIS had a negative effect in increasing the complications of cystotomy, bowel injury, subcutaneous emphysema, and fistula. Conclusions Our meta-analysis demonstrates that MIS is superior to laparotomy, with fewer postoperative overall complications (wound infection, pelvic infection and abscess, lymphedema, intestinal obstruction, pulmonary embolism, and urinary tract infection). However, MIS is associated with a higher risk of intraoperative aggregate complications (cystotomy, bowel injury, and subcutaneous emphysema) and postoperative fistula complications.