Oncological outcomes of extended versus standard pelvic lymph node dissection in radical cystectomy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gordilho Rafael Matos Vieira, Barretto Nilo Jorge Carvalho Leão, Silvão Rodrigo Barbosa Freire, Pazos Felipe Pereira Garrido, Queiroz Pedro Rodrigues, Figueiredo Matheus Oliveira, Souza Ricardo Andrade Freitas, da Conceição Oliva João Pedro Gomes, Góes Luma Gabriella Firme Sampaio, Oliveira Rafael Cintra Rosa Corrêa, de Sousa Lorena Barboza, Pinho Felipe, Silva Albuquerque, Calazans Leonardo Marques, Kruschewsky Wendel Souza, Ziomkowski Alexandre Azevedo, Filho Eduardo Deda Mendonça, Rocha Gabriel Silva, Tobias-Machado Marcos, Moreira Raphael Brandão
Аннотация
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to PRISMA 2020 (PROSPERO CRD420261309465). PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched. RCTs and observational studies comparing ePLND and sPLND were included. The primary outcome was OS; secondary outcomes included recurrence-free survival (RFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), 5-year OS, 5-year RFS, major complications and lymphocele. A random-effects model was used, with sensitivity analyses and meta-regression. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I.
RESULTS: Sixteen studies (n = 5960) were included. ePLND did not significantly improve OS compared with sPLND (HR = 0.86; 95% CI 0.72-1.03; p = 0.09; I 2 = 50%). The overall RFS analysis suggested a benefit favouring ePLND (HR = 0.74; 95% CI 0.63-0.81; p < 0.00001); however, this effect did not persist in analyses restricted to RCTs. No consistent benefit was observed for 5-year OS, although recurrence was reduced. ePLND did not significantly affect major complications. Sensitivity analyses confirmed result stability.
CONCLUSION: Higher quality evidence does not demonstrate a consistent benefit of ePLND for OS, although overall analyses show reduced recurrence. Current data do not support the routine adoption of ePLND with the sole objective of improving survival.