European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
The impact of margins in laryngeal cancer patients treated with transoral laser microsurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Iandelli Andrea, Gabella Giulia, Marchi Filippo, Campagnari Valentina, Filauro Marta, Sampieri Claudio, Tsai Tsung-You, Vilaseca Isabel, Peretti Giorgio
Аннотация
PURPOSE: In laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC) treated with transoral laser microsurgery (TOLMS), the status of margins significantly affected local control. When a positive or close margin is present, there is no ubiquitous consensus regarding further treatments. The rationale of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to investigate the survival impact of the status of the margins in patients affected by LSCC treated with TOLMS.
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library.
METHODS: We performed a systematic search, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were: patients affected by LSCC, staged according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System and treated by TOLMS without any previous treatment; margins status (close, positive, negative) and the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of overall survival, disease-specific survival, and disease-free survival has to be reported.
RESULTS: Nine studies were deemed eligible for the qualitative analysis, and 3 for the quantitative analysis to investigate the association between margin status and OS. The cumulative number of patients was 3130. The sample size ranged from 96 to 747 patients. The follow-up period ranged from 0 to 201 months. The meta-analysis results show that positive margins have an aHR of 1.30 yet with CI range (0.56 to 2.97).
CONCLUSIONS: Our current meta-analysis results are unable to definitively assess the real impact of resection margins on OS. Few authors provide accurate data regarding position and types of margins. Further prospective or high-quality studies are required.
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library.
METHODS: We performed a systematic search, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were: patients affected by LSCC, staged according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System and treated by TOLMS without any previous treatment; margins status (close, positive, negative) and the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of overall survival, disease-specific survival, and disease-free survival has to be reported.
RESULTS: Nine studies were deemed eligible for the qualitative analysis, and 3 for the quantitative analysis to investigate the association between margin status and OS. The cumulative number of patients was 3130. The sample size ranged from 96 to 747 patients. The follow-up period ranged from 0 to 201 months. The meta-analysis results show that positive margins have an aHR of 1.30 yet with CI range (0.56 to 2.97).
CONCLUSIONS: Our current meta-analysis results are unable to definitively assess the real impact of resection margins on OS. Few authors provide accurate data regarding position and types of margins. Further prospective or high-quality studies are required.