European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2024
Diagnostic laparoscopy for pre-operative selection of patients with known peritoneal carcinomatosis for CRS-HIPEC: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Ang Andre Jing Yuen, Liew Royston Yew Meng, Aw Vanessa Zhi Jie, Chia Claramae Shulyn, Shannon Nicholas Brian
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Preoperative selection of patients with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis (PC) for Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is challenging due to associated risks. Diagnostic laparoscopy (DL), an emerging alternative to conventional radiological imaging, has uncertain efficacy. This study aims to evaluate DL's diagnostic performance through a systematic review of available literature.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases from January 1987 to September 2023 identified studies investigating DL's diagnostic accuracy in selecting PC patients for CRS-HIPEC. Methodological bias assessment and analysis of performance metrics such as positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for primary ovarian cancer studies, and false positive sites were identified. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was plotted to assess overall diagnostic efficacy, with meta-regression conducted to identify sources of heterogeneity across studies.
RESULTS: This study included 25 studies comprising 3820 patients. Pooled PPV was 93.04 %, with a complication rate of 1.61 %. Pooled sensitivity was 98.26 % and pooled specificity was 83.67 %. The pooled DOR was 139.18, and sROC plot yielded an area under the curve of 0.96. Meta-regression found the ovarian subgroup as a strong source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis indicated similar findings in primary ovarian cancer studies, while false positives were commonly observed in the celiac axis, mesentery, ureters and para-aortic lymph nodes.
CONCLUSION: DL demonstrates robust diagnostic accuracy in selecting PC patients for CRS-HIPEC, with potential benefits in patient outcomes and resource optimization. Further multicenter investigations are warranted to validate DL's efficacy across diverse primary cancer types.
METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases from January 1987 to September 2023 identified studies investigating DL's diagnostic accuracy in selecting PC patients for CRS-HIPEC. Methodological bias assessment and analysis of performance metrics such as positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for primary ovarian cancer studies, and false positive sites were identified. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC) was plotted to assess overall diagnostic efficacy, with meta-regression conducted to identify sources of heterogeneity across studies.
RESULTS: This study included 25 studies comprising 3820 patients. Pooled PPV was 93.04 %, with a complication rate of 1.61 %. Pooled sensitivity was 98.26 % and pooled specificity was 83.67 %. The pooled DOR was 139.18, and sROC plot yielded an area under the curve of 0.96. Meta-regression found the ovarian subgroup as a strong source of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis indicated similar findings in primary ovarian cancer studies, while false positives were commonly observed in the celiac axis, mesentery, ureters and para-aortic lymph nodes.
CONCLUSION: DL demonstrates robust diagnostic accuracy in selecting PC patients for CRS-HIPEC, with potential benefits in patient outcomes and resource optimization. Further multicenter investigations are warranted to validate DL's efficacy across diverse primary cancer types.