Oral oncology · 2016
A comparison of mandible preservation method and mandibulotomy approach in oral and oropharyngeal cancer: A meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализНазвание 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.
Pang Pai, Li Rui-Wu, Shi Jing-Pu, Xu Zhong-Fei, Duan Wei-Yi, Liu Fa-Yu, Huang Shao-Hui, Tan Xue-Xin, Sun Chang-Fu
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the prognoses outcomes of mandibular preservation method (MPM) and the mandibulotomy approach (MLA) in oral and oropharyngeal cancer (OOPC) patients.
METHOD: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov up to September 2016 to identify the studies that compared the prognoses of the MPM versus the MLA in OOPC patients. Two authors individually extracted the data and performed quality assessment. The surgical margins, overall survival rate, total and local recurrence rates, fistula formation, and other functional outcomes were evaluated.
RESULT: Six studies with 309 patients were included in our analysis. No significant difference was found regarding the surgical margins, overall survival rate, total and local recurrence rates, and speech and tongue movement between the MPM and MLA groups. However, the MPM group showed a significantly lower fistula formation rate than the MLA group after the operation.
CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the MPM may provide a similar clinical outcome to the MLA, but that the MPM has a lower complication rate in the treatment of OOPC patients.
METHOD: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov up to September 2016 to identify the studies that compared the prognoses of the MPM versus the MLA in OOPC patients. Two authors individually extracted the data and performed quality assessment. The surgical margins, overall survival rate, total and local recurrence rates, fistula formation, and other functional outcomes were evaluated.
RESULT: Six studies with 309 patients were included in our analysis. No significant difference was found regarding the surgical margins, overall survival rate, total and local recurrence rates, and speech and tongue movement between the MPM and MLA groups. However, the MPM group showed a significantly lower fistula formation rate than the MLA group after the operation.
CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the MPM may provide a similar clinical outcome to the MLA, but that the MPM has a lower complication rate in the treatment of OOPC patients.