Annals of surgical oncology · 2024
Primary Tumour Detection in Carcinoma of Unknown Primary with Transoral Robotic Surgery (TORS) Tongue Base Mucosectomy: A 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.
Gupta Keshav Kumar, Khan Hamad, Mughal Zahir, De Mriganka, Sharma Neil, Garas George
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Head and neck carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) represents a challenging diagnostic process when standard work-up fails to identify the primary tumour site. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic utility and complication profile of transoral robotic surgery (TORS) tongue base mucosectomy (TBM) in the management of CUP.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic database search was performed in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed to obtain an estimate of the overall proportion for the detection and complication rates.
RESULTS: Nine studies representing 235 patients with CUP who had TORS TBM were included in the final analysis. The overall pooled tumour detection rate was 66.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 56.1-75.8]. The incidence of tumour detection in human papilloma virus (HPV)-positive cases (81.5%, 95% CI 60.8-96.4) was significantly higher than HPV-negative cases (2.3%, 95% CI 0.00-45.7). Weighted overall complication rate was 11.4% (95% CI 7.2-16.2). The majority were grade I or II (80%) according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests TORS to be safe and effective in localising the primary tumour site in patients with CUP. While the current data supports the use of TORS in patients who are HPV positive, larger numbers of HPV-negative cases are required to determine the true diagnostic effect with TORS before any valid conclusions can be inferred in this particular subgroup. Further research should focus on high quality prospective trials with stringent methodological work-up to minimise heterogeneity and allow for more accurate statistical analysis.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: An electronic database search was performed in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed and Cochrane databases. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed to obtain an estimate of the overall proportion for the detection and complication rates.
RESULTS: Nine studies representing 235 patients with CUP who had TORS TBM were included in the final analysis. The overall pooled tumour detection rate was 66.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 56.1-75.8]. The incidence of tumour detection in human papilloma virus (HPV)-positive cases (81.5%, 95% CI 60.8-96.4) was significantly higher than HPV-negative cases (2.3%, 95% CI 0.00-45.7). Weighted overall complication rate was 11.4% (95% CI 7.2-16.2). The majority were grade I or II (80%) according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests TORS to be safe and effective in localising the primary tumour site in patients with CUP. While the current data supports the use of TORS in patients who are HPV positive, larger numbers of HPV-negative cases are required to determine the true diagnostic effect with TORS before any valid conclusions can be inferred in this particular subgroup. Further research should focus on high quality prospective trials with stringent methodological work-up to minimise heterogeneity and allow for more accurate statistical analysis.