Defining Standard Data Reporting in Pelvic Exenterations for Non-Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review of Current Data Reporting.
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION
Pelvic exenteration (PEx) was first described in the 1940s as a palliative procedure in managing cervical cancer. Since then, advancements in perioperative care have transformed the options available to patients. This highly morbid procedure now offers a "cure" in a select cohort of patients with locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The large volume of literature in this field has resulted in a heterogeneity of data reporting, making comparative analysis extremely difficult. As such, we set out to examine the current literature and identify currently reported outcomes to guide development of a core information set (CIS) for data reporting for PEx in non-rectal cancers.
METHODS
A systematic review was carried out. Studies reporting on outcomes following PEx for advanced and recurrent gynecological, urological, and other non-rectal malignancies were included. Standardized outcomes were extracted and mapped to pre-determined domains.
RESULTS
Forty-four studies were found to meet our inclusion criteria. A total of 1735 data elements (DEs) were extracted verbatim, and these were assimilated into 111 standard DEs across nine domains. A wide range of reporting frequencies was observed, with the pathological domain containing the highest overall frequencies of DE reporting. Conversely, patient-reported and functional outcomes were noted to be the domain with the lowest frequency.
CONCLUSIONS
This review highlights recent trends of increased reporting in the field of PEx and how this had invariably resulted in heterogeneous data reporting. We aim to guide the development of a CIS for reporting in non-rectal pelvic malignancies to help standardize future reporting.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.