Intervention Review

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO Stage I ovarian cancer

  1. Lídia RF Medeiros1,*,
  2. Daniela D Rosa2,
  3. Mary C Bozzetti3,
  4. Maria INES Rosa4,
  5. Maria I Edelweiss5,
  6. Airton T Stein6,
  7. Alice Zelmanowicz7,
  8. Anaelena B Ethur8,
  9. Roselaine R Zanini9

Editorial Group: Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group

Published Online: 8 JUL 2009

Assessed as up-to-date: 20 JUL 2008

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005344.pub2

Database Title

Additional Information

How to Cite

Medeiros LRF, Rosa DD, Bozzetti MC, Rosa MINES, Edelweiss MI, Stein AT, Zelmanowicz A, Ethur AB, Zanini RR. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO Stage I ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD005344. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005344.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Post-graduation Program in Medical Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Social Medicine/Epidemiology, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

  2. 2

    Hospital Femina - Grupo Hospitalar Conceicao, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

  3. 3

    Faculty of Medicine at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Social Medicine, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

  4. 4

    Universidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense, Medical School, Criciuma, Santa Catarina, Brazil

  5. 5

    Faculty of Medicine at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Pathology, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

  6. 6

    Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde, Department of Public Health, Porto Alegre, Brazil

  7. 7

    Complexo Hospitalar Santa Casa, Cancer Prevention Centre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

  8. 8

    Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

  9. 9

    Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Postgraduate Program in Epidemiology at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

*Lídia RF Medeiros, Social Medicine/Epidemiology, Post-graduation Program in Medical Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Jose de Alencar 1244, 1009 Menino Deus, Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, 90880-480, Brazil. lidia.rosi@terra.com.br. lidiarosi@hotmail.com.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 8 JUL 2009

SEARCH

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Summary (59K)Standard (378K)Full (382K)
 

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Plain language summary
  4. 摘要

Background

Over the past ten years laparoscopy has become an increasingly common approach for the surgical removal of early stage ovarian tumours. There remains uncertainty about the value of this intervention. This review has been undertaken to assess the available evidence of the benefits and harms of laparoscopic surgery for the management of early stage ovarian cancer compared to laparotomy.

Objectives

To evaluate the benefits and harms of laparoscopy in the surgical treatment of FIGO stage I ovarian cancer (stages Ia, Ib and Ic) when compared with laparotomy.

Search methods

Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2007, MEDLINE (January 1990 to November 2007), EMBASE (1990 to November 2007), LILACS (1990 to November 2007), BIOLOGICAL ABSTRACTS (1990 to November 2007) and Cancerlit (1990 to November 2007). We also searched our own publication archives, based on prospective handsearching of relevant journals from November 2007. Reference lists of identified studies, gynaecological cancer handbooks and conference abstract were also scanned.

Selection criteria

Studies including patients with histologically proven stage I ovarian cancer according to the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO).

Studies comparing laparoscopic surgery with laparotomy for early stage ovarian cancer were only available from 1990. It was anticipated that a very small number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted studying the management of early stage ovarian cancer. Therefore, non-randomised comparative studies, cohort studies and case-controls studies, but not studies with historical controls, were also considered.

Data collection and analysis

Data extraction was performed independently by five review authors (LRM, DDR, MIR, MCB and MIE) who assessed study quality and quality of extracted data. Extracted data included trial characteristics, characteristics of the study participants, interventions and outcomes. The quality of non RCTs was assessed using appropriate quality evaluations tools from the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) and from the Newcastle-Ottawa tool for observational studies (NOS).

Main results

No RCTs were identified. Three observational studies were identified.

Authors' conclusions

This review has found no evidence to help quantify the value of laparoscopy for the management of early stage ovarian cancer as routine clinical practice.

 

Plain language summary

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Plain language summary
  4. 摘要

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO Stage I ovarian cancer

Controversial discussion has arisen among endoscopists and oncologists about the laparoscopic management of early stage ovarian tumours. This systematic review found no evidence to help quantify the value of laparoscopy for the management of early stage ovarian cancer in clinical practice.

 

摘要

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Plain language summary
  4. 摘要

背景

FIGO第一期卵巢癌以腹腔鏡 (Laparoscopy) 手術與剖腹手術 (laparotomy) 處理之比較

在過去十年，利用腹腔鏡進行手術切除早期卵巢腫瘤已日益普遍，但其價值仍然存在不確定性。本研究利用現有的資料評估以腹腔鏡手術處理早期卵巢癌，相較於剖腹手術之利益與損害。

目標

目標 評估利用腹腔鏡進行手術切除FIGO第一期卵巢癌(第Ia、Ib與Ic)，相較於剖腹手術之利益與損害。

搜尋策略

我們藉由搜尋Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 、The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2007、MEDLINE (1990年1月至 2007年11月) 、EMBASE (1990年至2007年11月) 、LILACS (1990年至2007年11月) 、BIOLOGICAL ABSTRACTS (1990年至2007年11月) 以及Cancerlit (1990年至2007年11月) 找出臨床試驗資料，此外，也搜尋我們所屬的出版物檔案，前瞻性地以人工搜尋自2007年11月之相關期刊，並掃描相關研究文獻的參考資料清單、婦癌教科書與學術會議摘要。

選擇標準

此包括根據國際婦產科聯合會(FIGO)定義，組織學上證實為第I期卵巢癌病患之研究。而僅於1990年後，才有腹腔鏡手術與剖腹手術治療早期卵巢癌的比較性研究。我們預期研究早期卵巢癌治療的隨機對照試驗(RCTs)極少，因此，非隨機比較設計的研究、族群研究與案例對照性研究皆列入考慮，但不包括歷史對照性研究。

資料收集與分析

本研究由五位作者 (LRM、DDR、MIR、MCB與MIE) 進行獨立審查；評估研究的品質與蒐集數據的品質，以摘錄相關數據。摘錄的數據包括研究的特性、研究參與者的特性、治療方式與治療結果。非隨機對照試驗的研究品質，則利用選自Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) 與NewcastleOttawa tool for observational studies (NOS) 之適當的品質評量工具以作為評估。

主要結論

本研究未搜尋到隨機對照試驗。但找到三個觀察性研究。

作者結論

本研究沒有發現任何證據，可用以量化臨床例行以腹腔鏡處理早期卵巢癌的價值。

翻譯人

此翻譯計畫由臺灣國家衛生研究院 (National Health Research Institutes, Taiwan) 統籌。

總結

FIGO第一期卵巢癌以腹腔鏡手術與剖腹手術處理之比較。內視鏡專家與腫瘤專家，對使用腹腔鏡處理早期卵巢癌早已爭議不斷。本系統性審查的研究並沒有發現任何證據，可用以量化臨床例行以腹腔鏡處理早期卵巢癌的價值。

View Full Article (HTML) Summary (59K)Standard (378K)Full (382K)