scholarly journals Multi-Center Evaluation of Post-Operative Morbidity and Mortality after Optimal Cytoreductive Surgery for Advanced Ovarian Cancer

PLoS ONE ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. e39415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arash Rafii ◽  
Eberhard Stoeckle ◽  
Mehdi Jean-Laurent ◽  
Gwenael Ferron ◽  
Philippe Morice ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena C. Bartels ◽  
Ailin C. Rogers ◽  
James Postle ◽  
Conor Shields ◽  
Jurgen Mulsow ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundThe primary treatment for advanced ovarian cancer is aggressive cytoreductive surgery (CRS), which is associated with considerable morbidity. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare morbidity associated with primary CRS and secondary CRS for recurrent disease.MethodsA literature search was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for publications reporting morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing CRS in primary and recurrent ovarian malignancy. Embase, Medline, Pubmed, Pubmed Central, clinicaltrials. gov and Cochrane databases were searched. Two independent reviewers applied inclusion and exclusion criteria to select included papers. A total of 215 citations were reviewed; 6 studies comprising 641 patients were selected for the analysis.ResultsResults were reported as mean differences or pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI). The overall morbidity rate was 38.4 %, and this did not differ between the two groups (p=0.97). This did not change when only Clavien-Dindo grade 3 and 4 morbidities were accounted for (14 % primary CRS, 15 % recurrent, p=0.83). Compared to primary CRS, secondary CRS was associated with a similar operative time (mean 400 min, I2=79 %, p=0.45), rate of bowel resection (I2=75 %, p=0.37) and transfusion requirements (MD – 0.7 L, I2=76 %, p=0.45). The mortality rate in both groups was too low to allow for meaningful meta-analysis, with four deaths in the group undergoing primary cytoreductive surgery (1.0 %) and two deaths in the group with recurrent disease (0.9 %).ConclusionsIn conclusion, secondary CRS for recurrent ovarian cancer is a safe and feasible option in carefully pre-selected patients with comparable morbidity to primary CRS.


2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 375-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazunori Ochiai ◽  
Satoshi Takakura ◽  
Seiji Isonishi ◽  
Hiroshi Sasaki ◽  
Yoshiteru Terashima

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document