Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Clinics |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/110866 |
Resumo: | The aim of this study is to address the outcomes of endoscopic resection compared with surgery in the treatment of ampullary adenomas. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. For this purpose, the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases were scanned. Studies included patients with ampullary adenomas and data considering endoscopic treatment compared with surgery. The entire analysis was based on a fixed-effects model. Five retrospective cohort studies were selected (466 patients). All five studies (466 patients) had complete primary resection data available and showed a difference that favored surgical treatment (risk difference [RD] = -0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.44 to -0.04). Primary success data were identified in all five studies as well. Analysis showed that the surgical approach outperformed endoscopic treatment for this outcome (RD = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.50 to -0.24). Recurrence data were found in all studies (466 patients), with a benefit indicated for surgical treatment (RD = 0.10, 95% CI = -0.01 to 0.19). Three studies (252 patients) presented complication data, but analysis showed no difference between the approaches for this parameter (RD = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.53 to 0.23). Considering complete primary resection, primary success and recurrence outcomes, the surgical approach achieves significantly better results. Regarding complication data, this systematic review concludes that rates are not significantly different. |
id |
USP-19_a7c705519472faa20ff7068088052037 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/110866 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-19 |
network_name_str |
Clinics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis The aim of this study is to address the outcomes of endoscopic resection compared with surgery in the treatment of ampullary adenomas. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. For this purpose, the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases were scanned. Studies included patients with ampullary adenomas and data considering endoscopic treatment compared with surgery. The entire analysis was based on a fixed-effects model. Five retrospective cohort studies were selected (466 patients). All five studies (466 patients) had complete primary resection data available and showed a difference that favored surgical treatment (risk difference [RD] = -0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.44 to -0.04). Primary success data were identified in all five studies as well. Analysis showed that the surgical approach outperformed endoscopic treatment for this outcome (RD = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.50 to -0.24). Recurrence data were found in all studies (466 patients), with a benefit indicated for surgical treatment (RD = 0.10, 95% CI = -0.01 to 0.19). Three studies (252 patients) presented complication data, but analysis showed no difference between the approaches for this parameter (RD = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.53 to 0.23). Considering complete primary resection, primary success and recurrence outcomes, the surgical approach achieves significantly better results. Regarding complication data, this systematic review concludes that rates are not significantly different. Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo2016-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/11086610.6061/clinics/2016(01)06Clinics; v. 71 n. 1 (2016); 28-35Clinics; Vol. 71 Núm. 1 (2016); 28-35Clinics; Vol. 71 No. 1 (2016); 28-351980-53221807-5932reponame:Clinicsinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/110866/109254Copyright (c) 2016 Clinicsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMendonça, Ernesto QuaresmaBernardo, Wanderley MarquesMoura, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux deChaves, Dalton MarquesKondo, AndréPu, Leonardo Zorrón Cheng TaoBaracat, Felipe Iankelevich2016-02-05T09:30:04Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/110866Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinicsPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/oai||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br1980-53221807-5932opendoar:2016-02-05T09:30:04Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
spellingShingle |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis Mendonça, Ernesto Quaresma |
title_short |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort |
Endoscopic versus surgical treatment of ampullary adenomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
author |
Mendonça, Ernesto Quaresma |
author_facet |
Mendonça, Ernesto Quaresma Bernardo, Wanderley Marques Moura, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Chaves, Dalton Marques Kondo, André Pu, Leonardo Zorrón Cheng Tao Baracat, Felipe Iankelevich |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Bernardo, Wanderley Marques Moura, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Chaves, Dalton Marques Kondo, André Pu, Leonardo Zorrón Cheng Tao Baracat, Felipe Iankelevich |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Mendonça, Ernesto Quaresma Bernardo, Wanderley Marques Moura, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Chaves, Dalton Marques Kondo, André Pu, Leonardo Zorrón Cheng Tao Baracat, Felipe Iankelevich |
description |
The aim of this study is to address the outcomes of endoscopic resection compared with surgery in the treatment of ampullary adenomas. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. For this purpose, the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases were scanned. Studies included patients with ampullary adenomas and data considering endoscopic treatment compared with surgery. The entire analysis was based on a fixed-effects model. Five retrospective cohort studies were selected (466 patients). All five studies (466 patients) had complete primary resection data available and showed a difference that favored surgical treatment (risk difference [RD] = -0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.44 to -0.04). Primary success data were identified in all five studies as well. Analysis showed that the surgical approach outperformed endoscopic treatment for this outcome (RD = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.50 to -0.24). Recurrence data were found in all studies (466 patients), with a benefit indicated for surgical treatment (RD = 0.10, 95% CI = -0.01 to 0.19). Three studies (252 patients) presented complication data, but analysis showed no difference between the approaches for this parameter (RD = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.53 to 0.23). Considering complete primary resection, primary success and recurrence outcomes, the surgical approach achieves significantly better results. Regarding complication data, this systematic review concludes that rates are not significantly different. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/110866 10.6061/clinics/2016(01)06 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/110866 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.6061/clinics/2016(01)06 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/110866/109254 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2016 Clinics info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2016 Clinics |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Clinics; v. 71 n. 1 (2016); 28-35 Clinics; Vol. 71 Núm. 1 (2016); 28-35 Clinics; Vol. 71 No. 1 (2016); 28-35 1980-5322 1807-5932 reponame:Clinics instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Clinics |
collection |
Clinics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br |
_version_ |
1787713178802585600 |