Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review)
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/216706 |
Resumo: | Background This is an updated version of the original review that was first published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. Laparoscopy has become an increasingly common approach to surgical staging of apparent early-stage ovarian tumours. This review was undertaken to assess the available evidence on the benefits and risks of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the management of International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I ovarian cancer. Objectives To evaluate the benefits and risks of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the surgical treatment of FIGO stage I ovarian cancer (stages Ia, Ib and Ic). Search methods For the original review, we searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials (CGCRG) Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2007, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Biological Abstracts and CancerLit from 1 January 1990 to 30 November 2007. We also handsearched relevant journals, reference lists of identified studies and conference abstracts. For this updated review, we extended the CGCRG Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS searches to 6 December 2011. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and prospective cohort studies comparing laparoscopic staging with open surgery (laparotomy) in women with stage I ovarian cancer according to FIGO. Data collection and analysis There were no studies to include, therefore we tabulated data from non-randomised studies (NRS) for discussion. Main results We performed no meta-analyses. Authors’ conclusions This review has found no good-quality evidence to help quantify the risks and benefits of laparoscopy for the management of earlystage ovarian cancer as routine clinical practice. |
id |
UFRGS-2_6d0622623bdfcaf62c313f9da8f359f2 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/216706 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRGS-2 |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Lawrie, Theresa A.Medeiros, Lídia Rosi de FreitasRosa, Daniela DornellesRosa, Maria Inês daEdelweiss, Maria Isabel AlbanoStein, Airton TetelbomZelmanowicz, Alice de MedeirosEthur, Anaelena Bragança de MoraesZanini, Roselaine Ruviaro2020-12-18T04:14:08Z20131469-493Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/10183/216706000874715Background This is an updated version of the original review that was first published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. Laparoscopy has become an increasingly common approach to surgical staging of apparent early-stage ovarian tumours. This review was undertaken to assess the available evidence on the benefits and risks of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the management of International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I ovarian cancer. Objectives To evaluate the benefits and risks of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the surgical treatment of FIGO stage I ovarian cancer (stages Ia, Ib and Ic). Search methods For the original review, we searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials (CGCRG) Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2007, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Biological Abstracts and CancerLit from 1 January 1990 to 30 November 2007. We also handsearched relevant journals, reference lists of identified studies and conference abstracts. For this updated review, we extended the CGCRG Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS searches to 6 December 2011. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and prospective cohort studies comparing laparoscopic staging with open surgery (laparotomy) in women with stage I ovarian cancer according to FIGO. Data collection and analysis There were no studies to include, therefore we tabulated data from non-randomised studies (NRS) for discussion. Main results We performed no meta-analyses. Authors’ conclusions This review has found no good-quality evidence to help quantify the risks and benefits of laparoscopy for the management of earlystage ovarian cancer as routine clinical practice.application/pdfengThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester. No. 2 (2013), CD005344, 31 p.Neoplasias ovarianasLaparoscopiaLaparotomiaLaparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review)Estrangeiroinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSTEXT000874715.pdf.txt000874715.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain80865http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/216706/2/000874715.pdf.txt2847335bfb66dfa7a8838147352b87d6MD52ORIGINAL000874715.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf437987http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/216706/1/000874715.pdf20060405f43eafa17131a3a3b94ba45fMD5110183/2167062020-12-19 05:19:46.91305oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/216706Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2020-12-19T07:19:46Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
title |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
spellingShingle |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) Lawrie, Theresa A. Neoplasias ovarianas Laparoscopia Laparotomia |
title_short |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
title_full |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
title_fullStr |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
title_full_unstemmed |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
title_sort |
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for FIGO stage 1 ovarian cancer (Review) |
author |
Lawrie, Theresa A. |
author_facet |
Lawrie, Theresa A. Medeiros, Lídia Rosi de Freitas Rosa, Daniela Dornelles Rosa, Maria Inês da Edelweiss, Maria Isabel Albano Stein, Airton Tetelbom Zelmanowicz, Alice de Medeiros Ethur, Anaelena Bragança de Moraes Zanini, Roselaine Ruviaro |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Medeiros, Lídia Rosi de Freitas Rosa, Daniela Dornelles Rosa, Maria Inês da Edelweiss, Maria Isabel Albano Stein, Airton Tetelbom Zelmanowicz, Alice de Medeiros Ethur, Anaelena Bragança de Moraes Zanini, Roselaine Ruviaro |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Lawrie, Theresa A. Medeiros, Lídia Rosi de Freitas Rosa, Daniela Dornelles Rosa, Maria Inês da Edelweiss, Maria Isabel Albano Stein, Airton Tetelbom Zelmanowicz, Alice de Medeiros Ethur, Anaelena Bragança de Moraes Zanini, Roselaine Ruviaro |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Neoplasias ovarianas Laparoscopia Laparotomia |
topic |
Neoplasias ovarianas Laparoscopia Laparotomia |
description |
Background This is an updated version of the original review that was first published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. Laparoscopy has become an increasingly common approach to surgical staging of apparent early-stage ovarian tumours. This review was undertaken to assess the available evidence on the benefits and risks of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the management of International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I ovarian cancer. Objectives To evaluate the benefits and risks of laparoscopy compared with laparotomy for the surgical treatment of FIGO stage I ovarian cancer (stages Ia, Ib and Ic). Search methods For the original review, we searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials (CGCRG) Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2007, Issue 2), MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, Biological Abstracts and CancerLit from 1 January 1990 to 30 November 2007. We also handsearched relevant journals, reference lists of identified studies and conference abstracts. For this updated review, we extended the CGCRG Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS searches to 6 December 2011. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and prospective cohort studies comparing laparoscopic staging with open surgery (laparotomy) in women with stage I ovarian cancer according to FIGO. Data collection and analysis There were no studies to include, therefore we tabulated data from non-randomised studies (NRS) for discussion. Main results We performed no meta-analyses. Authors’ conclusions This review has found no good-quality evidence to help quantify the risks and benefits of laparoscopy for the management of earlystage ovarian cancer as routine clinical practice. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2013 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2020-12-18T04:14:08Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
Estrangeiro info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/216706 |
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
1469-493X |
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
000874715 |
identifier_str_mv |
1469-493X 000874715 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/216706 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester. No. 2 (2013), CD005344, 31 p. |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) instacron:UFRGS |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
instacron_str |
UFRGS |
institution |
UFRGS |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/216706/2/000874715.pdf.txt http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/216706/1/000874715.pdf |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
2847335bfb66dfa7a8838147352b87d6 20060405f43eafa17131a3a3b94ba45f |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1815447727835709440 |