...
【24h】

Systematic review of radioguided surgery for non-palpable breast cancer.

机译:对非触诊性乳腺癌进行放射引导手术的系统评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

BACKGROUND: This systematic review examines whether radioguided localization surgery (RGL) (radioguided occult lesion localization - ROLL and radioguided seed localization - RSL) for non-palpable breast cancer lesions produces lower positive margin rates than standard wire-guided localization surgery. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature review to identify clinical studies using either ROLL or RSL. Included studies examined invasive or in situ BC and reported pathologically assessed margin status or specimen volume/weight. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and quality and abstracted relevant data on patient and surgical outcomes. Quantitative data analyses were performed. RESULTS: Fifty-two clinical studies on ROLL (n = 46) and RSL (n = 6) were identified. Twenty-seven met our inclusion criteria: 12 studies compared RGL to WGL and 15 studies were single cohorts using RGL. Ten studies were included in the quantitative analyses. Data for margin status and re-operation rates from 4 randomized controlled trials (RCT; n = 238) and 6 cohort studies were combined giving a combined odds ratio (OR) of 0.367 and 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.277 to 0.487 (p < 0.001) for margins status and OR 0.347, 95% CI: 0.250 to 0.481 (p < 0.001) for re-operation rates. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic review of RGL versus WGL demonstrate that RGL technique produces lower positive margins rates and fewer re-operations. While this review is limited by the small size and quality of RCTs, the odds ratios suggest that RGL may be a superior technique to guide surgical resection of non-palpable breast cancers. These results should be confirmed by larger, multi-centered RCTs.
机译:背景:本系统综述探讨了非触诊性乳腺癌病变的放射线定位术(RGL)(放射线隐匿病变定位-ROLL和放射线种子定位-RSL)是否比标准的线导定位手术产生了更低的阳性切缘率。方法:我们进行了全面的文献综述,以鉴定使用ROLL或RSL的临床研究。纳入的研究检查了浸润性或原位BC,并报告了经病理评估的切缘状态或标本体积/重量。两名评价员独立评估研究的资格和质量,并提取有关患者和手术结果的相关数据。进行定量数据分析。结果:鉴定了ROLL(n = 46)和RSL(n = 6)的五十二项临床研究。 27个符合我们的纳入标准:12个研究将RGL与WGL进行了比较,而15个研究是使用RGL的单队列研究。十项研究包括在定量分析中。来自4个随机对照试验(RCT; n = 238)和6个队列研究的边缘状态和再手术率数据相结合,得出的综合比值比(OR)为0.367,95%置信区间(CI)为0.277至0.487(保证金状态为p <0.001),OR率为0.347,95%CI:0.250至0.481(p <0.001)。结论:RGL与WGL的系统综述表明RGL技术产生的正切缘率更低,再手术次数更少。尽管本综述受到RCT的小尺寸和高质量的限制,但比值比表明RGL可能是指导不可触及的乳腺癌手术切除的一种优越技术。这些结果应通过更大的,多中心的RCT来证实。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号