-
European Urology Aug 2023Bladder cancer (BC) is common worldwide and poses a significant public health challenge. External risk factors and the wider exposome (totality of exposure from external... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Bladder cancer (BC) is common worldwide and poses a significant public health challenge. External risk factors and the wider exposome (totality of exposure from external and internal factors) contribute significantly to the development of BC. Therefore, establishing a clear understanding of these risk factors is the key to prevention.
OBJECTIVE
To perform an up-to-date systematic review of BC's epidemiology and external risk factors.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Two reviewers (I.J. and S.O.) performed a systematic review using PubMed and Embase in January 2022 and updated it in September 2022. The search was restricted to 4 yr since our previous review in 2018.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Our search identified 5177 articles and a total of 349 full-text manuscripts. GLOBOCAN data from 2020 revealed an incidence of 573 000 new BC cases and 213 000 deaths worldwide in 2020. The 5-yr prevalence worldwide in 2020 was 1 721 000. Tobacco smoking and occupational exposures (aromatic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) are the most substantial risk factors. In addition, correlative evidence exists for several risk factors, including specific dietary factors, imbalanced microbiome, gene-environment risk factor interactions, diesel exhaust emission exposure, and pelvic radiotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS
We present a contemporary overview of the epidemiology of BC and the current evidence for BC risk factors. Smoking and specific occupational exposures are the most established risk factors. There is emerging evidence for specific dietary factors, imbalanced microbiome, gene-external risk factor interactions, diesel exhaust emission exposure, and pelvic radiotherapy. Further high-quality evidence is required to confirm initial findings and further understand cancer prevention.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Bladder cancer is common, and the most substantial risk factors are smoking and workplace exposure to suspected carcinogens. On-going research to identify avoidable risk factors could reduce the number of people who get bladder cancer.
Topics: Humans; Vehicle Emissions; Risk Factors; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Smoking; Tobacco Smoking; Occupational Exposure
PubMed: 37198015
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.03.029 -
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2022Uterine fibroids (UFs) are the most common benign tumors of female genital diseases, unlike uterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS), a rare and aggressive uterine cancer. This... (Review)
Review
Uterine fibroids (UFs) are the most common benign tumors of female genital diseases, unlike uterine leiomyosarcoma (LMS), a rare and aggressive uterine cancer. This narrative review aims to discuss the biology and diagnosis of LMS and, at the same time, their differential diagnosis, in order to distinguish the biological and molecular origins. The authors performed a Medline and PubMed search for the years 1990-2022 using a combination of keywords on the topics to highlight the many genes and proteins involved in the pathogenesis of LMS. The mutation of these genes, in addition to the altered expression and functions of their enzymes, are potentially biomarkers of uterine LMS. Thus, the use of this molecular and protein information could favor differential diagnosis and personalized therapy based on the molecular characteristics of LMS tissue, leading to timely diagnoses and potential better outcomes for patients.
Topics: Female; Humans; Leiomyoma; Leiomyosarcoma; Pelvic Neoplasms; Uterine Neoplasms; Uterus
PubMed: 36077127
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23179728 -
Practical Radiation Oncology 2023With the results of several recently published clinical trials, this guideline informs on the use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and systemic therapy in the...
PURPOSE
With the results of several recently published clinical trials, this guideline informs on the use of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) and systemic therapy in the treatment of endometrial cancer. Updated evidence-based recommendations provide indications for adjuvant RT and the associated techniques, the utilization and sequencing of adjuvant systemic therapies, and the effect of surgical staging techniques and molecular tumor profiling.
METHODS
The American Society for Radiation Oncology convened a multidisciplinary task force to address 6 key questions that focused on the adjuvant management of patients with endometrial cancer. The key questions emphasized the (1) indications for adjuvant RT, (2) RT techniques, target volumes, dose fractionation, and treatment planning aims, (3) indications for systemic therapy, (4) sequencing of systemic therapy with RT, (5) effect of lymph node assessment on utilization of adjuvant therapy, and (6) effect of molecular tumor profiling on utilization of adjuvant therapy. Recommendations were based on a systematic literature review and created using a predefined consensus-building methodology and system for quality of evidence grading and strength of recommendation.
RESULTS
The task force recommends RT (either vaginal brachytherapy or external beam RT) be given based on the patient's clinical-pathologic risk factors to reduce risk of vaginal and/or pelvic recurrence. When external beam RT is delivered, intensity modulated RT with daily image guided RT is recommended to reduce acute and late toxicity. Chemotherapy is recommended for patients with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I to II with high-risk histologies and those with FIGO stage III to IVA with any histology. When sequencing chemotherapy and RT, there is no prospective data to support an optimal sequence. Sentinel lymph node mapping is recommended over pelvic lymphadenectomy for surgical nodal staging. Data on sentinel lymph node pathologic ultrastaging status supports that patients with isolated tumor cells be treated as node negative and adjuvant therapy based on uterine risk factors and patients with micrometastases be treated as node positive. The available data on molecular characterization of endometrial cancer are compelling and should be increasingly considered when making recommendations for adjuvant therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
These recommendations guide evidence-based best clinical practices on the use of adjuvant therapy for endometrial cancer.
Topics: Female; Humans; United States; Radiation Oncology; Endometrial Neoplasms; Brachytherapy; Combined Modality Therapy; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Neoplasm Staging; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
PubMed: 36280107
DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2022.09.002 -
Disability and Rehabilitation Sep 2022Urinary incontinence is one of the most clinically relevant side effects in the treatment of prostate cancer patients. The aim of this systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Supervised pelvic floor muscle exercise is more effective than unsupervised pelvic floor muscle exercise at improving urinary incontinence in prostate cancer patients following radical prostatectomy - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Urinary incontinence is one of the most clinically relevant side effects in the treatment of prostate cancer patients. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the specific exercise effects of supervised versus unsupervised pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) and exercise volume on urinary incontinence status after radical prostatectomy.
METHODS
A systematic data search was performed for studies published from January 2000 to December 2020 using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, SciSearch, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews and Effects. The review was undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A random-effects meta-analysis of urinary incontinence remission was performed. The relation between time since surgery and urinary incontinence remission was analyzed using a non-linear dose-response meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included 20 randomized controlled trials involving 2188 men ( = 1105 in intervention groups; = 1083 in control groups). PFME versus no PFME had a beneficial effect on urinary incontinence remission at 3 months, 3-6 months, and more than 6 months post-surgery, with risk differences ranging from 12 to 25%. These effects were particularly evident for higher volume, supervised PFME in the first 6 months post-surgery. Additional biofeedback therapy appeared to be beneficial but only during the first 3 months post-surgery.
CONCLUSIONS
There is good evidence that the supervised PFME causes a decrease in short-term urinary incontinence rates. Unsupervised PFME has similar effects as no PFME in postoperative urinary incontinence. PFME programs should be implemented as an early rehabilitative measure to improve postoperative short-term urinary incontinence in patients with prostate cancer.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONProstate cancer, surgery, and urinary incontinenceThe surgical treatment of prostate cancer often leads to urinary incontinence.Pelvic floor training leads to a significant improvement of this situation.Exercise therapy support is very important in this context and is even more effective than unsupported training.
Topics: Exercise Therapy; Humans; Male; Pelvic Floor; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 34550846
DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1937717 -
Physical Therapy Aug 2020The aim of this systematic review was to identify, evaluate, and synthesize the evidence from studies that have investigated the effect of nonsurgical,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to identify, evaluate, and synthesize the evidence from studies that have investigated the effect of nonsurgical, nonpharmacological, pelvic floor muscle interventions on any type of pelvic floor dysfunction or health-related quality of life in patients after any type of treatment for gynecological cancer.
METHODS
Six electronic databases (Cochrane Library 2018, CINAHL 1982-2018, MEDLINE 1950-2018, EMBASE 1980-2018, PsycINFO 1806-2018, and EMCARE 1995-2018) were systematically searched in June 2018. Reference lists of identified articles were hand searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series were included if they investigated the effects of conservative treatments, including pelvic floor muscle training or dilator training, on bladder, bowel, or sexual function in patients who had received treatment for gynecological cancer. Risk of bias was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies.
RESULTS
Five RCTs and 2 retrospective cohort studies were included (n = 886). The results provided moderate-level evidence that pelvic floor muscle training with counseling and yoga or core exercises were beneficial for sexual function (standardized mean difference = -0.96, 95% CI = -1.22 to -0.70, I2 = 0%) and health-related quality of life (standardized mean difference = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.88, I2 = 0%) in survivors of cervical cancer and very low-level evidence that dilator therapy reduced vaginal complications in survivors of cervical and uterine cancer (odds ratio = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.17 to 0.80, I2 = 54%). There were insufficient data for meta-analysis of bladder or bowel function.
CONCLUSION
Conservative pelvic floor muscle interventions may be beneficial for improving sexual function and health-related quality of life in survivors of gynecological cancer. Given the levels of evidence reported in this review, further high-quality studies are needed, especially to investigate effects on bladder and bowel function.
IMPACT
This review provides moderate-level evidence for the role of pelvic floor rehabilitation to improve health outcomes in the gynecological cancer survivorship journey. Clinicians and health service providers should consider how to provide cancer survivors the opportunity to participate in supervised pelvic floor rehabilitation programs.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Conservative Treatment; Counseling; Dilatation; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Muscle Contraction; Muscle Strength; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Pelvic Floor Disorders; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Sexual Behavior; Urinary Bladder; Yoga
PubMed: 32367126
DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzaa081 -
European Urology May 2021To improve the prognosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), clinicians have used neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) before or after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
To improve the prognosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), clinicians have used neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) before or after radical nephroureterectomy (RNU). Despite some new data, the evidence remains mixed on their efficacy.
OBJECTIVE
To update the current evidence on the role of NAC and AC for UTUC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We searched for all studies investigating NAC or AC for UTUC in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings up to February 2020. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
For NAC, the pooled pathologic complete response rate (≤ypT0N0M0) was 11% (n = 811) and pathologic partial response rate (≤ypT1N0M0) was 43% (n = 869), both across 14 studies. Across six studies, the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-0.59, p < 0.001) for overall survival (OS) and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.24-0.61, p < 0.001) for cancer-specific survival (CSS) in favor of NAC. The evidence for NAC is at best level 2. As for AC, there was a benefit in OS (pooled HR 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.92, p = 0.004 across 14 studies and 7983 patients), CSS (pooled HR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69-0.91, p = 0.001 across 18 studies and 5659 patients), and disease-free survival (DFS; pooled HR 0.52; 95% CI: 0.38-0.70 across four studies and 602 patients). While most studies were retrospective (level 2 evidence), there were two prospective randomized trials providing level 1 evidence. There are currently four phase 2 trials on neoadjuvant immunotherapy and three phase 2 trials on adjuvant immunotherapy for UTUC.
CONCLUSIONS
NAC for UTUC confers a favorable pathologic response and tumor downstaging rate, and an OS and CSS benefit compared with RNU alone. AC confers an OS, CSS, and DFS benefit compared with RNU alone. Currently, the evidence for AC appears stronger (with positive level 1 evidence) than that for NAC (at best level 2 evidence). Limited data are available for chemoimmunotherapy approaches, but preliminary data support an active research investment.
PATIENT SUMMARY
After a comprehensive search of the latest studies examining the role of neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy for upper tract urothelial cancer, the pooled evidence shows that perioperative chemotherapy was beneficial for prolonging survival; however, the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy was stronger than that for neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Topics: Carcinoma, Transitional Cell; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Ureteral Neoplasms; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
PubMed: 32798146
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.07.003 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2020Fibroids are the most common benign tumours of the female genital tract and are associated with numerous clinical problems including a possible negative impact on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Fibroids are the most common benign tumours of the female genital tract and are associated with numerous clinical problems including a possible negative impact on fertility. In women requesting preservation of fertility, fibroids can be surgically removed (myomectomy) by laparotomy, laparoscopically or hysteroscopically depending on the size, site and type of fibroid. Myomectomy is however a procedure that is not without risk and can result in serious complications. It is therefore essential to determine whether such a procedure can result in an improvement in fertility and, if so, to then determine the ideal surgical approach.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effect of myomectomy on fertility outcomes and to compare different surgical approaches.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Epistemonikos database, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), LILACS, conference abstracts on the ISI Web of Knowledge, OpenSigle for grey literature from Europe, and reference list of relevant papers. The final search was in February 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of myomectomy compared to no intervention or where different surgical approaches are compared regarding the effect on fertility outcomes in a group of infertile women suffering from uterine fibroids.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data collection and analysis were conducted in accordance with the procedure suggested in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included four RCTs with 442 participants. The evidence was very low-quality with the main limitations being due to serious imprecision, inconsistency and indirectness. Myomectomy versus no intervention One study examined the effect of myomectomy compared to no intervention on reproductive outcomes. We are uncertain whether myomectomy improves clinical pregnancy rate for intramural (odds ratio (OR) 1.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 6.14; 45 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence), submucous (OR 2.04, 95% CI 0.62 to 6.66; 52 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence), intramural/subserous (OR 2.00, 95% CI 0.40 to 10.09; 31 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence) or intramural/submucous fibroids (OR 3.24, 95% CI 0.72 to 14.57; 42 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence). Similarly, we are uncertain whether myomectomy reduces miscarriage rate for intramural fibroids (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.26 to 6.78; 45 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence), submucous fibroids (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.27 to 5.97; 52 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence), intramural/subserous fibroids (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.10 to 6.54; 31 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence) or intramural/submucous fibroids (OR 2.00, 95% CI 0.32 to 12.33; 42 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence). This study did not report on live birth, preterm delivery, ongoing pregnancy or caesarean section rate. Laparoscopic myomectomy versus myomectomy by laparotomy or mini-laparotomy Two studies compared laparoscopic myomectomy to myomectomy at laparotomy or mini-laparotomy. We are uncertain whether laparoscopic myomectomy compared to laparotomy or mini-laparotomy improves live birth rate (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.50; 177 participants; two studies; I = 0%; very low-quality evidence), preterm delivery rate (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.29; participants = 177; two studies; I = 0%, very low-quality evidence), clinical pregnancy rate (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.78; 177 participants; two studies; I = 0%, very low-quality evidence), ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.26 to 10.04; 115 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence), miscarriage rate (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.89; participants = 177; two studies; I = 0%, very low-quality evidence), or caesarean section rate (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.39; participants = 177; two studies; I = 21%, very low-quality evidence). Monopolar resectoscope versus bipolar resectoscope One study evaluated the use of two electrosurgical systems during hysteroscopic myomectomy. We are uncertain whether bipolar resectoscope use compared to monopolar resectoscope use improves live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.50; 68 participants; one study, very low-quality evidence), clinical pregnancy rate (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.36; 68 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence), or miscarriage rate (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 5.34; participants = 68; one study; very low-quality evidence). This study did not report on preterm delivery or caesarean section rate.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence to determine the role of myomectomy for infertility in women with fibroids as only one trial compared myomectomy with no myomectomy. If the decision is made to have a myomectomy, the current evidence does not indicate a superior method (laparoscopy, laparotomy or different electrosurgical systems) to improve rates of live birth, preterm delivery, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, or caesarean section. Furthermore, the existing evidence needs to be viewed with caution due to the small number of events, minimal number of studies and very low-quality evidence.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Cesarean Section; Female; Humans; Infertility, Female; Leiomyomatosis; Live Birth; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Rate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Uterine Myomectomy; Uterine Neoplasms
PubMed: 31995657
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003857.pub4 -
Surgery Jun 2023We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials on treating low anterior resection syndrome to help inform current practice. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials on treating low anterior resection syndrome to help inform current practice.
METHODS
This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of randomized clinical trials involved different treatments for low anterior resection syndrome. The risk of bias 2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The main outcomes were improvement in low anterior resection syndrome after treatment assessed by change in low anterior resection syndrome, fecal incontinence scores, and adverse treatment effects.
RESULTS
After an initial screening of 1,286 studies, 7 randomized clinical trials were included. Sample sizes ranged between 12 to 104 patients. Posterior tibial nerve stimulation was the most frequently assessed treatment in 3 randomized clinical trials. The weighted mean difference between posterior tibial nerve stimulation and medical treatment or sham therapy in follow-up low anterior resection syndrome score (-3.31, P = .157) was insignificant. Transanal irrigation reduced major low anterior resection syndrome symptoms by 61.5% compared with 28.6% after posterior tibial nerve stimulation with a significantly lower 6-month follow-up low anterior resection syndrome score. Pelvic floor training achieved better improvement in low anterior resection syndrome than standard care (47.8% vs 21.3%) at 6 months, but this was not maintained at 12 months (40.0% vs 34.9%). Ramosetron was associated with a greater short-term improvement in major low anterior resection syndrome (23% vs 8%) and a lower low anterior resection syndrome score (29.5 vs 34.6) at 4-weeks follow-up than Kegels or Sitz baths. No significant improvement in bowel function was noted after probiotics use as probiotics and placebo had similar follow-up low anterior resection syndrome scores (33.3 vs 36).
CONCLUSION
Transanal irrigation was associated with improvement in low anterior resection syndrome according to 2 trials, and ramosetron showed promising short-term results in one trial. Posterior tibial nerve stimulation had a marginal benefit compared with standard care. In contrast, pelvic floor training was associated with short-term symptomatic improvement, and probiotics showed no tangible improvement in low anterior resection syndrome symptoms. Firm conclusions cannot be drawn due to the small number of trials published.
Topics: Humans; Low Anterior Resection Syndrome; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37012144
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.02.010 -
Techniques in Coloproctology Dec 2023A common and debilitating complication of low anterior resection for rectal cancer is low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). As a multifactorial entity, LARS is poorly...
BACKGROUND
A common and debilitating complication of low anterior resection for rectal cancer is low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). As a multifactorial entity, LARS is poorly understood and challenging to treat. Despite this, prevention strategies are commonly overlooked. Our aim was to review the pathophysiology of LARS and explore current evidence on the efficacy and feasibility of prophylactic techniques.
METHODS
A literature review was performed between [1st January 2000 to 1st October 2023] for studies which investigated preventative interventions for LARS. Mechanisms by which LARS develop are described, followed by a review of prophylactic strategies to prevent LARS. Medline, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched, 189 articles screened, 8 duplicates removed and 18 studies reviewed.
RESULTS
Colonic dysmotility, anal sphincter dysfunction and neorectal dysfunction all contribute to the development of LARS, with the complex mechanism of defecation interrupted by surgery. Transanal irrigation (TAI) and pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR) have shown benefits in preventing LARS, but may be limited by patient compliance. Intraoperative nerve monitoring (IONM) and robotic-assisted surgery have shown some promise in surgically preventing LARS. Nerve stimulation and other novel strategies currently used in treatment of LARS have yet to be investigated in their roles prophylactically.
CONCLUSIONS
To date, there is a limited evidence base for all preventative strategies including IONM, RAS, PFP and TAI. These strategies are limited by either access (IONM, RAS and PFP) or acceptability (PFP and TAI), which are both key to the success of any intervention. The results of ongoing trials will serve to assess acceptability, while technological advancement may improve access to some of the aforementioned strategies.
Topics: Humans; Anal Canal; Low Anterior Resection Syndrome; Postoperative Complications; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 38091118
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-023-02872-5 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Apr 2024This study aimed to provide procedure-specific estimates of the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in the absence of thromboprophylaxis,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to provide procedure-specific estimates of the risk of symptomatic venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in the absence of thromboprophylaxis, following gynecologic cancer surgery.
DATA SOURCES
We conducted comprehensive searches on Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for observational studies. We also reviewed reference lists of eligible studies and review articles. We performed separate searches for randomized trials addressing effects of thromboprophylaxis and conducted a web-based survey on thromboprophylaxis practice.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Observational studies enrolling ≥50 adult patients undergoing gynecologic cancer surgery procedures reporting absolute incidence for at least 1 of the following were included: symptomatic pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic venous thromboembolism, bleeding requiring reintervention (including reexploration and angioembolization), bleeding leading to transfusion, or postoperative hemoglobin <70 g/L.
METHODS
Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility, performed data extraction, and evaluated risk of bias of eligible articles. We adjusted the reported estimates for thromboprophylaxis and length of follow-up and used the median value from studies to determine cumulative incidence at 4 weeks postsurgery stratified by patient venous thromboembolism risk factors. The GRADE approach was applied to rate evidence certainty.
RESULTS
We included 188 studies (398,167 patients) reporting on 37 gynecologic cancer surgery procedures. The evidence certainty was generally low to very low. Median symptomatic venous thromboembolism risk (in the absence of prophylaxis) was <1% in 13 of 37 (35%) procedures, 1% to 2% in 11 of 37 (30%), and >2.0% in 13 of 37 (35%). The risks of venous thromboembolism varied from 0.1% in low venous thromboembolism risk patients undergoing cervical conization to 33.5% in high venous thromboembolism risk patients undergoing pelvic exenteration. Estimates of bleeding requiring reintervention varied from <0.1% to 1.3%. Median risks of bleeding requiring reintervention were <1% in 22 of 29 (76%) and 1% to 2% in 7 of 29 (24%) procedures.
CONCLUSION
Venous thromboembolism reduction with thromboprophylaxis likely outweighs the increase in bleeding requiring reintervention in many gynecologic cancer procedures (eg, open surgery for ovarian cancer and pelvic exenteration). In some procedures (eg, laparoscopic total hysterectomy without lymphadenectomy), thromboembolism and bleeding risks are similar, and decisions depend on individual risk prediction and values and preferences regarding venous thromboembolism and bleeding.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Female; Anticoagulants; Venous Thromboembolism; Postoperative Complications; Hemorrhage; Thrombosis; Neoplasms
PubMed: 37827272
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.10.006