Department of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80138 Naples, Italy.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Oct 27;58(11):1539. doi: 10.3390/medicina58111539.
: Pelvic lymphadenectomy has been associated with radical hysterectomy for the treatment of early Cervical Cancer (ECC) since 1905. However, some complications are related to this technique, such as lymphedema and nerve damage. In addition, its clinical role is controversial. For this reason, the sentinel lymph node (SLN) has found increasing use in clinical practice over time. Oncologic safety, however, is debated, and there is no clear evidence in the literature regarding this. Therefore, our meta-analysis aims to schematically analyze the current scientific evidence to investigate the non-inferiority of SLN versus PLND regarding oncologic outcomes. : Following the recommendations in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, we systematically searched the PubMed and Scopus databases in June 2022 since their early first publications. We made no restrictions on the country. We considered only studies entirely published in English. We included studies containing Disease-Free Survival (DFS), Overall Survival (OS), Recurrence Rate (RR), and site of recurrence data. We used comparative studies for meta-analysis. We registered this meta-analysis to the PROSPERO site for meta-analysis with protocol number CRD42022316650. : Twelve studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. The four comparative studies were enrolled in meta-analysis. Patients were analyzed concerning Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLN) and compared with Bilateral Pelvic Systematic Lymphadenectomy (PLND) in early-stage Cervical Cancer (ECC). Meta-analysis highlighted no differences in oncological safety between these two techniques, both in DFS and OS. Moreover, most of the sites of recurrences in the SLN group seemed not to be correlated with missed lymphadenectomy. : Data in the literature do not seem to show clear oncologic inferiority of SLN over PLND. On the contrary, the higher detection rate of positive lymph nodes and the predominance of no lymph node recurrences give hope that this technique may equal PLND in oncologic terms, improving its morbidity profile.
盆腔淋巴结清扫术自 1905 年以来一直与根治性子宫切除术联合用于治疗早期宫颈癌(ECC)。然而,该技术与一些并发症有关,如淋巴水肿和神经损伤。此外,其临床作用也存在争议。因此,随着时间的推移,前哨淋巴结(SLN)在临床实践中得到了越来越多的应用。然而,其肿瘤学安全性存在争议,文献中尚无明确证据。因此,我们的荟萃分析旨在通过系统地分析当前的科学证据,来研究 SLN 与 PLND 在肿瘤学结果方面的非劣效性。
根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)声明的建议,我们于 2022 年 6 月在 PubMed 和 Scopus 数据库中进行了系统搜索,因为它们是早期首次发表的数据库。我们没有对国家进行限制。我们只考虑完全用英语发表的研究。我们纳入了包含无病生存(DFS)、总生存(OS)、复发率(RR)和复发部位数据的研究。我们使用比较研究进行荟萃分析。我们将这项荟萃分析注册到 PROSPERO 网站,注册号为 CRD42022316650。
有 12 项研究符合纳入标准。四项比较研究被纳入荟萃分析。对患者进行了分析,包括前哨淋巴结活检(SLN),并与早期宫颈癌(ECC)的双侧盆腔系统淋巴结清扫术(PLND)进行了比较。荟萃分析结果显示,这两种技术在 DFS 和 OS 方面,在肿瘤学安全性方面没有差异。此外,SLN 组的大多数复发部位似乎与淋巴结清扫不充分无关。
文献中的数据似乎并未显示 SLN 在肿瘤学方面明显劣于 PLND。相反,更高的阳性淋巴结检出率和更多的无淋巴结复发,使人们希望该技术在肿瘤学方面能够与 PLND 相媲美,改善其发病率。