{"title":"治疗早期乳腺癌的内镜辅助保乳手术(E-BCS)与传统保乳手术(C-BCS)技术:系统综述与荟萃分析。","authors":"Arga Patrianagara, Lie Rebecca Yen Hwei","doi":"10.3233/BD-230023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopy-assisted breast conserving surgery (E-BCS) was developed over 10 years ago as a method for breast cancer treatment with the potential advantage of less noticeable scarring. However, the evidence supporting its superiority over conventional breast conserving surgery (C-BCS) remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare the outcomes of E-BCS and C-BCS for the treatment of early breast cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search for relevant articles was performed using specific keywords in Medline, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library PubMed up to October 17th, 2022. Clinical trials that compared E-BCS with C-BCS in early breast cancer patients were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis of nine studies revealed that E-BCS was associated with shorter incision length [Mean Difference (MD) -6.50 cm (95% CI -10.75, -2.26), p = 0.003, I2 = 99%] and higher cosmetic score [MD 2.69 (95% CI 1.46, 3.93), p < 0.0001, I2 = 93%] compared with C-BCS. However, E-BCS had a longer operation time [MD 35.95 min (95% CI 19.12, 52.78), p < 0.0001, I2 = 93%] and greater drainage volume [MD 62.91 mL (95% CI 2.55, 123.27), p = 0.04, I2 = 79%]. There was no significant difference in blood loss volume (p = 0.06), drainage duration (p = 0.28), postoperative complications (p = 0.69), or local recurrence (p = 0.59) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study suggests that E-BCS offers a shorter incision length and better cosmetic outcome compared with C-BCS in the treatment of early breast cancer. However, E-BCS requires a longer operation time and has greater drainage volume. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":9224,"journal":{"name":"Breast disease","volume":"42 1","pages":"383-393"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endoscopy-assisted breast conservation surgery (E-BCS) vs conventional breast conservation surgery (C-BCS) technique for the management of early breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Arga Patrianagara, Lie Rebecca Yen Hwei\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/BD-230023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Endoscopy-assisted breast conserving surgery (E-BCS) was developed over 10 years ago as a method for breast cancer treatment with the potential advantage of less noticeable scarring. However, the evidence supporting its superiority over conventional breast conserving surgery (C-BCS) remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare the outcomes of E-BCS and C-BCS for the treatment of early breast cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search for relevant articles was performed using specific keywords in Medline, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library PubMed up to October 17th, 2022. Clinical trials that compared E-BCS with C-BCS in early breast cancer patients were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis of nine studies revealed that E-BCS was associated with shorter incision length [Mean Difference (MD) -6.50 cm (95% CI -10.75, -2.26), p = 0.003, I2 = 99%] and higher cosmetic score [MD 2.69 (95% CI 1.46, 3.93), p < 0.0001, I2 = 93%] compared with C-BCS. However, E-BCS had a longer operation time [MD 35.95 min (95% CI 19.12, 52.78), p < 0.0001, I2 = 93%] and greater drainage volume [MD 62.91 mL (95% CI 2.55, 123.27), p = 0.04, I2 = 79%]. There was no significant difference in blood loss volume (p = 0.06), drainage duration (p = 0.28), postoperative complications (p = 0.69), or local recurrence (p = 0.59) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study suggests that E-BCS offers a shorter incision length and better cosmetic outcome compared with C-BCS in the treatment of early breast cancer. However, E-BCS requires a longer operation time and has greater drainage volume. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Breast disease\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"383-393\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Breast disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/BD-230023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/BD-230023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Endoscopy-assisted breast conservation surgery (E-BCS) vs conventional breast conservation surgery (C-BCS) technique for the management of early breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Endoscopy-assisted breast conserving surgery (E-BCS) was developed over 10 years ago as a method for breast cancer treatment with the potential advantage of less noticeable scarring. However, the evidence supporting its superiority over conventional breast conserving surgery (C-BCS) remains unclear.
Objective: This study aims to compare the outcomes of E-BCS and C-BCS for the treatment of early breast cancer.
Methods: A comprehensive search for relevant articles was performed using specific keywords in Medline, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library PubMed up to October 17th, 2022. Clinical trials that compared E-BCS with C-BCS in early breast cancer patients were collected.
Results: Our analysis of nine studies revealed that E-BCS was associated with shorter incision length [Mean Difference (MD) -6.50 cm (95% CI -10.75, -2.26), p = 0.003, I2 = 99%] and higher cosmetic score [MD 2.69 (95% CI 1.46, 3.93), p < 0.0001, I2 = 93%] compared with C-BCS. However, E-BCS had a longer operation time [MD 35.95 min (95% CI 19.12, 52.78), p < 0.0001, I2 = 93%] and greater drainage volume [MD 62.91 mL (95% CI 2.55, 123.27), p = 0.04, I2 = 79%]. There was no significant difference in blood loss volume (p = 0.06), drainage duration (p = 0.28), postoperative complications (p = 0.69), or local recurrence (p = 0.59) between the two groups.
Conclusion: Our study suggests that E-BCS offers a shorter incision length and better cosmetic outcome compared with C-BCS in the treatment of early breast cancer. However, E-BCS requires a longer operation time and has greater drainage volume. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
期刊介绍:
The recent expansion of work in the field of breast cancer inevitably will hasten discoveries that will have impact on patient outcome. The breadth of this research that spans basic science, clinical medicine, epidemiology, and public policy poses difficulties for investigators. Not only is it necessary to be facile in comprehending ideas from many disciplines, but also important to understand the public implications of these discoveries. Breast Disease publishes review issues devoted to an in-depth analysis of the scientific and public implications of recent research on a specific problem in breast cancer. Thus, the reviews will not only discuss recent discoveries but will also reflect on their impact in breast cancer research or clinical management.