Comparing the therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic minimally invasive surgery and traditional surgery for early-stage breast cancer: A meta-analysis.

Background: Early-stage breast cancer requires effective surgical interventions. This meta-analysis compares the therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic minimally invasive surgery (EMIS) with traditional surgery, such as modified radical mastectomy.

Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and the Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome model, we systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library until July 19, 2023. We included comparative trials, focusing on randomized controlled trials, retrospective, and prospective studies. Metrics analyzed included operative time, blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, and lymph node harvest using Stata version 17.

Results: Out of 943 studies, six met the inclusion criteria. Endoscopic surgery had a longer operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 1.03, P < 0.01) but significantly less blood loss (WMD = -1.48, P < 0.01). No significant differences were noted in drainage volume and lymph node harvest.

Conclusions: EMIS reduces intraoperative blood loss but requires more time than traditional surgeries. Both methods show comparable outcomes in postoperative drainage and lymph node harvest, supporting their efficacy in treating early-stage breast cancer.