ReviewPleura and peritoneum2018
Role of laparoscopy in initial tumour staging in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: A systematic review.
Review in Pleura and peritoneum, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spectral CT iodine quantification for peritoneal metastasis burden and resectability prediction in ovarian cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Laparoscopy in the Surgical Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Comprehensive Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Minimally invasive surgery in advanced and recurrent ovarian cancer: current evidence and future directions.Current opinion in oncology · 2025Review
- Laparoscopic Surgery for Ovarian Neoplasms - What is Possible, What is Useful?Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2022Article
- When we open and close: Postoperative outcomes after aborted primary cytoreduction for ovarian cancer.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2022Article
- Early postoperative outcomes of staging laparoscopy for peritoneal metastases with or without pressurized intra-peritoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC).BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Review
- Accuracy of radiologic- laparoscopic peritoneal carcinomatosis categorization in the prediction of surgical outcome.The British journal of radiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this systematic review was to investigate the accuracy of additional staging laparoscopy (SL) in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC) to predict futile laparotomy (FL).
methodsSystematic review according to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement (PRISMA) criteria. Clinical studies investigating the role of SL in selecting women with AEOC for primary debulking surgery (PDS) were included. Index test: SL. Reference test: laparotomy. Target condition: incomplete cytoreduction (CR) with remaining disease<1 cm.
resultsNine prospective and retrospective studies reporting on eight cohorts totalizing 778 LS were included. Reference test was completed in 76 % cases. PPV for FL was between 0.69 and 1.0. In three studies examining the value of a predictive index value (PIV) for predicting FL, sensitivity of the index test (LS with PIV ≥8) was between 46% and 70 %, and specificity between 89 % and 100 %. The proportion of patients that received CR during PDS differed widely between studies (from 50 to 91). Using a PIV did not increase the sensitivity and might result in more patients receiving FL. In the only randomized trial, FL occurred in 10 (10 %) of 102 patients in the LS group versus 39 (39 %) of 99 patients in the primary PDS group (relative risk, 0.25; 95 % CI, 0.13-0.47;
conclusionsThe evidence available from this systematic review supports the inclusion of an additional LS to the conventional initial diagnostic workup in women with AEOC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.