SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021
The Oncology Safety of Diagnostic Hysteroscopy in Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of diagnostic hysteroscopy for the investigation of type II endometrial cancer: systematic review with meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Circular RNAs in gynecological cancer: From molecular mechanisms to clinical applications (Review).Oncology letters · 2025Review
- Hysteroscopy vs. Vabra in Endometrial Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Cancers · 2025Review
- Review
- Endometrial Cancer Management in Young Women.Cancers · 2022Review
- Oncological Safety of Diagnostic Hysteroscopy for Apparent Early-Stage Type II Endometrial Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHysteroscopy is becoming a common method for the diagnosis of uterine disorders in developed countries. However, hysteroscopy might worsen the prognosis of endometrial cancer because it could cause cancer dissemination into the peritoneal cavity through the fallopian tubes. Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore the oncological safety of hysteroscopy for early-stage endometrial cancer. SEARCH STRATEGY: Eligible studies were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to September 22, 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies which compared the oncological safety of hysteroscopy with other methods were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A total of 3980 patients were included in this study, of whom1357 patients had undergone hysteroscopy and2623 had not. MAIN
resultsThere was no significant association between hysteroscopy and worse prognosis in early-stage endometrial cancer [disease-free survival: log risk ratio(logRR) -0.22; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.54 to 0.1; p=0.97; overall survival: logRR 0.03; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.11; p=0.02; disease-specific survival: logRR 0.03; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.10; p=0.00].
conclusionThis study suggests that hysteroscopy is a safe diagnostic and treatment method, and has no significant effect on the prognosis of early-stage endometrial cancer. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020193696.
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.