ArticleGynecology and minimally invasive therapy
Comparison of Laparoscopy and Laparotomy in the Management of Early-stage Ovarian Cancer.
Article in Gynecology and minimally invasive therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopy in the Surgical Management of Gynecological Cancer: A Comprehensive Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The Impact of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Treatment of Ovarian Cancer in Young Patients.Cancers · 2025Article
- Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Management of Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.O&G open · 2024Review
- Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Exploring Intersections: Endometrial and Ovarian Cancer Investigations.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Successful Pregnancy after Fertility-sparing Surgery and Treatment for Metachronous Multiple Primary Malignancies - A Case Report.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Diagnostic Laparoscopy for Advanced Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Peritoneal Cancers: A Retrospective Study.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Treatment Options for Uterine Fibroids Using Microwave and Radiofrequency.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyReview
- Juvenile Granulosa Cell Tumor of the Ovary in Pregnancy: A Case Report.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- The Era of 4K Three-dimensional Imaging is Coming.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- Improvement of Prognostic Outcome in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Stage I Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
- The New Concepts from New Evidences.Gynecology and minimally invasive therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery for early-stage ovarian cancer (EOC) by comparing the surgical and survival outcomes between laparoscopy and laparotomy. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center observational study that included all patients who underwent surgical staging for EOC by laparoscopy or laparotomy between 2010 and 2019. Results: Forty-nine patients were included; of which 20 underwent laparoscopy, 26 laparotomy, and three conversion from laparoscopy to laparotomy. No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding operative time, number of lymph nodes dissected, or intraoperative tumor rupture rate, while estimated blood loss and transfusion requirements were lower in the laparoscopy group. The complication rate tended to be higher in the laparotomy group. Patients in the laparoscopy group had a faster recovery, with earlier urinary catheter and abdominal drain removal, shorter hospital stay, and a trend toward earlier tolerance of oral diet and mobilization. At a mean follow-up of 45.7 months, 14 patients had disease recurrence, with no differences in the mean progression-free survival between the two groups (36 months for laparoscopy vs. 35.5 months for laparotomy, Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery performed by a trained gynecological oncologist is a safe and effective surgical approach for comprehensive staging of EOC, with the additional benefits of a faster recovery compared to laparotomy.
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.