ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2025
Comparing the therapeutic efficacy of endoscopic minimally invasive surgery and traditional surgery for early-stage breast cancer: A meta-analysis.
Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
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, 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.
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.