ReviewArchives of medical science : AMS2026
Laparoscopy and laparotomy in endometrial cancer - a meta-analysis.
Review in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Uterine malignancies, the vast majority of which are endometrial cancers, constitute the most common type of gynecological neoplasms in developed countries. The primary treatment for endometrial cancer is hysterectomy and bilateral salpingoophorectomy. Women with endometrial cancer can be subjected to either total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) or to an increasingly recommended total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH). We decided to verify whether published evidence supports TLH as an effective, less invasive than TAH albeit still equally radical treatment for endometrial malignancies. Material and methods: The systematic review included articles indexed in MEDLINE (PubMed) and EBSCO, published between January 1974 and January 2017. The search was based on the following keywords and combinations thereof: "laparoscopy", "laparotomy", "endometrial cancer", "comparative". Twenty-six full-text articles were included in the meta-analysis. Results: A total of 5,996 patients were eligible for the analysis, among them 2,833 (47.2%) women subjected to TLH and 3,163 (52.8%) who underwent TAH. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy is associated with shorter hospital stay, faster recovery, lesser blood loss and fewer intra- and postoperative blood transfusions, reduced pain, and a lower reoperation rate than conventional TAH. Conclusions: All analyzed studies demonstrated that TLH is a safe and effective treatment option in endometrial cancer patients. This procedure is markedly less invasive than TAH. However, considering several contraindications for laparoscopy, such as peritoneal invasion, cardiorespiratory failure, history of previous surgery and large size of the uterus, qualification for a given procedure needs to be preceded by a detailed evaluation.
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.