We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Open Versus Endoscopic Approach for Sinonasal Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy 2019 March
BACKGROUND: Open resection (OR) of sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNM) traditionally has been the gold standard for treatment. However, endoscopic resection (ER) has recently become a surgical alternative. The aim of this study was to compare survival outcomes between OR and ER of SNM.
METHODS: A literature search encompassing PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar was performed. Two reviewers independently screened for original studies comparing survival outcomes between OR and ER for SNM. Data were systematically collected on study design, patient demographics, outcomes, and level of evidence. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Meta-analysis of overall survival and disease-free survival was performed using random-effects models.
RESULTS: The initial search yielded 2078 abstracts, of which 9 cohort studies were included for a total of 510 patients from 6 different countries. The average quality of all included studies using the NOS was 7.7 stars. Six out of 7 studies reported no differences in the stages of SNM between patients receiving ER versus OR. Overall survival was longer in the ER group versus OR group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.95). There was no significant difference in disease-free survival between groups (HR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.28-1.25).
CONCLUSION: Based on the available literature, an endoscopic approach for SNM resection has survival outcomes that are similar or greater compared to an open approach.
METHODS: A literature search encompassing PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar was performed. Two reviewers independently screened for original studies comparing survival outcomes between OR and ER for SNM. Data were systematically collected on study design, patient demographics, outcomes, and level of evidence. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). Meta-analysis of overall survival and disease-free survival was performed using random-effects models.
RESULTS: The initial search yielded 2078 abstracts, of which 9 cohort studies were included for a total of 510 patients from 6 different countries. The average quality of all included studies using the NOS was 7.7 stars. Six out of 7 studies reported no differences in the stages of SNM between patients receiving ER versus OR. Overall survival was longer in the ER group versus OR group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.95). There was no significant difference in disease-free survival between groups (HR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.28-1.25).
CONCLUSION: Based on the available literature, an endoscopic approach for SNM resection has survival outcomes that are similar or greater compared to an open approach.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app