Logo do repositório

Endoscopic versus microscopic transsphenoidal surgery in the treatment of pituitary tumors: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials

dc.contributor.authorBastos, Rodrigo V. S. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Carla Maria D. M. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorTagliarini, Jose Vicente [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorZanini, Marco Antonio [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorRomero, Flavio R. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBoguszewski, Cesar Luiz
dc.contributor.authorNunes, Vania dos Santos [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T17:07:25Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T17:07:25Z
dc.date.issued2016-01-01
dc.description.abstractWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that compared pure endoscopic with microscopic transsphenoidal surgery (TSS) in the resection of pituitary tumors. Embase, PubMed, Lilacs, and Central Cochrane were used as our data sources. The outcomes were total tumor resection, achievement of biochemical control of functioning adenomas, hospital stay and surgery complications. The randomized trials were analyzed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Two randomized and three prospective controlled non-randomized studies were included. Two studies, including 68 patients, evaluated total tumor resection and the meta-analysis did not show differences between the groups [RR: 1.45 (95% CI: 0.87, 2.44)]. Three studies involving 65 patients analyzed the achievement of biochemical control and no statistical difference was found [RR: 0.94 (95% CI: 0.7, 1.26)]. All five studies compared the frequency of postoperative complications between intervention and control group and meta-analysis favored for a low rate of postoperative complications in the endoscopic TSS group [(RR: 0.37 (95% CI: 0.16, 0.83)]. Due to the low evidence level and low number of observations, the results of our meta-analysis should not be viewed as a final proof of inferiority or superiority of one approach in relation to the other. More data including higher numbers of observations are needed.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartamento de Clínica Médica Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationDepartamento de Oftalmologia e Otorrinolaringologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationDepartamento de Neurologia Psiquiatria e Psicologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationDepartamento de Clínica Médica Divisão de Endocrinologia Serviço de Endocrinologia e Metabologia (SEMPR) Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartamento de Clínica Médica Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartamento de Oftalmologia e Otorrinolaringologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartamento de Neurologia Psiquiatria e Psicologia Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
dc.description.sponsorshipIdFAPESP: #2012/14761-0
dc.format.extent411-419
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2359-3997000000204
dc.identifier.citationArchives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, v. 60, n. 5, p. 411-419, 2016.
dc.identifier.doi10.1590/2359-3997000000204
dc.identifier.fileS2359-39972016000500411.pdf
dc.identifier.issn2359-4292
dc.identifier.issn2359-3997
dc.identifier.lattes2894975141895189
dc.identifier.scieloS2359-39972016000500411
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84994052320
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/173719
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofArchives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,505
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,505
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso abertopt
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectNeurosurgical procedure
dc.subjectPituitary tumor
dc.subjectReview
dc.subjectSurgical endoscopy
dc.subjectSystematic
dc.titleEndoscopic versus microscopic transsphenoidal surgery in the treatment of pituitary tumors: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trialsen
dc.typeResenhapt
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isDepartmentOfPublicatione31a9b63-072c-4e5b-9812-9c0b621b4848
relation.isDepartmentOfPublication.latestForDiscoverye31a9b63-072c-4e5b-9812-9c0b621b4848
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationa3cdb24b-db92-40d9-b3af-2eacecf9f2ba
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoverya3cdb24b-db92-40d9-b3af-2eacecf9f2ba
unesp.author.lattes2894975141895189
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Medicina, Botucatupt
unesp.departmentClínica Médica - FMBpt
unesp.departmentNeurologia, Psicologia e Psiquiatria - FMBpt
unesp.departmentOftalmologia, Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia de Cabeça e Pescoço - FMBpt

Arquivos

Pacote original

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
S2359-39972016000500411.pdf
Tamanho:
317.55 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format