A meta-analysis of treatment for early-stage cervical cancer: open versus minimally invasive radical trachelectomy

BACKGROUND: In previous systematic reviews, meta-analysis was lacking, resulting in the statistical difference between the data of different surgeries being impossible to judge. This meta-analysis aims to contrast the fertility results and cancer outcomes between open and minimally invasive surgery. METHOD: We systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus to collect studies that included open and minimally invasive radical trachelectomy. A random-effect model calculated the weighted average difference of each primary outcome via Review Manager V.5.4. RESULT: Eight studies (1369 patients) were incorporated into our study. For fertility results, the Open group excels MIS group in pregnancies-Third trimester delivery [OR = 2.68; 95% CI (1.29, 5.59); P = 0.008]. Nevertheless, there is no statistical difference in clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, and second-trimester rate. Concerning cancer outcomes, no difference was detected in the overall survival [OR = 1.56; 95% CI (0.70, 3.45); P = 0.27] and recurrence [OR = 0.63; 95% CI (0.35, 1.12); P = 0.12]. Concerning surgery-related outcomes, the comprehensive effects revealed that the estimated blood loss of the Open group was higher than that of the MIS group[MD = 139.40; 95% CI (79.05, 199.75); P < 0.0001]. However, there was no difference between the postoperative complication rate in the two groups [OR = 1.52; 95% CI (0.89, 2.60); P = 0.12]. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggested that the fertility result of the Open group may be better than the MIS group, while the MIS group has better surgery-related outcomes. Owing to the poor cases of our study, a more robust conclusion requires more relevant articles in the future. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022352999. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-023-06036-z.