OBJECTIVE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasound (TVS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for detecting myometrial infiltration (MI) in endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: An extensive search of papers comparing TVS and MRI in assessing MI in endometrial cancer was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, and Cochrane Database from January 1989 to January 2017. Quality was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. RESULTS: Our extended search identified 747 citations but after exclusions we finally included in the meta-analysis 8 articles. The risk of bias for most studies was low for most 4 domains assessed in QUADAS-2. Overall, pooled estimated sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing deep MI were 75% (95% confidence interval [CI]=67%–82%) and 82% (95% CI=75%–93%) for TVS, and 83% (95% CI=76%–89%) and 82% (95% CI=72%–89%) for MRI, respectively. No statistical differences were found when comparing both methods (p=0.314). Heterogeneity was low for sensitivity and high for specificity for TVS and MRI. CONCLUSION: MRI showed a better sensitivity than TVS for detecting deep MI in women with endometrial cancer. However, the difference observed was not statistically significant.
Animals ; Bias (Epidemiology) ; Endometrial Neoplasms* ; Female ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging* ; Mice ; Myometrium ; Population Characteristics ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Ultrasonography*

Objective: To assess the benefit of protective ostomies on anastomotic leak rate, urgent re-operations, and mortality due to anastomotic leak complications in ovarian cancer surgery. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for all studies on anastomotic leak and ostomy formation related to ovarian cancer surgery. Non-controlled studies, case series, abstracts, case reports, study protocols, and letters to the editor were excluded. Meta-analysis was performed on the primary endpoint of anastomotic leak rate. Subgroup analysis was carried out based on type of bowel resection and bevacizumab use. Secondary endpoints were urgent re-operations and mortality associated with anastomotic leak, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, 30-day readmission rate, adjuvant chemotherapy, survival, and reversal surgery in ostomy and non-ostomy patients. Results: A total of 17 studies (2,719 patients) were included: 16 retrospective cohort studies, and 1 case-control study. Meta-analysis of 17 studies did not show a decrease in anastomotic leak rate in ostomy patients (odds ratio [OR]=1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.60–1.70; p=0.980). Meta-analysis of ten studies (1,452 women) did not find a decrease in urgent re-operations in the ostomy group (OR=0.72; 95% CI=0.35–1.46; p=0.360). Other outcomes were not considered for meta-analysis due to the lack of data in included studies. Conclusion Protective ostomies did not decrease anastomotic leak rates, and urgent re-operations in ovarian cancer surgery. This evidence supports the use of ostomies in very select cases.