Fei Zhou1,2, Lu Liu2,3, Liyuan Liu1,2, Lixiang Yu1,2, Fei Wang1,2, Yujuan Xiang1,2, Chao Zheng1,2, Shuya Huang1,2, Han Cai1,2, Zhigang Yu1,2. 1. Department of Breast Surgery, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, China. 2. Institute of Translational Medicine of Breast Disease Prevention and Treatment, Shandong University, Jinan, China. 3. Department of Breast Surgery, Qingdao Municipal Hospital Group, Qingdao, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is a rare, benign breast disease without any definitive therapeutic strategy. It is controversial whether to use conservative or surgical treatment of IGM and high-level evidence-based medicine data are lacking. The purpose of this study was to systemically evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the conservative versus surgical treatment for IGM. METHODS: In this meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, EMbase, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science for comparative studies about the conservative versus surgical treatment of IGM. Two researchers independently identified reports and extracted data. We used Stata 11 for data analysis. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the differences in the recurrence rate of conservative and surgical treatment using a random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies involving 1,101 patients were included. The results demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate among patients who were treated by nonsurgical therapy and surgical treatment. No publication bias was detected. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrates that both the conservative and surgical treatment approaches have appropriate efficacy in IGM treatment and relapse. Further randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods are required to confirm the advantages of each approach.
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis (IGM) is a rare, benign breast disease without any definitive therapeutic strategy. It is controversial whether to use conservative or surgical treatment of IGM and high-level evidence-based medicine data are lacking. The purpose of this study was to systemically evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the conservative versus surgical treatment for IGM. METHODS: In this meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, EMbase, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science for comparative studies about the conservative versus surgical treatment of IGM. Two researchers independently identified reports and extracted data. We used Stata 11 for data analysis. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the differences in the recurrence rate of conservative and surgical treatment using a random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 10 studies involving 1,101 patients were included. The results demonstrated that there was no significant difference in the recurrence rate among patients who were treated by nonsurgical therapy and surgical treatment. No publication bias was detected. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrates that both the conservative and surgical treatment approaches have appropriate efficacy in IGM treatment and relapse. Further randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods are required to confirm the advantages of each approach.
Authors: Kate J Johnstone; Jennifer Robson; Sarah G Cherian; Jenny Wan Sai Cheong; Kris Kerr; Judith F Bligh Journal: Pathology Date: 2017-04-22 Impact factor: 5.306
Authors: Jason P Wilson; Nicole Massoll; Julia Marshall; Robin M Foss; Edward M Copeland; Stephen R Grobmyer Journal: Am Surg Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 0.688