| Literature DB >> 36011009 |
Georgios Koimtzis1, Leandros Stefanopoulos2,3, Vyron Alexandrou4, Nikos Tteralli5, Verity Brooker1, Awad Ali Alawad1, Eliot Carrington-Windo6, Nikolaos Karakasis4, Georgios Geropoulos7, Theodosios Papavramidis8.
Abstract
Thyroid cancer is the most common endocrine malignancy with an increasing incidence over the past few years. Surgery is considered the primary therapeutic option, which often involves lymph node dissection. The aim of this study was to assess the role of carbon nanoparticles, a novel agent, in thyroid cancer surgery. For that purpose, we conducted a systematic review of the literature on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases from 1 January 2002 to 31 January 2022. Ultimately, 20 articles with a total number of 2920 patients were included in the analysis. The outcome of the analysis showed that the use of carbon nanoparticles is associated with a higher number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD, 1.47, 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.82, p < 0.001) and a lower rate of accidental parathyroid gland removal (OR 0.34, CI 95% 0.24 to 0.50, p < 0.001). Based on these results, we suggest that carbon nanoparticles are applied in thyroid cancer surgery on a wider scale, so that these findings can be confirmed by future research on the subject.Entities:
Keywords: carbon nanoparticles; lymph nodes; parathyroid glands; thyroid cancer
Year: 2022 PMID: 36011009 PMCID: PMC9407010 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14164016
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.575
Figure 1Flowchart depicting the selection process for inclusion of studies in the article.
Characteristics of each individual study included in the meta-analysis (all studies originate from China).
| Study | Study Period | Experimental Group ( | Control Group ( | Sex (Male/Female) | Study Design |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liu, et al. [ | November 2017 to October 2018 | 334, 44.0 ± 11.7 | 52, 46.6 ± 13.0 | 98/288 | Retrospective |
| He, et al. [ | January 2018 to December 2020 | 54, 34.7 ± 9.8 | 72, 35.0 ± 9.1 | 4/122 | Retrospective |
| Rao, et al. [ | January 2015 to April 2019 | 50, 46.8 ± 11.9 | 58, 44.0 ± 10.2 | 25/83 | Randomized, control trial |
| Chen, et al. [ | September 2019 to December 2020 | 103, 48.57 ± 13.01 | 88, 45.49 ± 13.25 | 46/145 | Randomized, control trial |
| Ouyang, et al. [ | March 2020 to March 2021 | 64, 34.72 ± 8.79 | 50, 37.24 ± 9.63 | 17/97 | Retrospective |
| Li, et al. [ | February 2017 to April 2019 | 96, 42.54 ± 12.49 | 98, 43.86 ± 12.35 | 37/157 | Retrospective |
| Min, et al. [ | 2017 to 2018 | 120, 40.05 ± 12.37 | 86, 39.63 ± 11.22 | 44/162 | Retrospective |
| Ma, et al. [ | June 2014 to June 2019 | 51, 31.8 ± 7.3 | 42, 30.2 ± 9.2 | 13/80 | Randomized, control trial |
| Xu, et al. [ | January 2017 to January 2019 | 38, 30.5 ± 7.0 | 34, 32.6 ± 7.2 | 6/66 | Retrospective |
| Zhang, et al. [ | February 2016 to June 2018 | 152, 33.5 ± 10.02 | 150, 34.1 ± 10.13 | 22/280 | Randomized, control trial |
| Liu, et al. [ | February 2013 to May 2015 | 45, 46.17 ± 10.20 | 47, 45.39 ± 12.03 | 29/63 | Prospective |
| Xu, et al. [ | September 2013 to August 2014 | 57, 45.37 ± 10.71 | 57, 42.68 ± 14.43 | 9/105 | Randomized control trial |
| Long, et al. [ | January 2012 to May 2013 | 49, 44.5 ± 9.6 | 54, 43.8 ± 10.3 | 20/68 | Randomized, control trial |
| Yu, et al. [ | August 2012 to June 2013 | 41, 41.6 ± 17.1 | 41, 41.7 ± 18.9 | 19/63 | Randomized, control trial |
| Shi, et al. [ | January 2014 to February 2015 | 52, 45.2 ± 5.8 | 45, 42 ± 4.3 | 12/85 | Not mentioned |
| Wang, et al. [ | January 2013 to January 2014 | 90, 44.36 ± 11.48 | 141, 44.09 ± 12.41 | 62/169 | Prospective |
| Wang, et al. [ | March 2013 to March 2014 | 28, 30.25 ± 6.04 | 27, 29.44 ± 6.27 | 3/52 | Randomized, control trial |
| Gu, et al. [ | June 2012 and August 2014 | 50, 46.98 ± 9.027 | 50, 46.98 ± 9.027 | 16/84 | Randomized, control trial |
| Gao, et al. [ | January 2012 to December 2014 | 27, 49.4 ± 2.5 | 27, 52.5 ± 1.8 | 4/50 | Randomized control trial |
| Hao, et al. [ | January 2008 to December 2009 | 100, 41 | 100, 44 | 25/175 | Retrospective |
Primary outcomes of each study included in the meta-analysis.
| Study | Lymph Nodes Harvested (Experimental Group) | Lymph Nodes Harvested (Control Group) | Metastatic/Total Lymph Nodes Harvested (Experimental Group) | Metastatic/Total Lymph Nodes Harvested (Control Group) | Parathyroid Glands Removed (Experimental Group) | Parathyroid Glands Removed (Control Group) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liu, et al. [ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 44/334 | 7/52 |
| He, et al. [ | 5.65 ± 2.62 | 4.06 ± 2.48 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Rao, et al. [ | 6.44 ± 2.08 | 4.72 ± 1.89 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Chen, et al. [ | 2.51 ± 1.10 | 1.97 ± 0.85 | 42/216 | 28/134 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Ouyang, et al. [ | 9.48 ± 4.88 | 5.40 ± 2.67 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Li, et al. [ | 7.72 ± 4.98 | 5.87 ± 4.48 | 189/741 | 148/575 | 3/96 | 10/98 |
| Min, et al. [ | 10.03 ± 5.95 | 8.13 ± 4.37 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 16/120 | 20/86 |
| Ma, et al. [ | 10.24 ± 3.48 | 8.20 ± 2.45 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Xu, et al. [ | 8.9 ± 3.8 | 6.9 ± 2.7 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Zhang, et al. [ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 330/1059 | 213/872 | 2/152 | 9/150 |
| Liu, et al. [ | 4.7 ± 3.0 | 3.5 ± 2.3 | 57/211 | 35/166 | 3/45 | 10/47 |
| Xu, et al. [ | 6.00 ± 0.98 | 4.58 ± 0.60 | 81/342 | 27/261 | 2/57 | 7/57 |
| Long, et al. [ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 116/246 | 123/251 | 3/42 | 11/46 |
| Yu, et al. [ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 3/41 | 9/41 |
| Shi, et al. [ | 5.62 ± 0.47 | 4.24 ± 0.32 | 25/292 | 17/191 | 1/52 | 7/45 |
| Wang, et al. [ | 7.11 ± 5.4 | 5.45 ± 3.53 | 135/640 | 178/769 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned |
| Wang, et al. [ | 6.89 ± 4.15 | 4.56 ± 1.58 | 38/193 | 19/123 | 0/28 | 5/27 |
| Gu, et al. [ | 5.78 ± 4.55 | 6.62 ± 5.07 | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 3/50 | 13/50 |
| Gao, et al. [ | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | Not mentioned | 1/27 | 10/27 |
| Hao, et al. [ | 11 ± 2 | 10 ± 2 | 110/1119 | 99/1024 | 0/100 | 4/100 |
Figure 2Forest plot of the total number of lymph nodes harvested.
Figure 3Forest plot of the metastatic lymph nodes harvested.
Figure 4Forest plot of accidentally removed parathyroid glands.
Figure 5Funnel plot of the studies included in the analysis of the total number of harvested lymph nodes.
Figure 6Funnel plot of the studies included in the analysis of the metastatic lymph nodes harvested.
Figure 7Funnel plot of the studies included in the analysis of the number of accidentally removed parathyroid glands.
Figure 8TSA for the number of lymph nodes harvested-z-curve ends outside the not statistically significant zone.
Figure 9TSA for the number of parathyroid glands removed-z-curve ends outside the not statistically significant zone.