PURPOSE: The survival impact of secondary cytoreductive surgery in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer was studied.METHODS: We identified published studies from 1983 to 2021 following our inclusion criteria from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library. To integrate the effect size of single-arm studies, meta-analysis was performed using death rate as a primary outcome. The effect of complete cytoreduction and optimal cytoreduction on survival was evaluated using meta-regression. The pooled death rate was presented with a 95% CI. The publication bias was evaluated with the funnel plot and Egger's test, and sensitivity analysis was performed. To overcome missing death rates, the linear regression model was performed on log-transformed median overall survival (OS) time using study size as a weight.RESULTS: Thirty-six studies with 2,805 patients reporting death rates were used for this meta-analysis of the 80 eligible studies. There was strong heterogeneity, with the P value of the Cochrane Q test of < 0.0001 and Higgins's I²statistics of 86%; thus, we considered a random effect model. The pooled death rate was 44.2% (95% CI, 39.0 to 49.5), and both the complete and optimal cytoreductions were associated with better survival outcomes as significant moderators in the meta-regression model ( P < .001 and P = .005, respectively). Although 14 studies were located outside the funnel plot, Egger's test indicated no publication bias ( P = .327). A sensitivity analysis excluding 14 studies showed similar results. In the linear regression model on the basis of 57 studies, the median OS time increased by 8.97% and 7.04% when the complete and optimal cytoreduction proportion increased by 10%, respectively, after adjusting other variables.CONCLUSION: Secondary cytoreductive surgery, resulting in maximal tumor resection, significantly prolongs OS in platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer.

Baek MH, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Dec;29:e82. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2018.29.e82

Park JY, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2022 Jul;33:e73. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2022.33.e73

Baek MH, et al. J Gynecol Oncol. 2024 May;35:e105. https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2024.35.e105