Background： The effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy （NCRT） treatment for patients with esophageal carcinoma （EC） remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of NCRT followed ...Background： The effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy （NCRT） treatment for patients with esophageal carcinoma （EC） remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of NCRT followed by surgery （NCRTS） with surgery alone （SA） for EC. Methods： The PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched up to August 2015 for all the published studies that investigated EC patients receiving either NCRTS or SA, and the reference lists were also manually examined for the eligible studies. The risk ratio （RR） with 95% confidence intervals （CI s） as effective size was determined to assess the 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates （SRs）, postoperative morbidity, and postoperative mortality. Heterogeneity was determined using the Q-test. The Begg＇s test and Egger＇s test were used for assessing any potential publication bias. Results： Of 1120 identified studies, 16 eligible studies were included in this analysis （involving 2549 patients）. Overall, the pooled results suggested that NCRTS was associated with significantly improved 1-year （RR： 1.07, 95% CI： 1.02–1.13）, 3-year （RR： 1.26, 95% CI： 1.14–1.39）, and 5-year （RR： 1.36, 95% CI： 1.18–1.56） SRs. However, the results also indicated that NCRTS had no or little effect on postoperative morbidity （RR： 0.93, 95% CI： 0.82–1.05） and postoperative mortality （RR： 1.17, 95% CI： 0.56–2.44）. Conclusions： Compared with SA, NCRTS can increase 1-, 3-, and 5-year SRs in patients with EC.展开更多
文摘Background： The effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy （NCRT） treatment for patients with esophageal carcinoma （EC） remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of NCRT followed by surgery （NCRTS） with surgery alone （SA） for EC. Methods： The PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were electronically searched up to August 2015 for all the published studies that investigated EC patients receiving either NCRTS or SA, and the reference lists were also manually examined for the eligible studies. The risk ratio （RR） with 95% confidence intervals （CI s） as effective size was determined to assess the 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates （SRs）, postoperative morbidity, and postoperative mortality. Heterogeneity was determined using the Q-test. The Begg＇s test and Egger＇s test were used for assessing any potential publication bias. Results： Of 1120 identified studies, 16 eligible studies were included in this analysis （involving 2549 patients）. Overall, the pooled results suggested that NCRTS was associated with significantly improved 1-year （RR： 1.07, 95% CI： 1.02–1.13）, 3-year （RR： 1.26, 95% CI： 1.14–1.39）, and 5-year （RR： 1.36, 95% CI： 1.18–1.56） SRs. However, the results also indicated that NCRTS had no or little effect on postoperative morbidity （RR： 0.93, 95% CI： 0.82–1.05） and postoperative mortality （RR： 1.17, 95% CI： 0.56–2.44）. Conclusions： Compared with SA, NCRTS can increase 1-, 3-, and 5-year SRs in patients with EC.
