Anaesthesia Anaesthesia, 2022, 77 (1), pp.28-39. ⟨10.1111/anae.15563⟩ Anaesthesia, 77(1), 28-39. Wiley-Blackwell ANAESTHESIA MEDICAL JOURNAL OF AUSTRALIA r-INCLIVA. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica de INCLIVA instname COVIDSurg Collaborative 2022, ' SARS-CoV-2 infection and venous thromboembolism after surgery: an international prospective cohort study ', Anaesthesia, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 28-39 . https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15563 Anaesthesia, 77(1), 28-39. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd Anaesthesia, vol 77, iss 1 COVIDSurg, Collaborative; GlobalSurg, Collaborative (2022). SARS-CoV-2 infection and venous thromboembolism after surgery: an international prospective cohort study. Anaesthesia, 77(1), pp. 28-39. Association of Anaesthetists 10.1111/anae.15563 Anaesthesia, 77, 1, pp. 28-39 Anaesthesia, 77, 28-39
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394-424. GLOBOCAN 2018. Cervix uterino. [Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/23-Cervix-uteri-fact-sheet.pdf. Arbyn M, Weiderpass E, Bruni L, de Sanjosé S, Saraiya M, Ferlay J, et al. Estimates of incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in 2018: a worldwide analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(2):e191-e203. NCCN. Guidelines Version 1.2020 Cervical cancer. [Available from: Available: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/cervical.pdf. Ramirez PT, Slomovitz BM, Soliman PT, Coleman RL, Levenback C. Total laparoscopic radical hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy: the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. Gynecol Oncol. 2006;102(2):252-5. Wang YZ, Deng L, Xu HC, Zhang Y, Liang ZQ. Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage cervical cancer. BMC Cancer. 2015;15:928. Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, Lopez A, Vieira M, Ribeiro R, et al. Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(20):1895-904. Melamed A, Margul DJ, Chen L, Keating NL, Del Carmen MG, Yang J, et al. Survival after Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(20):1905-14. Cusimano MC, Baxter NN, Gien LT, Moineddin R, Liu N, Dossa F, et al. Impact of surgical approach on oncologic outcomes in women undergoing radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221(6):619.e1-.e24. Chen B, Ji M, Li P, Liu P, Zou W, Zhao Z, et al. Comparison between robot-assisted radical hysterectomy and abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer: A multicentre retrospective study. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157(2):429-36. Alfonzo E, Wallin E, Ekdahl L, Staf C, Rådestad AF, Reynisson P, et al. No survival difference between robotic and open radical hysterectomy for women with early-stage cervical cancer: results from a nationwide population-based cohort study. Eur J Cancer. 2019;116:169-77. Kim JH, Kim K, Park SJ, Lee JY, Lim MC, Kim JW. Comparative Effectiveness of Abdominal versus Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer in the Postdissemination Era. Cancer Res Treat. 2019;51(2):788-96. Kim SI, Cho JH, Seol A, Kim YI, Lee M, Kim HS, et al. Comparison of survival outcomes between minimally invasive surgery and conventional open surgery for radical hysterectomy as primary treatment in patients with stage IB1-IIA2 cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;153(1):3-12. Doo DW, Kirkland CT, Griswold LH, McGwin G, Huh WK, Leath CA, et al. Comparative outcomes between robotic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for IB1 cervical cancer: Results from a single high volume institution. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;153(2):242-7. Chen X, Zhao N, Ye P, Chen J, Nan X, Zhao H, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open radical hysterectomy in cervical cancer patients with tumor size ≤2 cm. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(5):564-71. Pedone Anchora L, Turco LC, Bizzarri N, Capozzi VA, Lombisani A, Chiantera V, et al. How to Select Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Patients Still Suitable for Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy: a Propensity-Matched Study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(6):1947-55. Kanno K, Andou M, Yanai S, Toeda M, Nimura R, Ichikawa F, et al. Long-term oncological outcomes of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer: A retrospective, single-institutional study in the wake of the LACC trial. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019;45(12):2425-34. Brandt B, Sioulas V, Basaran D, Kuhn T, LaVigne K, Gardner GJ, et al. Minimally invasive surgery versus laparotomy for radical hysterectomy in the management of early-stage cervical cancer: Survival outcomes. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;156(3):591-7. Matanes E, Abitbol J, Kessous R, Kogan L, Octeau D, Lau S, et al. Oncologic and Surgical Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019;41(4):450-8. Lim TYK, Lin KKM, Wong WL, Aggarwal IM, Yam PKL. Surgical and Oncological Outcome of Total Laparoscopic Radical Hysterectomy versus Radical Abdominal Hysterectomy in Early Cervical Cancer in Singapore. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2019;8(2):53-8. Hu TWY, Ming X, Yan HZ, Li ZY. Adverse effect of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy depends on tumor size in patients with cervical cancer. Cancer Manag Res. 2019;11:8249-55. Yuan Z, Cao D, Yang J, Yu M, Shen K, Zhang Y, et al. Laparoscopic vs. Open Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer: A Single-Institution, Propensity Score Matching Study in China. Front Oncol. 2019;9:1107. Paik ES, Lim MC, Kim MH, Kim YH, Song ES, Seong SJ, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy in early stage cervical cancer patients without adjuvant treatment: Ancillary analysis of a Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group Study (KGOG 1028). Gynecol Oncol. 2019;154(3):547-53. Kim SI, Lee M, Lee S, Suh DH, Kim HS, Kim K, et al. Impact of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy on survival outcome in patients with FIGO stage IB cervical cancer: A matching study of two institutional hospitals in Korea. Gynecol Oncol. 2019;155(1):75-82. Uppal S, Gehrig PA, Peng K, Bixel KL, Matsuo K, Vetter MH, et al. Recurrence Rates in Patients With Cervical Cancer Treated With Abdominal Versus Minimally Invasive Radical Hysterectomy: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Review Study. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(10):1030-40. Nitecki R, Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Krause KJ, Tergas AI, Wright JD, et al. Survival After Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Hysterectomy for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2020. Tantitamit T, Huang KG, Lee CL. Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in women with early stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;59(4):481-8. Vergote I, Magrina JF, Zanagnolo V, Magtibay PM, Butler K, Gil-Moreno A, et al. The LACC Trial and Minimally Invasive Surgery in Cervical Cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(2):462-3. Leitao MM. The LACC Trial: Has Minimally Invasive Surgery for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer Been Dealt a Knockout Punch? Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2018;28(7):1248-50. Nam JH, Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT. Laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: long-term survival outcomes in a matched cohort study. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(4):903-11. Wallin E, Flöter Rådestad A, Falconer H. Introduction of robot-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: impact on complications, costs and oncologic outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96(5):536-42. Bogani G, Cromi A, Uccella S, Serati M, Casarin J, Pinelli C, et al. Laparoscopic versus open abdominal management of cervical cancer: long-term results from a propensity-matched analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(5):857-62. Ditto A, Martinelli F, Bogani G, Gasparri ML, Di Donato V, Zanaboni F, et al. Implementation of laparoscopic approach for type B radical hysterectomy: a comparison with open surgical operations. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41(1):34-9. Shah CA, Beck T, Liao JB, Giannakopoulos NV, Veljovich D, Paley P. Surgical and oncologic outcomes after robotic radical hysterectomy as compared to open radical hysterectomy in the treatment of early cervical cancer. J Gynecol Oncol. 2017;28(6):e82. Park JY, Nam JH. How should gynecologic oncologists react to the unexpected results of LACC trial? J Gynecol Oncol. 2018;29(4):e74. Park JY, Kim DY, Kim JH, Kim YM, Kim YT, Nam JH. Outcomes after radical hysterectomy according to tumor size divided by 2-cm interval in patients with early cervical cancer. Ann Oncol. 2011;22(1):59-67. Gauthier T, Lacorre A, Sallee C, Tardieu A, Guyon F, Margueritte F, et al. [Impact of the LACC study. A SFOG survey]. Bull Cancer. 2020;107(5):551-5. Kesic V, Poljak M, Rogovskaya S. Cervical cancer burden and prevention activities in Europe. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21(9):1423-33. Murillo R, Herrero R, Sierra MS, Forman D. Cervical cancer in Central and South America: Burden of disease and status of disease control. Cancer Epidemiol. 2016;44 Suppl 1:S121-S30 Pardo C, Cendales R. Cancer incidence estimates and mortality for the top five cancer in Colombia, 2007-2011. Colomb Med (Cali). 2018;49(1):16-22. Marth C, Landoni F, Mahner S, McCormack M, Gonzalez-Martin A, Colombo N, et al. Cervical cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(suppl_4):iv72-iv83. Querleu D, Cibula D, Concin N, Fagotti A, Ferrero A, Fotopoulou C, et al. Laparoscopic radical hysterectomy: a European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) statement. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(1):15. Committee FGO. FIGO statement on minimally invasive surgery in cervical cancer. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149(3):264. ESMO Guidelines Committee. eUpdate-Cervical Cancer Treatment Recommendations, 2020. [Available from: https://www.esmo.org/guidelines/gynaecological-cancers/cervical-cancer/eupdate-cervical-cancer-treatment-recommendations. Taylor SE, McBee WC, Richard SD, Edwards RP. Radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: laparoscopy versus laparotomy. JSLS. 2011;15(2):213-7. He J, Hao M, Liu P, Liu Z, Lang J, Bin X, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer: oncologic outcomes based on tumor diameter. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020. Hu TWY, Huang Y, Li N, Nie D, Li Z. Comparison of laparoscopic versus open radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer: a multicenter study in China. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(8):1143-50. Chiva L, Zanagnolo V, Querleu D, Martin-Calvo N, Arévalo-Serrano J, Căpîlna ME, et al. SUCCOR study: an international European cohort observational study comparing minimally invasive surgery versus open abdominal radical hysterectomy in patients with stage IB1 cervical cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020. Falconer H, Palsdottir K, Stalberg K, Dahm-Kähler P, Ottander U, Lundin ES, et al. Robot-assisted approach to cervical cancer (RACC): an international multi-center, open-label randomized controlled trial. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2019;29(6):1072-6. Chao X, Li L, Wu M, Ma S, Tan X, Zhong S, et al. Efficacy of different surgical approaches in the clinical and survival outcomes of patients with early-stage cervical cancer: protocol of a phase III multicentre randomised controlled trial in China. BMJ Open. 2019;9(7):e029055. Austin PC, Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med. 2015;34(28):3661-79. Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983;70:41-55 Rosenbaum P, Rubin D. Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. J Am Stat Assoc 1984;79:516e24 Rosenbaum P. Model-based direct adjustment. J Am Stat Assoc. 1987;82:387–94. Lunt M. Selecting an appropriate caliper can be essential for achieving good balance with propensity score matching. Am J Epidemiol. 2014;179(2):226-35. Moulis G, Lapeyre-Mestre M. [Propensity score: Interests, use and limitations. A practical guide for clinicians]. Rev Med Interne. 2018;39(10):805-12. Williamson E, Morley R, Lucas A, Carpenter J. Propensity scores: from naive enthusiasm to intuitive understanding. Stat Methods Med Res. 2012;21(3):273-93. Ali MS, Groenwold RH, Belitser SV, Pestman WR, Hoes AW, Roes KC, et al. Reporting of covariate selection and balance assessment in propensity score analysis is suboptimal: a systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(2):112-21. Patorno E, Glynn RJ, Hernández-Díaz S, Liu J, Schneeweiss S. Studies with many covariates and few outcomes: selecting covariates and implementing propensity-score-based confounding adjustments. Epidemiology. 2014;25(2):268-78. Rubin D. Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1974;66:688–701 Imbens GW. Nonparametric estimation of average treatment effects under exogeneity: a review. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2004;86:4–29 Lunceford JK, Davidian M. Stratification and weighting via the propensity score in estimation of causal treatment effects: a comparative study. Stat Med. 2004;23(19):2937-60. Joffe MM, Ten Have TR, Feldman HI, SE. K. Model selection, confounder control, and marginal structural models:review and new applications. The American Statistician. 2004;58:272–9. Cole SR, Hernán MA. Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168(6):656-64. Lazcano-Ponce E, Fernández E, Salazar-Martínez E, Hernández-Avila M. Estudios de cohorte. Metodología, sesgos y aplicación. Salud Pública de México. 2000;42:230-41. Robins JM, Hernán MA, Brumback B. Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology. Epidemiology. 2000;11(5):550-60. Xie J, Liu C. Adjusted Kaplan-Meier estimator and log-rank test with inverse probability of treatment weighting for survival data. Stat Med. 2005;24(20):3089-110. Pareja R. Safety of minimally invasive radical hysterectomy in cervical tumors <2 cm. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(5):572-4. Pecorelli S. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the vulva, cervix, and endometrium. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;105(2):103-4. Salvo G, Odetto D, Saez Perrotta MC, Noll F, Perrotta M, Pareja R, et al. Measurement of tumor size in early cervical cancer: an ever-evolving paradigm. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(8):1215-23. Matsuo K, Shimada M, Yamaguchi S, Matoda M, Nakanishi T, Kikkawa F, et al. Association of Radical Hysterectomy Surgical Volume and Survival for Early-Stage Cervical Cancer. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(6):1086-98. Aviki EM, Chen L, Dessources K, Leitao MM, Wright JD. Impact of hospital volume on surgical management and outcomes for early-stage cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;157(2):508-13. Reiffel JA. Propensity Score Matching: The 'Devil is in the Details' Where More May Be Hidden than You Know. Am J Med. 2020;133(2):178-81. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. 1996. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;455:3-5. Repositorio EdocUR-U. Rosario Universidad del Rosario instacron:Universidad del Rosario
Revista Colombiana de Cancerologia, Revista Colombiana de Cancerologia, Revista Colombiana de Cancerología Repositorio EdocUR-U. Rosario Universidad del Rosario instacron:Universidad del Rosario