Prognostic Value of Pleural Lavage Cytology in Patients with Lung Cancer Resection: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Chun-Mei Wang, Zhou-Gui Ling, Yan-Bin Wu, Shuang-Qi Cai, Zhen-Ming Tang, Cong Wu and Yi-Qiang Chen

PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, issue 7, 1-17

Abstract: Objective: Pleural lavage cytology (PLC) is considered as a possible tool for assessing prognosis of lung cancer patients. We aimed to comprehensively review the prognosis value of PLC in patients undergoing surgical resection. Methods: We searched 4 electronic databases for relevant studies comparing positive PLC and negative PLC. The primary outcomes included survival rate and recurrence rate at maximum follow-up. Results: The meta-analysis included 28 studies, with a total of 20,714 patients. For the overall survival rate of all stages, the results demonstrated that positive pre-resection, post-resection and pooled PLC were associated with unfavorable survival: hazard ratio (HR) 2.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.48–3.37), 2.70 (1.90–3.83), and 2.89 (2.52–3.31), respectively. For the stage I survival rate, the combined results also suggested that positive pre-resection, post-resection and pooled PLC were associated with unfavorable survival: HR 3.29 (95% CI 2.55–4.25), 4.85 (2.31–10.20), and 3.16 (2.53–3.94), respectively. Furthermore, a meta-analysis of 14 studies included 14,279 patients showed that positive pre-resection, post-resection and pooled PLC were associated with an increased risk of overall recurrence: risk ratio (RR) 2.45 (95% CI 1.91–3.15), 2.37 (1.11–5.09), and 2.37 (95% CI 2.00–2.80), respectively. Positive PLC was also associated with a high pleural recurrence (RR 4.77; 95% CI 3.13–7.26) or distant recurrence (RR 2.33; 95% CI 1.65–3.29). Conclusions: Both positive pre- resection and post-resection PLC are associated with not only higher tumor recurrence but also unfavorable survival outcomes in patients with lung cancer resection. This technique can therefore act as a strong prognostic factor for tumor recurrence and adverse survival rates.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0157518 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 57518&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0157518

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157518

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().