Outcome After Laparoscopic Compared to Open Interval Debulking Surgery for Advanced Stage Ovarian Cancer: A...

Background/Objectives: This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the oncological safety and outcomes of minimally invasive versus open interval debulking surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer, addressing whether laparoscopy represents a safe alternative to the standard open procedure. Methods: The Ovid/Medline, Pubmed, and Cochrane databases were systematically screened for studies investigating surgical resection status and/or patient survival after laparotomy compared to minimally invasive interval debulking surgery for FIGO stage III-IV ovarian cancer. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model and risk of bias was assessed. Results: Overall, 14 observational and randomized studies published between 2015 and 2024 with a total of 16,578 patients (4310 laparoscopy and 12,268 laparotomy) were included. A complete cytoreduction to no visible tumour was achieved significantly more often after minimally invasive surgery compared to laparotomy (RR = 1.12; 95% CI [1.01, 1.23]; p = 0.03). Overall survival showed no significant difference between the two groups (HR = 0.81; 95%CI [0.64, 1.04]); progression-free survival was significantly more common after laparoscopy (HR = 0.67; 95% CI [0.48, 0.94]; p = 0.02; I² = 55%; p = 0.07). Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery experienced significantly fewer postoperative complications (RR = 0.50; 95% CI [0.33, 0.76]; p ≤ 0.001), a lower mean blood loss (165 mL vs. 325 mL; SMD -0.58, 95% CI [-0.82, -0.35]; p ≤ 0.001), a shorter mean hospital stay (3 days vs. 5 days; SMD -0.79, 95% CI [-1.06, -0.52], p ≤ 0.001), and a faster initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy (mean 25 ± 32 days vs. 33 ± 28 days). Conclusions: This study indicates that laparoscopic interval debulking surgery is an oncologically safe alternative in selected patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancer. However, randomized controlled trials should confirm these findings as certainty of evidence is low and residual confounding cannot be excluded. Trial registration: PROSPERO Identifier CRD42024524725.