ReviewOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2025
Giant borderline ovarian tumours - review of the literature.
Review in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Anesthesia management for a giant ovarian tumor complicated with heart failure: a case report.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Giant borderline ovarian tumours (GBOTs) are rare neoplasms that require meticulous management to prevent high-risk operative complications. The broader goal of this systematic review is to consolidate the existing knowledge on GBOTs by focusing on diagnostic approaches, differential diagnoses, and treatment strategies. Furthermore, the relationship between the clinical features of GBOTs and the types of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures implemented was determined. Materials and methods: The publications were analysed for the following data: histopathological type of GBOT; patient's age; dimensions, weight, and/or volume of the tumour; levels and types of tumour markers determined; types of imaging tests performed; type of treatment applied. Results: Twenty-one articles describing the clinical situation of 22 patients met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. The mean age of the patients included in the analysis was 46.68 years (SD: 19.1 years); the youngest patient was 12, and the oldest was 76 years of age. In the analysed literature, patients most often (81.8%) had the mucinous type of GBOT. In the vast majority of cases (86.36%), based on the analysed literature, the surgical treatment method for the patients was laparotomy. In more than half of the patients (54.55%), the uterus was removed during surgical treatment. In the analysed literature, the hysterectomy procedure was not performed in patients under 40 years of age. Based on the analysed literature, it was found that if the CA 125 concentration in the blood serum of patients with mucosal tumours exceeded 40 U/mL, laparoscopy was not performed and the patients were treated using an open approach. Conclusions: GBOTs are rare neoplasms that require meticulous management to prevent high-risk operative complications. Despite the diagnostic and therapeutic challenges posed by the large size and potential complications of these tumours, with proper medical care, patients can achieve successful outcomes and a good prognosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.