Unilateral or Bilateral Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.

IF 1.7 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT Pub Date : 2024-12-12 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.4103/gmit.gmit_89_23
Faezeh Zakerinasab, Qumars Behfar, Taif Haitham Al Saraireh, Mahdyieh Naziri, Shirin Yaghoobpoor, Niloofar Deravi, Reza Khademi, Fariba Arbab Mojeni
{"title":"Unilateral or Bilateral Laparoscopic Ovarian Drilling in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials.","authors":"Faezeh Zakerinasab, Qumars Behfar, Taif Haitham Al Saraireh, Mahdyieh Naziri, Shirin Yaghoobpoor, Niloofar Deravi, Reza Khademi, Fariba Arbab Mojeni","doi":"10.4103/gmit.gmit_89_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>On the first line of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) treatment, ovulation with clomiphene citrate (CC) is induced. However, 25% of patients need alternative therapy. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) can result in successive ovulations and is not linked to ovarian hyperstimulation. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to consider the efficacy of unilateral LOD (ULOD) versus bilateral LOD (BLOD) for enhancing fertility and improving fertility outcomes in women with CC-resistant.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted up to July 15, 2023, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases. Thirteen articles were included in the meta-analysis. After data extraction, we performed a meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As the main unit of analysis for each variable, the standardized mean difference was used between the two groups. The random effects model was used for analysis and heterogeneity was assessed by <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistics. Publication bias was inspected through funnel plots and Begg's and Egger's regression tests. The included studies were divided into two general categories. In the first category, surgical treatment of LOD was compared with other treatments. Whereas, in the other category, ULOD was compared with BLOD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary, this meta-analysis did not find a significant difference in the rate of ovulation, pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth between the two groups. However, LOD could cause damage to the ovarian reserve, but it has long-term effects on improving the menstrual cycle and reproduction. In general, LOD is a significant method for the treatment of infertility in PCOS, which needs further investigation.</p>","PeriodicalId":45272,"journal":{"name":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","volume":"14 1","pages":"14-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11936394/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/gmit.gmit_89_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: On the first line of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) treatment, ovulation with clomiphene citrate (CC) is induced. However, 25% of patients need alternative therapy. Laparoscopic ovarian drilling (LOD) can result in successive ovulations and is not linked to ovarian hyperstimulation. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to consider the efficacy of unilateral LOD (ULOD) versus bilateral LOD (BLOD) for enhancing fertility and improving fertility outcomes in women with CC-resistant.

Materials and methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted up to July 15, 2023, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases. Thirteen articles were included in the meta-analysis. After data extraction, we performed a meta-analysis.

Results: As the main unit of analysis for each variable, the standardized mean difference was used between the two groups. The random effects model was used for analysis and heterogeneity was assessed by I 2 statistics. Publication bias was inspected through funnel plots and Begg's and Egger's regression tests. The included studies were divided into two general categories. In the first category, surgical treatment of LOD was compared with other treatments. Whereas, in the other category, ULOD was compared with BLOD.

Conclusion: In summary, this meta-analysis did not find a significant difference in the rate of ovulation, pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth between the two groups. However, LOD could cause damage to the ovarian reserve, but it has long-term effects on improving the menstrual cycle and reproduction. In general, LOD is a significant method for the treatment of infertility in PCOS, which needs further investigation.

多囊卵巢综合征的单侧或双侧腹腔镜卵巢钻孔:随机试验的荟萃分析。
目的:在治疗多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)的第一线,应用枸橼酸克罗米芬(CC)诱导排卵。然而,25%的患者需要替代疗法。腹腔镜卵巢钻孔(LOD)可导致连续排卵,与卵巢过度刺激无关。在这项系统回顾和荟萃分析中,我们旨在考虑单侧LOD (ULOD)与双侧LOD (BLOD)在提高cc耐药女性生育能力和改善生育结局方面的疗效。材料和方法:在PubMed、Scopus、谷歌Scholar和Cochrane Library数据库中检索截至2023年7月15日的相关随机对照试验,进行全面的文献检索。13篇文章被纳入meta分析。数据提取后,我们进行meta分析。结果:两组间采用标准化均差作为各变量的主要分析单位。采用随机效应模型进行分析,采用i2统计量评价异质性。通过漏斗图和Begg’s和Egger’s回归检验检验发表偏倚。纳入的研究分为两大类。在第一类中,将LOD的手术治疗与其他治疗进行比较。然而,在另一个类别中,ULOD与BLOD进行比较。结论:综上所述,本荟萃分析未发现两组在排卵率、妊娠率、流产率和活产率方面存在显著差异。然而,LOD可能会对卵巢储备造成损害,但它对改善月经周期和生殖有长期影响。总的来说,LOD是治疗PCOS不孕的重要方法,有待进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
98
审稿时长
52 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信