单切口腹腔镜与常规腹腔镜在异位妊娠输卵管切除术或输卵管切开术中的非劣效性:一项荟萃分析。

Greg J. Marchand MD , Ahmed Massoud MD , Hollie Ulibarri BS , Amanda Arroyo BS , Daniela Gonzalez Herrera BS , Brooke Hamilton BS , Kate Ruffley BS , Mckenna Robinson BS , Marissa Dominick BS , Ali Azadi MD
{"title":"单切口腹腔镜与常规腹腔镜在异位妊娠输卵管切除术或输卵管切开术中的非劣效性:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Greg J. Marchand MD ,&nbsp;Ahmed Massoud MD ,&nbsp;Hollie Ulibarri BS ,&nbsp;Amanda Arroyo BS ,&nbsp;Daniela Gonzalez Herrera BS ,&nbsp;Brooke Hamilton BS ,&nbsp;Kate Ruffley BS ,&nbsp;Mckenna Robinson BS ,&nbsp;Marissa Dominick BS ,&nbsp;Ali Azadi MD","doi":"10.1016/j.xagr.2024.100435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>Ectopic pregnancy is an emergency frequently requiring laparoscopic intervention. This study aimed to determine whether single-incision laparoscopic surgery is a safe and effective treatment method compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery with multiple ports.</div></div><div><h3>DATA SOURCES</h3><div>This study searched 6 databases from their inception to May 15, 2024, for articles comparing the safety outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery with conventional laparoscopic surgery in managing women with ectopic pregnancy.</div></div><div><h3>STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA</h3><div>This study included all studies that evaluated the safety outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery in patients with ectopic pregnancy and included at least 1 of our preselected outcomes. In addition, this study included both randomized controlled trials and observational studies.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>Review Manager (version 5.4.1) and OpenMetaAnalyst software were used to analyze the extracted data. In addition, this study used odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes, mean difference for continuous outcomes, a fixed effects model for homogeneous outcomes, and a random effects model for heterogeneous outcomes. Furthermore, heterogeneity was evaluated using the <em>I<sup>2</sup></em> and <em>P</em> values. After removing duplicates, this study identified 83 studies. Using a 2-step screening process, this study excluded non-English and animal studies and included randomized controlled trials and observational studies that included at least 1 of our preselected outcomes. Ultimately, 12 studies were included in the final synthesis.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>Our analysis showed a significant favoring of the single-incision laparoscopic surgery group in the pain visual analog scale score (median difference=−0.57; <em>P</em>&lt;.01). However, our study found no statistically significant difference between both procedures in the times of analgesic use (median difference=−0.08; <em>P</em>=.19), intraoperative complications (odds ratio=1.17; <em>P</em>=.8), postoperative complications (odds ratio=1.02; <em>P</em>=.96), conversion to laparotomy (odds ratio=1.40; <em>P</em>=.59), bowel injury (odds ratio=1.42; <em>P</em>=.8), and postoperative fever (odds ratio=0.52; <em>P</em>=.42).</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSION</h3><div>The use of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for treating ectopic pregnancy may reduce postoperative pain with similar rates of analgesic use. The incidences of intraoperative and postoperative complications were comparable. Furthermore, the rates of conversion to laparotomy, bowel injury, and postoperative fever were similar between the 2 techniques. Our results seem to show that single-incision laparoscopic surgery is noninferior to conventional laparoscopic surgery for the safe treatment of ectopic pregnancy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72141,"journal":{"name":"AJOG global reports","volume":"5 1","pages":"Article 100435"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11773238/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Noninferiority of single-incision laparoscopy vs conventional laparoscopy in salpingectomy or salpingotomy for ectopic pregnancy: a meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Greg J. Marchand MD ,&nbsp;Ahmed Massoud MD ,&nbsp;Hollie Ulibarri BS ,&nbsp;Amanda Arroyo BS ,&nbsp;Daniela Gonzalez Herrera BS ,&nbsp;Brooke Hamilton BS ,&nbsp;Kate Ruffley BS ,&nbsp;Mckenna Robinson BS ,&nbsp;Marissa Dominick BS ,&nbsp;Ali Azadi MD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.xagr.2024.100435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>Ectopic pregnancy is an emergency frequently requiring laparoscopic intervention. This study aimed to determine whether single-incision laparoscopic surgery is a safe and effective treatment method compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery with multiple ports.</div></div><div><h3>DATA SOURCES</h3><div>This study searched 6 databases from their inception to May 15, 2024, for articles comparing the safety outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery with conventional laparoscopic surgery in managing women with ectopic pregnancy.</div></div><div><h3>STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA</h3><div>This study included all studies that evaluated the safety outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery in patients with ectopic pregnancy and included at least 1 of our preselected outcomes. In addition, this study included both randomized controlled trials and observational studies.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>Review Manager (version 5.4.1) and OpenMetaAnalyst software were used to analyze the extracted data. In addition, this study used odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes, mean difference for continuous outcomes, a fixed effects model for homogeneous outcomes, and a random effects model for heterogeneous outcomes. Furthermore, heterogeneity was evaluated using the <em>I<sup>2</sup></em> and <em>P</em> values. After removing duplicates, this study identified 83 studies. Using a 2-step screening process, this study excluded non-English and animal studies and included randomized controlled trials and observational studies that included at least 1 of our preselected outcomes. Ultimately, 12 studies were included in the final synthesis.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>Our analysis showed a significant favoring of the single-incision laparoscopic surgery group in the pain visual analog scale score (median difference=−0.57; <em>P</em>&lt;.01). However, our study found no statistically significant difference between both procedures in the times of analgesic use (median difference=−0.08; <em>P</em>=.19), intraoperative complications (odds ratio=1.17; <em>P</em>=.8), postoperative complications (odds ratio=1.02; <em>P</em>=.96), conversion to laparotomy (odds ratio=1.40; <em>P</em>=.59), bowel injury (odds ratio=1.42; <em>P</em>=.8), and postoperative fever (odds ratio=0.52; <em>P</em>=.42).</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSION</h3><div>The use of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for treating ectopic pregnancy may reduce postoperative pain with similar rates of analgesic use. The incidences of intraoperative and postoperative complications were comparable. Furthermore, the rates of conversion to laparotomy, bowel injury, and postoperative fever were similar between the 2 techniques. Our results seem to show that single-incision laparoscopic surgery is noninferior to conventional laparoscopic surgery for the safe treatment of ectopic pregnancy.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72141,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOG global reports\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100435\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11773238/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOG global reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666577824001291\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOG global reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666577824001291","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:异位妊娠是一种经常需要腹腔镜干预的急诊。本研究旨在确定单切口腹腔镜手术与常规多切口腹腔镜手术相比是否安全有效。资料来源:本研究检索了6个数据库,从建立之日起至2024年5月15日,检索了比较单切口腹腔镜手术与常规腹腔镜手术治疗异位妊娠安全性结局的文章。研究资格标准:本研究包括所有评估异位妊娠患者单切口腹腔镜手术与常规腹腔镜手术安全性结果的研究,并包括至少1个我们预先选择的结果。此外,本研究包括随机对照试验和观察性研究。方法:采用Review Manager (version 5.4.1)软件和OpenMetaAnalyst软件对提取的数据进行分析。此外,本研究对二分类结局采用优势比,对连续结局采用平均差异,对同质结局采用固定效应模型,对异质结局采用随机效应模型。此外,使用I2和P值评估异质性。在剔除重复项后,本研究确定了83项研究。采用两步筛选过程,本研究排除了非英语和动物研究,并纳入了随机对照试验和观察性研究,其中至少包括我们预先选择的1个结果。最终,12项研究被纳入最终的综合。结果:我们的分析显示,单切口腹腔镜手术组在疼痛视觉模拟量表评分上明显有利(中位数差=-0.57;PP= 0.19),术中并发症(优势比=1.17;P= 0.8),术后并发症(优势比=1.02;P= 0.96),转为剖腹手术(优势比=1.40;P= 0.59),肠损伤(优势比=1.42;P= 0.8),术后发热(优势比=0.52;P =点)。结论:采用单切口腹腔镜手术治疗异位妊娠可减轻术后疼痛,且镇痛药使用率相近。术中、术后并发症发生率比较。此外,两种技术之间转换为剖腹手术、肠损伤和术后发热的比率相似。我们的结果似乎表明,单切口腹腔镜手术是不逊色于传统腹腔镜手术的安全治疗异位妊娠。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Noninferiority of single-incision laparoscopy vs conventional laparoscopy in salpingectomy or salpingotomy for ectopic pregnancy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Ectopic pregnancy is an emergency frequently requiring laparoscopic intervention. This study aimed to determine whether single-incision laparoscopic surgery is a safe and effective treatment method compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery with multiple ports.

DATA SOURCES

This study searched 6 databases from their inception to May 15, 2024, for articles comparing the safety outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery with conventional laparoscopic surgery in managing women with ectopic pregnancy.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

This study included all studies that evaluated the safety outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery in patients with ectopic pregnancy and included at least 1 of our preselected outcomes. In addition, this study included both randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

METHODS

Review Manager (version 5.4.1) and OpenMetaAnalyst software were used to analyze the extracted data. In addition, this study used odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes, mean difference for continuous outcomes, a fixed effects model for homogeneous outcomes, and a random effects model for heterogeneous outcomes. Furthermore, heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 and P values. After removing duplicates, this study identified 83 studies. Using a 2-step screening process, this study excluded non-English and animal studies and included randomized controlled trials and observational studies that included at least 1 of our preselected outcomes. Ultimately, 12 studies were included in the final synthesis.

RESULTS

Our analysis showed a significant favoring of the single-incision laparoscopic surgery group in the pain visual analog scale score (median difference=−0.57; P<.01). However, our study found no statistically significant difference between both procedures in the times of analgesic use (median difference=−0.08; P=.19), intraoperative complications (odds ratio=1.17; P=.8), postoperative complications (odds ratio=1.02; P=.96), conversion to laparotomy (odds ratio=1.40; P=.59), bowel injury (odds ratio=1.42; P=.8), and postoperative fever (odds ratio=0.52; P=.42).

CONCLUSION

The use of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for treating ectopic pregnancy may reduce postoperative pain with similar rates of analgesic use. The incidences of intraoperative and postoperative complications were comparable. Furthermore, the rates of conversion to laparotomy, bowel injury, and postoperative fever were similar between the 2 techniques. Our results seem to show that single-incision laparoscopic surgery is noninferior to conventional laparoscopic surgery for the safe treatment of ectopic pregnancy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AJOG global reports
AJOG global reports Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women's Health, Perinatology, Pediatrics and Child Health, Urology
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信