腹腔镜与阴道子宫骶韧带悬吊的meta分析。

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Ali Azadi MD, FACOG , Hollie Ulibarri BS , Amanda Arroyo BS , Daniela Gonzalez Herrera BS , Brooke Hamilton BS , Kate Ruffley BS , McKenna Robinson BS , Greg J. Marchand MD, FACS, FICS, FACOG
{"title":"腹腔镜与阴道子宫骶韧带悬吊的meta分析。","authors":"Ali Azadi MD, FACOG ,&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;Greg J. Marchand MD, FACS, FICS, FACOG","doi":"10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We set out to systematically evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy outcomes of laparoscopic and vaginal approaches in uterosacral suspension.</div></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We searched major databases using appropriate terms to find studies comparing laparoscopic (or robotic-assisted laparoscopic) versus vaginal techniques for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We searched from each database’s inception until January 01, 2024.</div></div><div><h3>Methods of Study Selection</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We included studies of patients undergoing POP surgery via either vaginal or laparoscopic routes, with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Ultimately, 9 studies met our criteria.</div></div><div><h3>Tabulation, Integration, and Results</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We conducted this meta-analysis utilizing Review Manager Software and OpenMeta [Analyst]. The laparoscopic group had a longer operative time (mean difference [MD] = 5.77 minutes, p = .02, <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 47%) and lower estimated blood loss (MD = –49.71 mL, p = .05, <em>I</em>² = 81%). The length of hospital stay was similar between groups (MD = –0.26 days, p = .28, <em>I</em>² = 97%). The recurrence rate of any POP was lower in the laparoscopic group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.53, p = .03, <em>I</em>² = 0%). There were no significant differences in anatomical success rate (RR = 1.06, p = .16, <em>I</em>² = 35%), dyspareunia (RR = 0.79 p = .5, <em>I</em>² = 0%), or postoperative POP quantification stages I (RR = 1.11, p = .31, <em>I</em>² = 60%), II (RR = 0.93, p = .77, <em>I</em>² = 0%), and III (RR = 0.54, p = .52, <em>I</em>² = 0%). Following subgroup analysis with only cases that did not include hysterectomy, the differences in operative time ([–3.26,9.77] [p = .11]; <em>I</em>² = 55%<strong>)</strong>, and estimated blood loss ([–55.75,7.66]) [p =.14]; <em>I</em>² = 54%) were no longer statistically significant.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both techniques proved effective. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (L-USLS) involved longer operative times and less blood loss than vaginal-USLS. Adjusting for concomitant hysterectomy eliminated differences in operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. Both methods showed similar hospital stay lengths, urinary tract infection rates, transfusion needs, reoperation rates, readmission rates, dyspareunia, and postoperative POP quantification stages. L-USLS displayed lower POP recurrence and urinary retention rates. While L-USLS may have advantages with hysterectomy, particularly in reduced blood loss, vaginal-USLS is also viable without hysterectomy. Due to study heterogeneity and lack of large randomized controlled trial data, more rigorous studies are essential to better define these surgical options.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","volume":"32 10","pages":"Pages 877-888"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension\",\"authors\":\"Ali Azadi MD, FACOG ,&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;Greg J. Marchand MD, FACS, FICS, FACOG\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmig.2025.07.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We set out to systematically evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy outcomes of laparoscopic and vaginal approaches in uterosacral suspension.</div></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We searched major databases using appropriate terms to find studies comparing laparoscopic (or robotic-assisted laparoscopic) versus vaginal techniques for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We searched from each database’s inception until January 01, 2024.</div></div><div><h3>Methods of Study Selection</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We included studies of patients undergoing POP surgery via either vaginal or laparoscopic routes, with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Ultimately, 9 studies met our criteria.</div></div><div><h3>Tabulation, Integration, and Results</h3><div><strong>:</strong> We conducted this meta-analysis utilizing Review Manager Software and OpenMeta [Analyst]. The laparoscopic group had a longer operative time (mean difference [MD] = 5.77 minutes, p = .02, <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 47%) and lower estimated blood loss (MD = –49.71 mL, p = .05, <em>I</em>² = 81%). The length of hospital stay was similar between groups (MD = –0.26 days, p = .28, <em>I</em>² = 97%). The recurrence rate of any POP was lower in the laparoscopic group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.53, p = .03, <em>I</em>² = 0%). There were no significant differences in anatomical success rate (RR = 1.06, p = .16, <em>I</em>² = 35%), dyspareunia (RR = 0.79 p = .5, <em>I</em>² = 0%), or postoperative POP quantification stages I (RR = 1.11, p = .31, <em>I</em>² = 60%), II (RR = 0.93, p = .77, <em>I</em>² = 0%), and III (RR = 0.54, p = .52, <em>I</em>² = 0%). Following subgroup analysis with only cases that did not include hysterectomy, the differences in operative time ([–3.26,9.77] [p = .11]; <em>I</em>² = 55%<strong>)</strong>, and estimated blood loss ([–55.75,7.66]) [p =.14]; <em>I</em>² = 54%) were no longer statistically significant.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both techniques proved effective. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (L-USLS) involved longer operative times and less blood loss than vaginal-USLS. Adjusting for concomitant hysterectomy eliminated differences in operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. Both methods showed similar hospital stay lengths, urinary tract infection rates, transfusion needs, reoperation rates, readmission rates, dyspareunia, and postoperative POP quantification stages. L-USLS displayed lower POP recurrence and urinary retention rates. While L-USLS may have advantages with hysterectomy, particularly in reduced blood loss, vaginal-USLS is also viable without hysterectomy. Due to study heterogeneity and lack of large randomized controlled trial data, more rigorous studies are essential to better define these surgical options.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology\",\"volume\":\"32 10\",\"pages\":\"Pages 877-888\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1553465025002249\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1553465025002249","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:我们开始系统地评估和比较腹腔镜和阴道入路在子宫骶骨悬吊术中的安全性和有效性。数据来源:我们检索了主要数据库,使用适当的术语来查找比较腹腔镜(或机器人辅助腹腔镜)和阴道技术修复盆腔器官脱垂(POP)的研究。我们从每个数据库开始搜索到2024年1月1日。研究方法选择:我们纳入了通过阴道或腹腔镜方式进行POP手术的患者,伴有或不伴有子宫切除术。最终有9项研究符合我们的标准。制表、整合和结果:我们利用Review Manager软件和OpenMeta [Analyst]进行了这项荟萃分析。腹腔镜组手术时间较长(Mean Difference (MD)=5.77min,P=0.02,I2 =47%),估计失血量较低(MD=-49.71 ml,P=0.05, I2 =81%)。两组患者住院时间相似(MD=-0.26天,P=0.28,I²=97%)。腹腔镜组所有POP复发率均低于腹腔镜组(RR =0.53,P=0.03,I²=0%)。解剖成功率(RR=1.06,P=0.16,I²=35%)、性交困难(RR=0.79 P=0.5,I²=0%)、术后POP-Q期I (RR=1.11,P=0.31,I²=60%)、II (RR=0.93,P=0.77,I²=0%)、III (RR=0.54,P=0.52,I²=0%)差异均无统计学意义。经亚组分析,仅不包括子宫切除术的病例,手术时间差异([-3.26,9.77](P =0.11);我²= 55%),估计失血([-55.75,7.66])(P = 0.14);I²=54%)不再具有统计学意义。结论:两种方法均有效。与V-USLS相比,L-USLS手术时间更长,出血量更少。调整合并子宫切除术消除了手术时间、出血量和住院时间的差异。两种方法的住院时间、尿路感染率、输血需求、再手术率、再入院率、性交困难和术后POP-Q分期相似。L-USLS显示较低的POP复发率和尿潴留率。虽然L-USLS可能具有子宫切除术的优势,特别是在减少失血方面,但V-USLS也可以不切除子宫。由于研究的异质性和缺乏大型RCT数据,需要更严格的研究来更好地确定这些手术选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Vaginal Uterosacral Ligament Suspension

Objective

: We set out to systematically evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy outcomes of laparoscopic and vaginal approaches in uterosacral suspension.

Data Sources

: We searched major databases using appropriate terms to find studies comparing laparoscopic (or robotic-assisted laparoscopic) versus vaginal techniques for the repair of pelvic organ prolapse (POP). We searched from each database’s inception until January 01, 2024.

Methods of Study Selection

: We included studies of patients undergoing POP surgery via either vaginal or laparoscopic routes, with or without concomitant hysterectomy. Ultimately, 9 studies met our criteria.

Tabulation, Integration, and Results

: We conducted this meta-analysis utilizing Review Manager Software and OpenMeta [Analyst]. The laparoscopic group had a longer operative time (mean difference [MD] = 5.77 minutes, p = .02, I2 = 47%) and lower estimated blood loss (MD = –49.71 mL, p = .05, I² = 81%). The length of hospital stay was similar between groups (MD = –0.26 days, p = .28, I² = 97%). The recurrence rate of any POP was lower in the laparoscopic group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.53, p = .03, I² = 0%). There were no significant differences in anatomical success rate (RR = 1.06, p = .16, I² = 35%), dyspareunia (RR = 0.79 p = .5, I² = 0%), or postoperative POP quantification stages I (RR = 1.11, p = .31, I² = 60%), II (RR = 0.93, p = .77, I² = 0%), and III (RR = 0.54, p = .52, I² = 0%). Following subgroup analysis with only cases that did not include hysterectomy, the differences in operative time ([–3.26,9.77] [p = .11]; I² = 55%), and estimated blood loss ([–55.75,7.66]) [p =.14]; I² = 54%) were no longer statistically significant.

Conclusion

Both techniques proved effective. Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (L-USLS) involved longer operative times and less blood loss than vaginal-USLS. Adjusting for concomitant hysterectomy eliminated differences in operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay. Both methods showed similar hospital stay lengths, urinary tract infection rates, transfusion needs, reoperation rates, readmission rates, dyspareunia, and postoperative POP quantification stages. L-USLS displayed lower POP recurrence and urinary retention rates. While L-USLS may have advantages with hysterectomy, particularly in reduced blood loss, vaginal-USLS is also viable without hysterectomy. Due to study heterogeneity and lack of large randomized controlled trial data, more rigorous studies are essential to better define these surgical options.
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
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
272
审稿时长
37 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, formerly titled The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, is an international clinical forum for the exchange and dissemination of ideas, findings and techniques relevant to gynecologic endoscopy and other minimally invasive procedures. The Journal, which presents research, clinical opinions and case reports from the brightest minds in gynecologic surgery, is an authoritative source informing practicing physicians of the latest, cutting-edge developments occurring in this emerging field.
×
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