阴道自然腔内窥镜手术与腹腔镜单部位手术良性子宫切除术的疗效比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 1.4 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT Pub Date : 2023-09-07 eCollection Date: 2023-10-01 DOI:10.4103/gmit.gmit_88_22
Avir Sarkar, P Sivaranjani, Rinchen Zangmo, Kallol Kumar Roy, Maninder Kaur Ghotra, Radha Rani Seelam, Shivam Pandey
{"title":"阴道自然腔内窥镜手术与腹腔镜单部位手术良性子宫切除术的疗效比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Avir Sarkar, P Sivaranjani, Rinchen Zangmo, Kallol Kumar Roy, Maninder Kaur Ghotra, Radha Rani Seelam, Shivam Pandey","doi":"10.4103/gmit.gmit_88_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Gradually increasing interest in laparoscopic surgeries has led to the advent of various lesser invasive techniques in the form of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) and laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery. Very few studies have analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of vNOTES over LESS surgeries in hysterectomy. After a comprehensive search, full texts of relevant manuscripts were obtained to assess eligibility for recruitment. A comprehensive meta-analysis was subsequently performed to compare the outcomes of vNOTES and LESS in hysterectomy, and forest plots were constructed. Four articles were rendered for review (three retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial). Three studies showed lesser postoperative pain in vNOTES compared to LESS. In one study, postoperative vaginal pain was higher in vNOTES due to additional suture between uterine artery and vaginal wall. The meta-analysis concluded that vNOTES could be better alternative to LESS hysterectomies. However, further large multicentric randomized trials are required for the standardization of the surgical method.</p>","PeriodicalId":45272,"journal":{"name":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","volume":"12 1","pages":"195-202"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10683960/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Outcomes following Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery and Laparoendoscopic Single-site Surgery in Benign Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Avir Sarkar, P Sivaranjani, Rinchen Zangmo, Kallol Kumar Roy, Maninder Kaur Ghotra, Radha Rani Seelam, Shivam Pandey\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/gmit.gmit_88_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Gradually increasing interest in laparoscopic surgeries has led to the advent of various lesser invasive techniques in the form of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) and laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery. Very few studies have analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of vNOTES over LESS surgeries in hysterectomy. After a comprehensive search, full texts of relevant manuscripts were obtained to assess eligibility for recruitment. A comprehensive meta-analysis was subsequently performed to compare the outcomes of vNOTES and LESS in hysterectomy, and forest plots were constructed. Four articles were rendered for review (three retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial). Three studies showed lesser postoperative pain in vNOTES compared to LESS. In one study, postoperative vaginal pain was higher in vNOTES due to additional suture between uterine artery and vaginal wall. The meta-analysis concluded that vNOTES could be better alternative to LESS hysterectomies. However, further large multicentric randomized trials are required for the standardization of the surgical method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"195-202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10683960/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_88_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/gmit.gmit_88_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对腹腔镜手术的兴趣逐渐增加,导致了各种微创技术的出现,如阴道自然孔腔内内镜手术(vNOTES)和腹腔镜单点手术(LESS)。很少有研究分析子宫切除术中vNOTES与LESS手术的优缺点。经过全面搜索,获得了相关手稿的全文,以评估招募资格。随后进行了全面的荟萃分析,比较了vNOTES和LESS在子宫切除术中的结果,并构建了森林图。四篇文章纳入综述(三篇回顾性队列研究和一篇随机对照试验)。三项研究显示,与LESS相比,vNOTES的术后疼痛更少。在一项研究中,由于子宫动脉和阴道壁之间的额外缝合,vNOTES术后阴道疼痛更高。荟萃分析得出结论,vNOTES可能是LESS子宫切除术的更好选择。然而,需要进一步的大型多中心随机试验来标准化手术方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Outcomes following Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery and Laparoendoscopic Single-site Surgery in Benign Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Gradually increasing interest in laparoscopic surgeries has led to the advent of various lesser invasive techniques in the form of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) and laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery. Very few studies have analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of vNOTES over LESS surgeries in hysterectomy. After a comprehensive search, full texts of relevant manuscripts were obtained to assess eligibility for recruitment. A comprehensive meta-analysis was subsequently performed to compare the outcomes of vNOTES and LESS in hysterectomy, and forest plots were constructed. Four articles were rendered for review (three retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial). Three studies showed lesser postoperative pain in vNOTES compared to LESS. In one study, postoperative vaginal pain was higher in vNOTES due to additional suture between uterine artery and vaginal wall. The meta-analysis concluded that vNOTES could be better alternative to LESS hysterectomies. However, further large multicentric randomized trials are required for the standardization of the surgical method.

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
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信