Effect of different surgical techniques on postoperative wound infection in patients with uterine prolapse: A meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractThe assumption is that a number of controlled trials have been conducted to assess the impact of uterus retaining or hysterectomy on wound and haemorrhage, but there is no indication as to which method would be more beneficial for wound healing. This research is intended to provide a comprehensive overview of the availability of wound healing in case studies of both operative methods. From inception to October 2023, four databases were reviewed. The odds ratio (OR) and the mean difference (MD) for both groups were computed with a random effect model, as well as the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. A total of five studies were carried out in the overall design and enrolled 16 972 patients. No statistical significance was found in the rate of postoperative wound infection among the two treatments (OR,1.46; 95% CI,0.66,3.22 p = 0.35); The rates of bleeding after surgery did not differ significantly from one procedure to another (OR,1.41; 95% CI,0.91,2.17 p = 0.12); two studies demonstrated no statistical significance for the rate of incisional hernia after surgery (OR,2.58; 95% CI,0.37,18.05 p = 0.34). Our findings indicate that there is a similar risk between uterine preservation and hysterectomies for the incidence of wound infection, haemorrhage and protrusion of incision.