Laparoscopic Assisted Vaginal Hysterectomy Verses Abdominal Hysterectomy: A systematic review and metanalysis

Author:

Menshawey EsraaORCID,Menshawey RahmaORCID

Abstract

AbstractOBJECTIVETo examine studies that explored the differences between laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LAVH) and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH) in endometrial cancer (EC) patients, and to determine which surgical intervention has better outcomes.DATA SOURCESElectronic search of the following databases was performed; Google Scholar, PubMed/Medline, Wiley, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and EBSCO Host.METHODS of STUDY SELECTIONAll full English articles in the form of randomized controlled trials (RCT), prospective cohort (PC), and retrospective cohort (RC) comparing LAVH and TAH outcomes in endometrial cancer patients was included in this study. A complete search of the literature comparing the outcomes of LAVH and AH in EC patients. This study was registered in PROSPERO [ID: CRD42021225509] and follows PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Outcomes included length of hospital stay, surgical duration, complications, blood transfusion requirements, and blood loss.TABULATIONROBINS-1, ROB 2.0, and ROBVIS was used to assess the risk of bias. Statistical tests used included relative risk (RR) for dichotomous and standard mean difference (SMD) for continuous variable. A P value less than 0.05 was considered significant. A forest plot was used to visually demonstrate the analyses for all outcomes.INTEGRATION and RESULTSA total of 13 articles (total cohort n=14,803) were included in the systematic review and metanalysis. The total cohort for LAVH patients was n=1845 and n=12,958 for TAH. Patients who underwent a TAH had significantly higher risk of complications [RR = 0.547, p<0.001], greater risk for blood transfusion [RR = 0.349, p<0.033], more blood loss [SMD = −3.256, p<0.001], and longer hospital stay [SMD = −1.351, p<0.001]. LAVH patients had longer operating time [SMD= 1.103, p<0.001] compared TAH patients.CONCLUSIONLAVH presented with lower of hospital stay, complications, amount of blood loss, and blood transfusion requirements when compared to TAH. LAVH in the appropriate setting and skills may be a safer alternative than TAH.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference17 articles.

1. Kunle Odunsi (2022) How is Immunotherapy for Uterine Cancer Changing the Outlook for Patients? In: Cancer Research Institue

2. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

3. Retrospective cohort studies: advantages and disadvantages;BMJ (online),2014

4. Laparoscopic Versus Abdominal Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer: Comparison of Patient Outcomes;International Journal of Gynecologic Cancer,2009

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3