Robert Magali, Soraisham Amuchou, Sauve Reg
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Mar;198(3):264.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.09.033. Epub 2008 Jan 15.
A metaanalysis of randomized trials was conducted to evaluate if the type of hysterectomy, total abdominal hysterectomy or supracervical hysterectomy, has an impact on the development of urinary incontinence.
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Biological Abstract, and the Cochrane Library up to February 2007; abstracts at major meetings and bibliographies of retrieved articles were scanned. A fixed effect model was used to calculate summary relative risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Analysis showed no statistical difference in the risk of developing stress or urge urinary incontinence in women who underwent supracervical hysterectomy compared with women who underwent total abdominal hysterectomy (relative risk, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.94-1.78; P = 0.16 and relative risk, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.77-2.46; P = .25).
There is no statistical evidence of a different risk for developing either stress or urge urinary incontinence after a supracervical hysterectomy or a total hysterectomy.
进行一项随机试验的荟萃分析，以评估子宫切除术的类型（全腹子宫切除术或次全子宫切除术）是否对尿失禁的发生有影响。
我们检索了截至2007年2月的MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、生物学文摘和Cochrane图书馆；扫描了主要会议的摘要和检索文章的参考文献。采用固定效应模型计算汇总相对风险估计值和95%置信区间（CI）。
分析显示，接受次全子宫切除术的女性与接受全腹子宫切除术的女性相比，发生压力性或急迫性尿失禁的风险无统计学差异（相对风险，1.3；95%CI，0.94 - 1.78；P = 0.16；相对风险，1.37；95%CI，0.77 - 2.46；P = 0.25）。
没有统计学证据表明次全子宫切除术或全子宫切除术后发生压力性或急迫性尿失禁的风险存在差异。
Zotero 插件