Suppr超能文献

腹腔镜和机器人辅助子宫切除术阴道边缘裂开的发生率和预防:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Incidence and Prevention of Vaginal Cuff Dehiscence after Laparoscopic and Robotic Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy (Drs. Uccella and Zorzato).

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Verona, Verona, Italy (Drs. Uccella and Zorzato).

出版信息

J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021 Mar;28(3):710-720. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2020.12.016. Epub 2021 Jan 5.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Vaginal cuff dehiscence, a severe and potentially detrimental complication, has significantly increased after the introduction of endoscopic hysterectomy. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature was to identify the incidence of, and possible strategies to prevent, this complication after total laparoscopic hysterectomy and total robotic hysterectomy.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were systematically queried to identify all articles reporting either laparoscopic or robot-assisted hysterectomies for benign indications in which vaginal dehiscence was reported as an outcome. Reference lists of the identified studies were manually searched. Only papers written in English were considered.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

The Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework for the review included (1) population of interest: women who underwent conventional and robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy; (2) interventions: possible methods to prevent vaginal dehiscence; (3) comparison: experimental strategies vs standard treatment or alternative strategy for each item of intervention; and (4) outcome: rate of vaginal dehiscence. Series of subtotal hysterectomies and radical hysterectomies in addition to reports that combined both benign and malignant cases were excluded. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan version 5.4.1 (Cochrane Training, London, United Kingdom). Two independent reviewers identified all reports comparing 2 or more possible strategies to prevent vaginal dehiscence.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: A total of 460 articles were identified. Of these, 20 (6 randomized, 2 prospective, and 12 retrospective) studies were included in this review for a total of 19 392 patients. The incidence of vaginal dehiscence after total laparoscopic hysterectomy ranged between 0.64% and 1.35%. Robotic hysterectomy was associated with a risk of vaginal dehiscence of approximately 1.64%. No study compared early vs delayed resumption of coital activity nor analyzed the role of training in laparoscopic suturing. No study specifically assessed the impact of electrosurgery on the risk of vaginal dehiscence in endoscopic hysterectomies for benign indications. Double-layer and reinforced sutures did not decrease the risk of dehiscence. Barbed sutures reduced the risk of separation compared with nonbarbed closure (0.4% [4/1108] vs 2% [22/1097]; odds ratio [OR] 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11-0.57). However, these data came mainly from retrospective series. Excluding studies on the use of self-anchoring sutures during robotic hysterectomy, there was no significant difference in the risk of dehiscence between barbed and nonbarbed sutures (0.5% [4/890] vs 1.4% [181/776]; OR 0.38; 95% CI, 0.13-1.10). Transvaginal suture of the vault at the end of an endoscopic hysterectomy seemed to increase the risk of dehiscence when compared with laparoscopic closure (2.3% [23/1002] vs 1.16% [11/944]; OR 1.97; 95% CI, 1.00-3.88).

CONCLUSION

There is a paucity of high-quality papers evaluating vaginal dehiscence and possible prevention strategies in the current literature. Only 2 effective strategies have been identified in reducing the risk for this complication: the use of barbed sutures and the adoption of a laparoscopic approach to close the vaginal cuff. When restricting the analysis only to laparoscopic cases, the use of barbed sutures does not protect against vaginal cuff separation.

摘要

目的

阴道残端裂开是一种严重且潜在有害的并发症,在引入内镜子宫切除术之后显著增加。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在确定全腹腔镜子宫切除术和全机器人子宫切除术后这种并发症的发生率,并确定可能的预防策略。

数据来源

通过系统检索 PubMed、ClinicalTrials.gov、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库,以识别报告良性适应证的腹腔镜或机器人辅助子宫切除术且阴道残端裂开作为结局的所有文章。手动搜索已确定研究的参考文献列表。仅考虑以英文撰写的论文。

研究选择方法

综述的人群、干预、比较和结局框架包括:(1)感兴趣的人群:接受常规和机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术的女性;(2)干预措施:预防阴道残端裂开的可能方法;(3)比较:每种干预措施的标准治疗或替代策略的实验策略;(4)结局:阴道残端裂开的发生率。排除了一系列次全子宫切除术和根治性子宫切除术以及将良性和恶性病例合并的报告。使用 RevMan 版本 5.4.1(Cochrane 培训,英国伦敦)进行荟萃分析。两位独立的审查员确定了所有比较 2 种或更多可能预防阴道残端裂开策略的报告。

表格、整合和结果:共确定了 460 篇文章。其中,20 篇(6 篇随机、2 篇前瞻性和 12 篇回顾性)研究纳入了本次综述,共纳入 19392 例患者。全腹腔镜子宫切除术后阴道残端裂开的发生率在 0.64%至 1.35%之间。机器人子宫切除术与阴道残端裂开的风险约为 1.64%相关。没有研究比较过早与延迟恢复性生活,也没有分析腹腔镜缝合训练的作用。没有研究专门评估电外科对良性适应证内镜子宫切除术阴道残端裂开风险的影响。双层和加强缝线并不能降低裂开的风险。带倒钩缝线与非带倒钩缝线相比降低了分离的风险(0.4%[1108 例中的 4 例]与 2%[1097 例中的 22 例];比值比[OR]0.25;95%置信区间[CI]0.11-0.57)。然而,这些数据主要来自回顾性系列。排除在机器人子宫切除术中使用自固定缝线的研究后,带倒钩缝线与非带倒钩缝线之间阴道残端裂开的风险无显著差异(0.5%[890 例中的 4 例]与 1.4%[776 例中的 181 例];OR 0.38;95%CI 0.13-1.10)。与腹腔镜关闭相比,阴道残端内镜子宫切除术结束时经阴道缝合似乎增加了裂开的风险(2.3%[1002 例中的 23 例]与 1.16%[944 例中的 11 例];OR 1.97;95%CI 1.00-3.88)。

结论

目前文献中评估阴道残端裂开和可能的预防策略的高质量论文很少。仅确定了 2 种减少这种并发症风险的有效策略:使用带倒钩缝线和采用腹腔镜方法关闭阴道残端。当仅对腹腔镜病例进行分析时,使用带倒钩缝线并不能预防阴道残端裂开。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验