Guan Meijun, Li Hui, Tian Tian, Peng Jirong, Huang Yan, He Li
Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, School of Medicine University of Electronic Science and Technology of China Chengdu China.
Health Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 3;7(11):e70137. doi: 10.1002/hsr2.70137. eCollection 2024 Nov.
This network meta-analysis aimed to compare the perioperative efficacy of various minimally invasive hysterectomy procedures for treating benign gynecological diseases and to assess whether vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic hysterectomy (VNOTEH), a recently emerging procedure, is inferior to traditional laparoscopy.
We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Biology Medicine disc (CBM), Wanfang Data, and China VIP Database from inception to August 2022 and updated in June 2023. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different minimally invasive hysterectomy techniques in patients with benign gynecological conditions. The intervention measures included nine minimally invasive hysterectomies. The two researchers used the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool for study appraisal. All statistical analyses and drawings were performed using STATA 17.0 and R 4.4.1. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the effectiveness of minimally invasive hysterectomy and rank its relative impact probabilistically.
A total of 78 RCTs involving 7640 patients and nine minimally invasive hysterectomy methods with 16 intervention combinations were included in this study. Among these, 2, 63, and 13 studies were deemed to have a low, medium, and high risk of bias, respectively. Based on the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) probability ranking results of NMA, laparoendoscopic single-site surgery-laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy (LESS-LAVH) demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of complications, infections, and 24-h postoperative pain scores. LAVH exhibited better performance in injuries and hospital stays, total laparoscopic hysterectomy showed the least blood loss, and vaginal hysterectomy had the shortest operation time.
LESS-LAVH and LAVH are recommended options, if feasible. Meanwhile, VNOTEH can achieve comparable results to traditional laparoscopy but requires careful attention to the risk of injury and infection. Future research should aim to broaden the search scope by including high-quality, large-scale, multicenter RCTs.
本网络荟萃分析旨在比较各种微创子宫切除术治疗良性妇科疾病的围手术期疗效,并评估最近出现的经阴道自然腔道内镜手术(VNOTEH)是否逊于传统腹腔镜手术。
我们检索了从建库至2022年8月并于2023年6月更新的PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Embase、中国知网(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、万方数据和维普数据库。我们纳入了比较不同微创子宫切除术技术治疗良性妇科疾病患者的随机对照试验(RCT)。干预措施包括九种微创子宫切除术。两位研究人员使用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具进行研究评估。所有统计分析和绘图均使用STATA 17.0和R 4.4.1进行。进行网络荟萃分析(NMA)以比较微创子宫切除术的有效性并概率性地对其相对影响进行排名。
本研究共纳入78项RCT,涉及7640例患者以及9种微创子宫切除术方法和16种干预组合。其中,分别有2项、63项和13项研究被认为具有低、中、高偏倚风险。基于NMA的累积排序曲线下面积(SUCRA)概率排名结果,单孔腹腔镜手术-腹腔镜辅助阴式子宫切除术(LESS-LAVH)在并发症、感染和术后24小时疼痛评分方面显示出更好的结果。LAVH在损伤和住院时间方面表现更佳,全腹腔镜子宫切除术失血最少,阴式子宫切除术手术时间最短。
如果可行,推荐选择LESS-LAVH和LAVH。同时,VNOTEH可取得与传统腹腔镜手术相当的结果,但需要密切关注损伤和感染风险。未来的研究应旨在通过纳入高质量、大规模、多中心RCT来扩大搜索范围。