...
首页> 外文期刊>Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica: Official Publication of the Nordisk Forening for Obstetrik och Gynekologi >Uterine-sparing minimally invasive interventions in women with uterine fibroids: A systematic review and indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis
【24h】

Uterine-sparing minimally invasive interventions in women with uterine fibroids: A systematic review and indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis

机译:子宫肌瘤妇女保留子宫的微创干预:系统评价和间接治疗比较荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of uterine-sparing interventions for women with symptomatic uterine fibroids who wish to preserve their uterus. Design Systematic review and indirect comparison meta-analysis. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, conference proceedings, trial registers and reference lists were searched up to October 2013 for randomized controlled trials. Main outcome measures Outcome measures were patient satisfaction, re-intervention and complications rates, reproductive outcomes, and hospitalization and recovery times. Results Five trials, involving 436 women were included; two compared uterine artery embolization with myomectomy and three compared uterine artery embolization with laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion. Indirect treatment comparison showed that myomectomy and uterine artery embolization resulted in higher rates of patient satisfaction (odds ratio 2.56, 95% credible interval 0.56-11.75 and 2.7, 95% credible interval 1.1-7.14, respectively) and lower rates of clinical failure (odds ratio 0.29, 95% credible interval 0.06-1.46 and 0.37, 95% credible interval 0.13-0.93, respectively) than laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion. Myomectomy resulted in lower re-intervention rate than uterine artery embolization (odds ratio 0.08, 95% credible interval 0.02-0.27) and laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion (odds ratio 0.08, 95% credible interval 0.01-0.37) even though the latter techniques had an advantage over myomectomy because of shorter hospitalization and quicker recovery. There was no evidence of difference between the three techniques in ovarian failure and complications rates. The evidence for reproductive outcomes is poor. Conclusion Our study's results suggest that laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion is less effective than uterine artery embolization and myomectomy in treatment of symptomatic fibroids. The choice between uterine artery embolization and myomectomy should be based on individuals' expectations and fully informed discussion.
机译:目的评估保留子宫的干预措施对有症状的子宫肌瘤希望保留子宫的女性的有效性。设计系统审查和间接比较荟萃分析。方法检索截至2013年10月的MEDLINE,EMBASE,CENTRAL,会议记录,试验登记册和参考文献清单,以进行随机对照试验。主要结局指标结局指标为患者满意度,再次干预和并发症发生率,生殖结局以及住院和恢复时间。结果共纳入五项试验,涉及436名妇女;两个将子宫动脉栓塞术与子宫肌瘤切除术进行比较,三个将子宫动脉栓塞术与腹腔镜子宫动脉闭塞术进行了比较。间接治疗比较显示,子宫肌瘤切除术和子宫动脉栓塞术导致较高的患者满意度(赔率比为2.56,95%可信区间为0.56-11.75和2.7,95%可信区间为1.1-7.14)和较低的临床失败率(赔率比腹腔镜子宫动脉闭塞的比率分别为0.29、95%可信区间0.06-1.46和0.37、95%可信区间0.13-0.93)。子宫肌瘤切除术的再干预率低于子宫动脉栓塞术(奇数比0.08,95%可信区间0.02-0.27)和腹腔镜子宫动脉闭塞(奇数比0.08,95%可信区间0.01-0.37),尽管后者技术具有与子宫肌瘤切除术相比,其优势在于住院时间短,恢复快。没有证据表明这三种技术在卵巢衰竭和并发症发生率方面存在差异。生殖结果的证据不充分。结论我们的研究结果表明,腹腔镜子宫动脉闭塞术在治疗症状性肌瘤方面不如子宫动脉栓塞和子宫肌瘤切除术有效。子宫动脉栓塞术和子宫肌瘤切除术之间的选择应基于个人的期望和充分知情的讨论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号