Litcius/Paper detail

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Hysterectomy by Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (vNOTES) Compared to Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for Benign Indications

Susanne Housmans, Nargis Noori, Supuni Kapurubandara, Jan Bosteels, Laura Cattani, İbrahim Alkatout, Jan Deprest, Jan Baekelandt

2020Journal of Clinical Medicine123 citationsDOIOpen Access PDF

Abstract

(1) Objective: We aimed to report an update of the systematic review and meta-analysis by Baekelandt et al. (2016). (2) Method: We followed PRISMA guidelines to perform this systematic review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and additional sources and aimed to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and prospective/retrospective cohort studies in human subjects that allowed direct comparison of vNOTES to laparoscopy. (3) Results: Our search yielded one RCT and five retrospective cohort trials. Pooled analysis of two subgroups showed that, compared to conventional laparoscopy, vNOTES is equally effective to successfully remove the uterus in individuals meeting the inclusion criteria. vNOTES had significantly lower values for operation time, length of stay and estimated blood loss. There was no significant difference in intra- and postoperative complications, readmission, pain scores at 24 h postoperative and change in hemoglobin (Hb) on day 1 postoperative.

Topics & Concepts

MedicineMeta-analysisHysterectomyLaparoscopyRetrospective cohort studyRandomized controlled trialBlood lossMEDLINESurgeryClinical trialCohort studyNatural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgeryProspective cohort studySystematic reviewInternal medicineLawPolitical scienceUterine Myomas and TreatmentsMinimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesGynecological conditions and treatments