Research evaluating optimal repair techniques for the reduction of postpartum dyspareunia following obstetric laceration is severely limited. Prevailing guidelines from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) are reliant on data from just nine clinical trials conducted from 1980 to 2012. While the literature on this topic is still limited today, this review aims to synthesize data from past and present studies to ensure that standing clinical recommendations are supported by current literature.A review was conducted per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched. Included articles (1) compared continuous with interrupted repair techniques for subjects with episiotomies and/or second-degree tears, (2) were available in full length, and (3) reported dyspareunia as an outcome variable. Excluded articles were those (1) inclusive of first-, third-, or fourthdegree tears; (2) comparing suture material rather than technique; and (3) not available in English. A metaanalysis was conducted for both acute dyspareunia (<3 months) and chronic dyspareunia (>3 months) utilizing Meta-Essentials Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA) workbook. Bias was evaluated via Egger regression and Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation tests.Twelve articles met inclusion and exclusion guidelines, seven for acute dyspareunia and eight for chronic dyspareunia. All publications were randomized controlled trials and were inclusive of a total of 4,081 patients. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effect model. Analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between continuous and interrupted suture groups for acute dyspareunia (RR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.89-1.08) or chronic dyspareunia (RR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.83-1.12). Egger regression test (p-value=0.534) and Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation test (p-value=0.570) indicated minimal publication bias. Compiled data does not indicate a preferential suture technique for the reduction of postpartum dyspareunia. These findings are congruent with the ACOG guidelines; therefore, there is no supporting evidence for ACOG's recommendation of continuous suturing to be overturned.
Robotic single-site hysterectomy (RSSH) has emerged as a novel surgical approach for the treatment of endometrial cancer and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH). Current research regarding the benefits of RSSH compared to robotic multiport hysterectomy (RMPH) for these indications has been inconclusive. Our team sought to compare surgical outcomes between these two approaches of robotic hysterectomy via systematic review and meta-analysis to ensure optimal surgical practices. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 Checklist guided our review. MEDLINE, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane Library were searched, yielding 59 results. Articles were filtered by title and abstract and then reviewed in full for inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria required that (1) studies compared outcomes for RSSH and RMPH, (2) hysterectomy was indicated for endometrial cancer or hyperplasia with atypia, and (3) studies were available in English. Excluded studies (1) compared single-site and multiport laparoscopic approaches, (2) compared robotic approaches to laparoscopic or abdominal (open) techniques, and (3) employed hysterectomy for benign conditions. Publication bias was assessed using the Egger Regression Correlation analysis. Four studies complied with the selection criteria, comprising 138 patients in the RSSH group and 259 in the RMPH group. Similar outcomes were noted across all measures, including conversion rate (relative risk [RR] = 1.84 and confidence interval [CI] = 0.99-3.43), blood loss (Cohen's d = 1.05 and Z = 18.62), operating time (Cohen's d = 0.29 and Z = 4.38), and length of hospital stay (Cohen's d = 1.06 and Z = 3.86). Publication bias was deemed minimal as indicated by Egger regression values of less than 0.05. These findings suggest that either a surgical approach or AEH with the proper standard of care can provide patients with endometrial cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.