DOI 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.01.003
Identifying the superior surgical procedure for endometrial polypectomy: A network meta-analysis.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To identify the superior surgical procedure for endometrial polypectomy based on network meta-analysis.
METHOD: Literature retrieval was conducted in globally recognized databases, namely, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central, to address relative randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the clinical effects of respective surgical procedure for endometrial polypectomy. Surgical parametric data, including operative time, success rates and complications, were quantitatively pooled and estimated based on the Bayesian theorem. The values of surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities regarding each parameter were calculated and ranked by various procedures. Node-splitting analysis was performed to test the inconsistency of the main results and publication bias was assessed by examining funnel-plot symmetry.
RESULTS
After a detailed review, 8 RCTs containing 5 different procedures were finally included for network meta-analysis. The results indicated that hysteroscopic morcellation possessed the highest possibility of revealing best clinical effects on operative time (SUCRA, 0.49), success rate (SUCRA, 0.90) and complications (SUCRA, 0.50). Moreover, node-splitting analysis and funnel-plot symmetries illustrated no inconsistency or obvious publication bias in the current study.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence demonstrated that hysteroscopic morcellation showed optimal potential superior clinical effects for endometrial polypectomy compared to other procedures. However, high-quality large sample trials are still expected, and new investigations on other relative procedures in this field should be included in the future.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.