Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2012
Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of the application of adjuvant material in the repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapsed.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Min Hu, Li Hong, Bingshu Li, Yanxiang Cheng, Lu Chen, Qing Sun, Xuejiao Zhu, Wenying Wu, Debin Wu, Shasha Hong, Wenjuan Ding, Jie Min, Xiaohong Zhang, Wenjun Guo, Jianhua Chen, Qian Liu, Yuling Liu
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study is a meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of the application of adjuvant material in the repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapse and a sub-category analysis of the use of nonabsorbable synthetic mesh, biological graft and absorbable synthetic mesh.
METHOD: Pubmed, Embase and Ovid databases were searched for published randomized controlled trials from 1980 to February 2012 on the treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse with adjuvant materials. A comprehensive meta-analysis applying Revman5.1 analysis software was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 20 randomized controlled trials including 2,313 participants were recognized. The result showed that repair with adjuvant materials was better and more effective; nevertheless, use of adjuvant materials resulted in longer duration of surgery and more peri-operative bleeding when compared with the control group, but no significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding visceral injury, postoperative pain, urinary tract infection rate, new stress incontinence and new dyspareunia.
CONCLUSION: Adjuvant material is worthy of clinical popularization, especially the biological graft type because of its lower anatomy failure rate and no difference in safety compared with the control group. However, exposure to adjuvant materials and erosion rate are high, which are the most important aspects to be improved.
METHOD: Pubmed, Embase and Ovid databases were searched for published randomized controlled trials from 1980 to February 2012 on the treatment of anterior vaginal wall prolapse with adjuvant materials. A comprehensive meta-analysis applying Revman5.1 analysis software was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 20 randomized controlled trials including 2,313 participants were recognized. The result showed that repair with adjuvant materials was better and more effective; nevertheless, use of adjuvant materials resulted in longer duration of surgery and more peri-operative bleeding when compared with the control group, but no significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding visceral injury, postoperative pain, urinary tract infection rate, new stress incontinence and new dyspareunia.
CONCLUSION: Adjuvant material is worthy of clinical popularization, especially the biological graft type because of its lower anatomy failure rate and no difference in safety compared with the control group. However, exposure to adjuvant materials and erosion rate are high, which are the most important aspects to be improved.