Search

Objective: Cervical insufficiency is a defect of the cervix that leads to failure to preserve a full-term intrauterine pregnancy. Laparoscopic cerclage and open transabdominal cerclage (TAC) are effective ways to manage patients with cervical insufficiency. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the complications of laparoscopic cerclage and open TAC in the management of cervical insufficiency., Data Sources: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science using our search strategy and screened the results for our criteria. We extracted the results reported and analyzed them using Open Meta-Analyst (OpenMeta[Analyst], Brown School of Public Health, Providence, RI) and Review Manager (Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom) software., Methods of Study Selection: We included all randomized controlled and observational trials performed on patients with cervical insufficiency undergoing open TAC or laparoscopic cerclage that matched our search strategy. We excluded letters to the editor, reviews, meetings/conference abstracts, non-English or nonhuman studies, and instances where the full text was not available., Tabulation, Integration, and Results: We included a total of 33 trials. Both interventions of laparoscopic cerclage and open TAC were associated with significantly less total fetal loss (laparoscopic cerclage, relative risk [RR] 0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.08; p <.001, and open TAC, RR 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07-0.51; p <.009). The overall blood loss in open TAC was 110.589 mL (95% CI, 93.737-127.44; p <.001), and in laparoscopic cerclage, it was 24.549 mL (95% CI, 9.892-39.205; p = .001). In addition, open TAC had a positive effect regarding incidence of hemorrhage >400 mL (RR 0.077; 95% CI, 0.033-0.122; p <.001). Preterm premature rupture of membranes was significant in the open TAC (RR 0.037; 95% CI, 0.019-0.055; p <.001) and laparoscopic cerclage groups (RR 0.031; 95% CI, 0.009-0.053; p = .006)., Conclusion: Laparoscopic cerclage may be safer than open TAC in the management of cervical insufficiency because we found a statistically significant lower incidence of fetal loss, blood loss, and rate of hemorrhage in the laparoscopic cerclage group. Clinically, this evidence may help support favoring a laparoscopic approach over an open one in appropriate patients, although it is unclear whether this benefit is limited to cerclages placed either before pregnancy or placed in the first-trimester or both., (Copyright © 2020 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: After strong evidence and major organizations recommending salpingectomy over tubal ligation, we sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the intraoperative attributes and complication rates associated with these 2 procedures., Data Sources: We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and clinical trials registries without time or language restrictions. The search was conducted in February 2020. Database searches revealed 74 potential studies, of which 11 were examined at the full-text level. Of these, 6 studies were included in the qualitative analysis and 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis., Study Eligibility Criteria: We included randomized controlled trials comparing salpingectomy with tubal ligation in women seeking sterilization. We included studies that also had at least 1 outcome listed in the population/patient problem, intervention, comparison, outcome, and time. Articles were excluded if they did not meet the inclusion criteria or if data were not reported and the authors did not respond to inquiries., Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: Abstracts and full-text articles were assessed by 2 authors independently using the blinded coding assignment function or EPPI-Reviewer 4. Conflicting selections were resolved by consensus. The quality of included studies was determined using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias for each study; disagreements were resolved by consensus., Results: There were few differences between the procedures, with no differences in most important clinical outcomes (antimüllerian hormone, blood loss, length of hospital stay, pre- or postoperative complications, or wound infections). A single study reported a reduced rate of pregnancies with salpingectomy (risk ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-1.02), but this did not reach statistical significance (P=.05)., Conclusion: We conclude from these data that salpingectomy is as safe and efficacious as tubal ligation for sterilization and may be preferred, where appropriate, to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)