Response: Clinician perspectives on hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.

This article is a response to comments made by Drs. Husby and Klarskov regarding a systematic review and meta-analysis on the topic of hysterectomy versus uterine preservation in pelvic organ prolapse surgery. The authors clarify that their objective was to determine whether or not to preserve the uterus, not to compare different surgical procedures for treating pelvic organ prolapse. They agree with the suggestion to distinguish between the Manchester procedure and the sacrospinous ligament hysteropexy and performed a meta-analysis stratified by uterine-preserving procedure. The results showed no statistically significant differences in reoperation rates or complications between hysterectomy and uterine preservation using either procedure. The authors conclude that the decision to preserve or remove the uterus should be based on individual factors identified during patient counseling. [Extracted from the article]