Efficacy of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy vs. conventional radical hysterectomy in early-stage cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of the present study was to compare the oncological outcome of nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy (NSRH) and conventional radical hysterectomy (CRH) for early-stage cervical cancer using a meta-analysis. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, including 4 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 8 case-control and 11 comparative cohort studies comparing the morbidity, pelvic dysfunctions and oncological outcome between the two surgical methods. A total of 23 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The studies reported data of patients affected by cervical cancer; were written in English; included ≥20 patients; and reported data of patients with a comparison of clinical outcomes between NSRH and CRH. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by four independent reviewers. A total of 1,796 patients were included: 884 patients (49.2%) undergoing NSRH and 912 (50.8%) undergoing CRH. The meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager version 5.3 software, which is designed for conducting Cochrane reviews. As regards perioperative parameters, NSRH was found to be associated with a lower intraoperative blood loss and a shorter length of hospital stay in comparison with CRH. Patients undergoing NSRH experienced lower incidence of urinary, colorectal and sexual dysfunction compared with patients undergoing CRH. However, the resected parametrial width was favorable in patients with CRH, suggesting that NSRH was inferior to CRH in terms of radicality. The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates were similar between the two groups. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the collected data to date demonstrated that the nerve-sparing approach guarantees minimized surgical-related pelvic dysfunction, with similar oncological outcomes as CRH. However, further RCTs should be conducted to confirm the superiority and safety of NSRH.

Effects of Parity and Breast Feeding Duration on the Risk of Osteoporosis in Postmenopausal Korean Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize the evidence regarding the association of parity and breast feeding duration with the risk of osteoporosis in postmenopausal Korean women. This was because studies have been inconsistent regarding the effect of parity and breast feeding duration on the risk of osteoporosis. METHODS: A systematic literature search of relevant studies published by December 26, 2018 was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, RISS, KISS, KMbase, and KoreaMed. Outcome estimates of odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference were pooled with fixed or random-effect model. In case of heterogeneity, subgroup analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Seven cross-sectional studies (with 3,813 subjects) were included in the analysis. OR for osteoporosis was 1.43 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-1.88, P = 0.010) in postmenopausal women with higher parity compared to those with less parity. Moreover, OR for osteoporosis was 1.93 (95% CI = 1.28-2.93, P = 0.002) in postmenopausal women with longer durations of breast feeding than in those with shorter durations of breast feeding. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that duration of breast feeding increased the risk of osteoporosis in postmenopausal Korean women. More cohort studies with high quality research designs are needed to confirm our results.

Comparison of vaginal hysterectomy and laparoscopic hysterectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are various surgical approaches of hysterectomy for benign indications. This study aimed to compare vaginal hysterectomy (VH) and laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) with respect to their complications and operative outcomes. METHODS: We selected randomised controlled trials that compared VH with LH for benign gynaecological indications. We included studies published after January 2000 in the following databases: Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library). The primary outcome was comparison of the complication rate. The secondary outcomes were comparisons of operating time, blood loss, intraoperative conversion, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay and duration of recuperation. We used Review Manager 5.3 software to perform the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eighteen studies of 1618 patients met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis showed no differences in overall complications, intraoperative conversion, postoperative pain on the day of surgery and at 48 h, length of hospital stay and recuperation time between VH and LH. VH was associated with a shorter operating time and lower postoperative pain at 24 h than LH. CONCLUSIONS: When both surgical approaches are feasible, VH should remain the surgery of choice for benign hysterectomy.

Clinical application of serum anti-Müllerian hormone in women.

Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), a peptide growth factor of the transforming growth factor-ß family, is a reliable marker of ovarian reserve. Regarding assisted reproductive technology, AMH has been efficiently used as a marker to predict ovarian response to stimulation. The clinical use of AMH has recently been extended and emphasized. The uses of AMH as a predictive marker of menopause onset, diagnostic tool for polycystic ovary syndrome, and assessment of ovarian function before and after gynecologic surgeries or gonadotoxic agents such as chemotherapy have been investigated. Serum AMH levels can also be affected by environmental and genetic factors; thus, the effects of factors that may alter AMH test results should be considered. This review summarizes the findings of recent studies focusing on the clinical application of AMH and factors that influence the AMH level and opinions on the use of the AMH level to assess the probability of conception before reproductive life planning as a "fertility test."