Abstract
BackgroundA meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of different techniques of pelvic floor reconstruction on urinary continence.MethodsA comprehensive search was made for trials that evaluated the efficacy of pelvic floor reconstruction. Relevant databases included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid, Web of Science databases and relevant trials from the references. Random-effects model was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) statistics.ResultsPooled results of patients treated with posterior reconstruction demonstrated complete urinary continence improved at all timepoint following catheter removal. Anterior suspension was associated with improvement only at 28–42 days.ConclusionsPatients who underwent RP and PR had the least urinary incontinence. No significant benefit was observed after AS. AR + PR and AS + PR had little benefit in the post-operative period.
Accepted Version
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call