A Meta-Analysis Comparing the Effectiveness of Uterine-Sparing Procedures versus Hysterectomy for Adenomyosis: Patient-Reported Outcomes and Fertility Preservation

Background: Adenomyosis is a benign gynecological condition that can cause significant morbidity, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain. Hysterectomy has been the traditional treatment for adenomyosis, but uterine-sparing procedures (USPs) are increasingly being considered, especially for women who desire fertility preservation. This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of USPs versus hysterectomy for adenomyosis, focusing on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and fertility preservation. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for studies published between 2013 and 2024, comparing USPs (e.g., laparoscopic or hysteroscopic adenomyomectomy, uterine artery embolization) with hysterectomy for adenomyosis. Studies reporting PROs (dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, pelvic pain, quality of life) and fertility outcomes (pregnancy rate, live birth rate) were included. Random-effects models were used to pool data and assess heterogeneity. Results: Six studies (n = 1248 patients) met the inclusion criteria. USPs were associated with significantly lower rates of major complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.54, p<0.0001) and shorter hospital stays (mean difference -2.73 days, 95% CI -3.29 to -2.17, p<0.0001) compared to hysterectomy. PROs, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain, significantly improved in both groups, with no significant difference between USPs and hysterectomy. Fertility preservation was significantly higher in the USP group (OR 3.9, 95% CI 3.02-5.03, p<0.0001). Conclusion: USPs offer a safe and effective alternative to hysterectomy for adenomyosis, with comparable improvements in PROs and significantly higher rates of fertility preservation. This information can guide clinicians and patients in shared decision-making regarding the optimal treatment approach.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Bioscientia Medicina Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research
Published
2024-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.37275/bsm.v9i2.1189
Primary Topic
Endometriosis Research and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Meta-Analysis Comparing the Effectiveness of Uterine-Sparing Procedures versus Hysterectomy for Adenomyosis: Patient-Reported Outcomes and Fertility Preservation

Kadek Agus wijaya, I Wayan Agus Surya Pradnyana
Bioscientia Medicina Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research
Endometriosis Research and Treatment
article

A Meta-Analysis Comparing the Effectiveness of Uterine-Sparing Procedures versus Hysterectomy for Adenomyosis: Patient-Reported Outcomes and Fertility Preservation

Kadek Agus wijaya, I Wayan Agus Surya Pradnyana
article en

Abstract

Background: Adenomyosis is a benign gynecological condition that can cause significant morbidity, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain. Hysterectomy has been the traditional treatment for adenomyosis, but uterine-sparing procedures (USPs) are increasingly being considered, especially for women who desire fertility preservation. This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of USPs versus hysterectomy for adenomyosis, focusing on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and fertility preservation. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for studies published between 2013 and 2024, comparing USPs (e.g., laparoscopic or hysteroscopic adenomyomectomy, uterine artery embolization) with hysterectomy for adenomyosis. Studies reporting PROs (dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, pelvic pain, quality of life) and fertility outcomes (pregnancy rate, live birth rate) were included. Random-effects models were used to pool data and assess heterogeneity. Results: Six studies (n = 1248 patients) met the inclusion criteria. USPs were associated with significantly lower rates of major complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.54, p<0.0001) and shorter hospital stays (mean difference -2.73 days, 95% CI -3.29 to -2.17, p<0.0001) compared to hysterectomy. PROs, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain, significantly improved in both groups, with no significant difference between USPs and hysterectomy. Fertility preservation was significantly higher in the USP group (OR 3.9, 95% CI 3.02-5.03, p<0.0001). Conclusion: USPs offer a safe and effective alternative to hysterectomy for adenomyosis, with comparable improvements in PROs and significantly higher rates of fertility preservation. This information can guide clinicians and patients in shared decision-making regarding the optimal treatment approach.

Bioscientia Medicina Journal of Biomedicine and Translational ResearchVol. 9(2)
Udayana University (ID), Universitas Tabanan (ID)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Endometriosis Research and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.