Effect of two different surgical modalities for pelvic organ prolapse on postoperative wound infection in patients: A meta‐analysis

Abstract

Sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSLF) is widely applied to the treatment of female pelvis organ prolapsed. Contradictory findings have already been reported in the comparison of sacrocolpopexy (SC) with SSLF. The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of SC versus SSLF in treating pelvis organ prolapsed after operation. We conducted a meta-analysis of both operative approaches, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. In this research, 822 articles were chosen from three databases, 201 were copied, and 10 were included. Among them, 7248 cases were operated on the prolapsed pelvis. It was found that SSLF surgery could significantly decrease the rate of postoperative wound infection after operation (odds ratio [OR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42–0.82; p = 0.001). No statistical significance was found among the SSLF and the SC surgery for the post-operation haemorrhage of the patient (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.23–2.83; p = 0.75). No statistical significance was found among the SSLF and the SC surgery for the postoperative period of the patient's operation (mean difference, −15.46; 95% CI, −52.87 to 21.94; p = 0.42). Applying SSLF surgery to treat pelvic prolapse in women may benefit from a reduction in the number of post-operative wound infections. However, SSLF had no statistical significance with respect to the amount of haemorrhage after operation or operation time.