SynthesisReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2023
Preoperative Misoprostol to Reduce Blood Loss and Related Morbidities During Abdominal Hysterectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 10 Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Misoprostol During Abdominal Myomectomy: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 16 Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to perform a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that surveyed the efficacy and safety of preoperative misoprostol versus placebo during abdominal hysterectomy. Six databases were screened from inception until 3 August 2022. The eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. The outcomes were summarized as mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in a random-effects model. Ten RCTs with 1076 patients (misoprostol = 537, placebo = 539 patients) were analyzed. Six and four RCTs had an overall low and high risk of bias (single-blinded), respectively. The mean intraoperative blood loss (n = 10 RCTs, MD = - 78.97 ml, 95% [- 130.89, - 27.06], p = 0.003), mean difference in hemoglobin drop (n = 10 RCTs, MD = - 0.42 g/dl, 95% CI [- 0.69, - 0.14], p = 0.003), and mean length of hospital stay (n = 5 RCTs, MD = - 0.2 d, 95% CI [- 0.24, - 0.16], p < 0.001) were significantly reduced in favor of the misoprostol group compared with the placebo group. However, there were no significant differences between both groups regarding the mean operative time (n = 8 RCTs, MD = - 0.63 min, 95% CI [- 5.07, 3.81], p = 0.78), rate of perioperative blood transfusion (n = 7 RCTs, RR = 0.83, 95% CI [0.53, 1.3], p = 0.42), and rate of drug-related adverse events (i.e., nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, chills, and fever). Leave-one-out sensitivity analyses revealed stability for all endpoints, except hospitalization stay. There was no publication bias for all endpoints, except perioperative blood transfusion. Among patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy, preoperative administration of misoprostol was largely safe and linked to substantial decrease in blood loss-related morbidities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.