Table 3.
Procedure and Recovery Results of Studies Included in the Meta-Analysis
Study | Procedure time (minutes) | Time to discharge (hours) | Time to return to normal activities (days) | Time to return to work (days) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bongers et al.15 | 39 ± 23 | — | 4.4 ± 3.1 | — |
Brölmann et al.16 | ||||
Garza-Leal17 | — | — | — | — |
Braun et al.18 | 114 ± 60 | 6.8 ± 3.2 | — | — |
Brucker et al.19 | 66 ± 24 | 10.0 ± 5.5 | 20.5 (5, 103)a | 10.0 (2, 86)a |
Hahn et al.20 | ||||
Krämer et al.21 | ||||
Carrafiello et al.22 | 20 (15, 25)b | — | — | — |
Cho et al.23 | — (10, 40) | — | — | — |
Cho et al.24 | — | — | — | — |
Chudnoff et al.25 | 126 ± 60 | — | 9.0 (2, 60)a | 5.0 (0, 29)a |
Galen et al.26 | ||||
Guido et al.27 | ||||
Berman et al.28 | ||||
Chudnoff et al.29 | 47 ± 30 | 2.5 ± 1.2 | 2.2 ± 2.2 | 3.6 ± 2.6 |
Miller and Osman30 | ||||
Galen et al.31 | 140 (42, 290)a | — | 4.5 (1, 11)b | 4.0 (2, 10)a |
Garza-Leal et al.32 | ||||
Robles et al.33 | ||||
Ghezzi et al.34 | 25 (20, 45)a | 18c | — | — |
Bergamini et al.35 | ||||
Iversen and Dueholm36 | — | — | — | — |
Iversen et al.37 | ||||
Jiang et al.38 | 25 (20, 30)b | — | — | — |
Kim et al.39 | 18 ± 5 | — | — | — |
Lee et al.40 | — | — | — | — |
Marcos et al.41 | 36 ± 11 | 12.0 (8, 24)b | — | — |
Meng et al.42 | — | — | — | — |
Rattray et al.43 | 73 ± 26 | 6.7 ± 3.0 | — | 11.1 ± 7.6 |
Rey et al.44 | 17 (11, 44)b | — | — | — |
Turtulici et al.45 | 28 (16, 43)b | — | — | — |
Wu et al.46 | — (20, 40) | 2.5c | — | — |
POOLED RESULTd | 49 (41–56) | 8.2 (6.3–10.0) | 5.2 (3.3–7.1) | 5.1 (3.7–6.5) |
Laparoscopic RFA | 73 (56–91) | 10.7 (5.9–15.5) | 9.0 (3.8–14.1) | 6.5 (3.8–9.2) |
Transvaginal RFA | 24 (20–28) | 2.5 (2.4–2.6) | — | — |
TFA | 44 (36–51) | 2.5 (2.3–2.7) | 3.3 (1.1–5.4) | 3.6 (3.1–4.1) |
Median (min, max).
Mean (min, max).
Estimated value.
Pooled results derived from random effects meta-analysis and reported as weighted mean (95% confidence interval).
RFA, radiofrequency ablation; TFA, transcervical fibroid ablation.