Comparison 3. Suction curettage under hysteroscopy versus under ultrasonography.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
3.1 Treatment success after initial treatment	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
3.1.1 Suction curettage after UAE	1	66	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.91 [0.81, 1.03]
3.1.2 Suction curettage after UACE	1	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.02 [0.96, 1.09]
3.2 Complications	2		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
3.2.1 Suction curettage after UAE	1	66	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	4.00 [0.47, 33.91]
3.2.2 Suction curettage after UACE	1	92	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.18 [0.01, 3.72]
3.3 Adverse effects (overall)	2		Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
3.3.1 Suction curettage after UAE	1	66	Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	3.09 [0.12, 78.70]
3.3.2 Suction curettage after UACE	1	92	Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Not estimable
3.4 Time to normalize β‐hCG	2		Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
3.4.1 Suction curettage after UAE	1	66	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	4.03 [‐1.79, 9.85]
3.4.2 Suction curettage after UACE	1	92	Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.84 [‐1.90, 3.58]