Risk factors for postoperative ileus in hysterectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study intended to evaluate the risk factors of postoperative ileus in hysterectomy patients. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Program for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Internet were searched. The search period was restricted from the earliest records to March 2024. Key words used were: (hysterectomy) AND (postoperative ileus OR postoperative intestinal obstruction OR ileus OR intestinal obstruction). Two researchers screened literatures and extracted data, and used Newcastle-Ottawa scale and Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies to evaluate their quality. Then, Stata17 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULT: A total of 11 literatures were included. Personal factors and previous history of disease factors of postoperative ileus in hysterectomy patients included use opioids (OR = 3.91, 95%CI: 1.08-14.24), dysmenorrhea (OR = 2.51, 95%: 1.25-5.05), smoking (OR = 1.55, 95%: 1.18-2.02), prior abdominal or pelvic surgery (OR = 1.46, 95%CI: 1.16-1.83) and age (OR = 1.03, 95%: 1.02-1.04). Surgery-related factors included perioperative transfusion (OR = 4.50, 95%CI: 3.29-6.16), concomitant bowel surgery (OR = 3.79, 95%CI: 1.86-7.71), anesthesia technique (general anesthesia) (OR = 2.73, 95%CI: 1.60, 4.66), adhesiolysis (OR = 1.97, 95%CI: 1.52-2.56), duration of operation (OR = 1.78, 95%CI: 1.32-2.40), operation approach (laparoscopic hysterectomy) (OR = 0.43, 95%CI: 0.29-0.64) and operation approach (vaginal hysterectomy) (OR = 0.35, 95%CI: 0.18-0.69). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study were personal factors and previous history of disease factors, surgery-related factors, which may increase the risk of postoperative ileus in hysterectomy patients. After the conclusion of risk factors, more accurate screening and identification of high-risk groups can be conducted and timely preventive measures can be taken to reduce the incidence of postoperative ileus. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol for this meta-analysis was registered (CRD42023407167) with the PROSPERO database (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".