Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research
Kadek Agus Wijaya
Unknown Affiliation
Biochemistry, Genetics & Molecular Biology Immunology & microbiology Medicine & Pharmacology Neuroscience

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
A Meta-Analysis Comparing the Effectiveness of Uterine-Sparing Procedures versus Hysterectomy for Adenomyosis: Patient-Reported Outcomes and Fertility Preservation Pradnyana, I Wayan Agus Surya; Kadek Agus Wijaya
Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research Vol. 9 No. 2 (2025): Bioscientia Medicina: Journal of Biomedicine & Translational Research
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/bsm.v9i2.1189

Abstract

Background: Adenomyosis is a benign gynecological condition that can cause significant morbidity, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain. Hysterectomy has been the traditional treatment for adenomyosis, but uterine-sparing procedures (USPs) are increasingly being considered, especially for women who desire fertility preservation. This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of USPs versus hysterectomy for adenomyosis, focusing on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and fertility preservation. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for studies published between 2013 and 2024, comparing USPs (e.g., laparoscopic or hysteroscopic adenomyomectomy, uterine artery embolization) with hysterectomy for adenomyosis. Studies reporting PROs (dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, pelvic pain, quality of life) and fertility outcomes (pregnancy rate, live birth rate) were included. Random-effects models were used to pool data and assess heterogeneity. Results: Six studies (n = 1248 patients) met the inclusion criteria. USPs were associated with significantly lower rates of major complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.54, p<0.0001) and shorter hospital stays (mean difference -2.73 days, 95% CI -3.29 to -2.17, p<0.0001) compared to hysterectomy. PROs, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain, significantly improved in both groups, with no significant difference between USPs and hysterectomy. Fertility preservation was significantly higher in the USP group (OR 3.9, 95% CI 3.02-5.03, p<0.0001). Conclusion: USPs offer a safe and effective alternative to hysterectomy for adenomyosis, with comparable improvements in PROs and significantly higher rates of fertility preservation. This information can guide clinicians and patients in shared decision-making regarding the optimal treatment approach.
A Meta-Analysis Comparing the Effectiveness of Uterine-Sparing Procedures versus Hysterectomy for Adenomyosis: Patient-Reported Outcomes and Fertility Preservation Pradnyana, I Wayan Agus Surya; Kadek Agus Wijaya
Bioscientia Medicina : Journal of Biomedicine and Translational Research Vol. 9 No. 2 (2025): Bioscientia Medicina: Journal of Biomedicine & Translational Research
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/bsm.v9i2.1189

Abstract

Background: Adenomyosis is a benign gynecological condition that can cause significant morbidity, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain. Hysterectomy has been the traditional treatment for adenomyosis, but uterine-sparing procedures (USPs) are increasingly being considered, especially for women who desire fertility preservation. This meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of USPs versus hysterectomy for adenomyosis, focusing on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and fertility preservation. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for studies published between 2013 and 2024, comparing USPs (e.g., laparoscopic or hysteroscopic adenomyomectomy, uterine artery embolization) with hysterectomy for adenomyosis. Studies reporting PROs (dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, pelvic pain, quality of life) and fertility outcomes (pregnancy rate, live birth rate) were included. Random-effects models were used to pool data and assess heterogeneity. Results: Six studies (n = 1248 patients) met the inclusion criteria. USPs were associated with significantly lower rates of major complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.54, p<0.0001) and shorter hospital stays (mean difference -2.73 days, 95% CI -3.29 to -2.17, p<0.0001) compared to hysterectomy. PROs, including dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, and pelvic pain, significantly improved in both groups, with no significant difference between USPs and hysterectomy. Fertility preservation was significantly higher in the USP group (OR 3.9, 95% CI 3.02-5.03, p<0.0001). Conclusion: USPs offer a safe and effective alternative to hysterectomy for adenomyosis, with comparable improvements in PROs and significantly higher rates of fertility preservation. This information can guide clinicians and patients in shared decision-making regarding the optimal treatment approach.
Co-Authors Pradnyana, I Wayan Agus Surya