Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy for treating hydrocoeles

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Ir a:

Figure 1

Study selection flow diagram.

Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 1 Clinical cure.

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 2 Recurrence.

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 3 Fever.

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 4 Infection.

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 5 Haematoma.

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 6 Time to work resumption.

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy, Outcome 7 Satisfaction.

Comparison 1. Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Clinical cure Show forest plot	3		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only

1.1 One round of sclerotherapy	3	215	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.45 [0.18, 1.10]
1.2 Two rounds of sclerotherapy	2	129	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.58 [0.21, 1.65]
1.3 Osman 1994 removed (one round of sclerotherapy)	2	136	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.74 [0.64, 0.85]
2 Recurrence Show forest plot	3	189	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	9.43 [1.82, 48.77]

2.1 Follow‐up at 3 months	2	110	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	5.26 [1.04, 26.75]
2.2 Follow‐up at 6 months	1	79	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	25.55 [3.66, 178.47]
3 Fever Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

4 Infection Show forest plot	4	275	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.31 [0.09, 1.06]

5 Haematoma Show forest plot	3	189	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.57 [0.17, 1.90]

6 Time to work resumption Show forest plot	1		Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

7 Satisfaction Show forest plot	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	Totals not selected

7.1 At 3 months	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
7.2 At 6 months	1		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Comparison 1. Aspiration and sclerotherapy versus hydrocoelectomy