Аннотация
Introduction: Prolapse can be fixed using a variety of surgical procedures. The goal of the present study was to examine the current literature on various surgical techniques for treating female genital organ prolapse. Methods: The PubMed and Medline databases were explored for pertinent literature up through August 2022 for this meta-analysis. The terms [surgery] AND [management] AND [genital prolapse OR gynaecological diseases] AND [randomised control studies OR randomised control trials] were used as search criteria. The studies that met the inclusion criteria were considered qualified using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Cochrane handbook of “Systematic reviews of interventions” was used for risk of bias assessment. Results: The investigations found significant difference in the heterogeneity between the groups with a 76% I2 value (p<0.00001). There was little variability among the six trials that examined robotic and laparoscopic therapy of prolapse (I2=0%, p=0.94). In six investigations, the odd ratio revealed no statistically significant difference between groups (1.05; 95% CI, 0.52, 2.12). However, generally there were no appreciable differences between robotic and laparoscopic treatment of female prolapse. There was a low-risk bias among the selected studies. Conclusion: According to this meta-analysis study, laparoscopic surgery performed better job of managing prolapse than abdominal surgery.