Statistical analysis and data synthesis
The outcomes of the present meta-analysis included mean serum AMH levels
(in ng/mL) and mean AFC counts, along with their respective standard
deviations, both preoperatively and at postoperative 1,3,6 and 12
months. These measures were utilized to evaluate ovarian reserve. AMH
decline rate was also evaluated. The datasets of comparable outcome
measures were pooled for meta-analysis using standard statistical
procedures in RevMan 5.4 (Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.4. The
Cochrane Collaboration, 2020. Available at revman.cochrane.org). To
assess the impact of continuous outcomes represented as mean and
standard deviation, we calculated the mean difference along with a 95%
confidence interval. P<0.05 was considered statistically
significant. Statistical heterogeneity was determined by examining the
results of the I2 statistics. A random-effect model
was used for meta-analysis with high heterogeneity
(I2>50), and a fixed-effect model was
used with low heterogeneity. We employed a funnel plot to assess
publication bias for the primary outcome. The certainty of evidence for
various outcomes was evaluated by two reviewers using the Grading of
Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system.
The GRADE approach categorizes the level of evidence into four grades:
high, moderate, low, and very low.