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.