A Systematic Review on Efficacy and Safety of Gasless Laparoscopy in the Management of Uterine Leiomyoma

Uterine leiomyoma causes considerable morbidity in women. This study systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of gasless laparoscopic myomectomy（GLM） in the management of uterine leiomyoma by comparing GLM with other minimally invasive procedures. Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, WANFANG database and China National Knowledge Infrastructure（CNKI） were searched for studies published in English or Chinese between January 1995 and May 2015, and related references were traced. Study outcomes from randomized controlled trials and retrospective cohort studies were presented as mean difference（MD） or odds ratio（OR） with a 95% confidence interval（CI）. Seventeen studies（including 1862 patients） meeting the inclusion criteria, including 934 treated with GLM and 928 treated with other minimally invasive procedures were reviewed. The results of meta-analysis revealed that GLM resulted in significantly shorter operating time [MD=–10.34, 95% CI（–18.12, –2.56）, P〈0.00001], shorter hospital stay [MD=–0.47, 95% CI（–0.88, –0.06）], less time to flatus [MD=–2.04, 95% CI（–2.59, –1.48）], less postoperative complications [OR=0.20, 95% CI（0.06, 0.62）] and less blood loss [MD =–30.74, 95% CI（–47.50, –13.98）]. On the other hand, there were no significant differences in duration of post-operative fever [MD=–0.52, 95% CI（–1.46, 0.42）] between the two groups. Additionally, GLM was associated with lower febrile morbidity, lower postoperative abdominal pain, and higher postoperative hemoglobin than other minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of uterine leiomyoma. In conclusion, GLM and other minimally invasive procedures are feasible, safe, and reliable for uterine leiomyoma treatment. However, available studies show that GLM is more effective and safer than other minimally invasive approaches.

Several Controversial Issues on Judicial Review of Foreign-Related Arbitration in China: From the Perspective of the Amendment to the Arbitration Law

With the continuous development of China's market economic system,the arbitration judicial review system based on the Arbitration Law promulgated in 1994,including the dual-track review of foreign-related and domestic cases,and the dual-supervision on procedural and substantive matters,has shown some issues that need to be studied and solved in practice.On July 30,2021,the Ministry of Justice officially announced the Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China(Amendment)(Draft for Comment),which unified the provisions on setting aside domestic and foreign-related arbitrament,and partially revised the scope of judicial review.However,heated debate arose and many problems remained unsolved such as the setting of the scope of supervision on foreign-related arbitration cases,how to grasp the principles of procedural review,and how to place the substantive supervision after the dual-track systems were changed into unified ones.Based on the Draft for Comments,this paper analyzes several prominent issues at present,and puts forward suggestions such as expanding the criteria for identifying foreign-related factors,converging to the original supervision scope of foreign-related arbitration,adhering to the principle of procedural review,and permitting the parties concerned to agree on the scope of supervision to maximize respect for the autonomy of the will of parties,so as to build a judicial supervision mechanism for commercial arbitration betterfitting into the era.