Table 1.
PICOS criteria to guide the systematic review.
Fig 1.
Flow chart with studies included in the systematic review.
Table 2.
Studies with ProACT included in the meta-analysis and variables evaluated.
Table 3.
Studies with ATOMS included in the meta-analysis and variables evaluated.
Table 4.
Newcastle-Ottawa scale for assessing the quality of cohort studies with ProACT included in the meta-analysis.
Table 5.
Newcastle-Ottawa scale for assessing the quality of cohort studies with ATOMS included in the meta-analysis.
Fig 2.
Forest plot of studies analyzed for dry rate.
Fig 3.
Forest plot of studies analyzed for improve rate.
Fig 4.
Forest plot of studies analyzed for satisfaction rate.
Fig 5.
Forest plot of studies analyzed with number of fillings.
Fig 6.
Forest plot of studies analyzed with differential pad-count in pads-per-day.
Fig 7.
Forest plot of studies analyzed with differential pad-test expressed in mL.
Fig 8.
Forest plot of studies analyzed for explant rate.
Fig 9.
Forest plot of studies analyzed for complication rate.
Fig 10.
Forest plot of studies analyzed with durability of the devices at 12-months (A), 24-months (B) and 36-months (C).