American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2007
Changes in rates of hysterectomy and uterine conserving procedures for treatment of uterine leiomyoma.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jacobson Gavin F, Shaber Ruth E, Armstrong Mary Anne, Hung Yun-Yi
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate treatment of uterine leiomyoma by hysterectomy and uterine conserving procedures (UCPs).
STUDY DESIGN: Data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California members undergoing hysterectomy, myomectomy, uterine artery embolization (UAE) and endometrial ablation (EA) for uterine leiomyoma from 1997-2003 were collected. Statistical analysis included trend tests and survival analysis.
RESULTS: Hysterectomy rates for leiomyoma decreased significantly from 2.13 per 1000 to 1.91 (P < .0001). Rates for myomectomy (.4-.37) and EA (.26-.27) remained stable (P = .17 and .26, respectively), whereas rates for UAE increased significantly from < .01-.24 (P < .0001). The combined rates for hysterectomy and UCPs remained stable at 2.79 (P = .95). Rate of hysterectomy after UCP increased over time, and at 6 years reached 11.5%, 17.7%, and 7.9% for EA, UAE, and myomectomy, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Whereas rate of hysterectomy for leiomyoma decreased, total rate of invasive treatment remained stable. Increase in rate of UAE had the greatest impact on treatment, possibly replacing hysterectomy.
STUDY DESIGN: Data from Kaiser Permanente Northern California members undergoing hysterectomy, myomectomy, uterine artery embolization (UAE) and endometrial ablation (EA) for uterine leiomyoma from 1997-2003 were collected. Statistical analysis included trend tests and survival analysis.
RESULTS: Hysterectomy rates for leiomyoma decreased significantly from 2.13 per 1000 to 1.91 (P < .0001). Rates for myomectomy (.4-.37) and EA (.26-.27) remained stable (P = .17 and .26, respectively), whereas rates for UAE increased significantly from < .01-.24 (P < .0001). The combined rates for hysterectomy and UCPs remained stable at 2.79 (P = .95). Rate of hysterectomy after UCP increased over time, and at 6 years reached 11.5%, 17.7%, and 7.9% for EA, UAE, and myomectomy, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Whereas rate of hysterectomy for leiomyoma decreased, total rate of invasive treatment remained stable. Increase in rate of UAE had the greatest impact on treatment, possibly replacing hysterectomy.