American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2002
Does hysterectomy without adnexectomy in patients with prior tubal interruption increase the risk of subsequent hydrosalpinx?
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Morse Abraham N, Hammer Robert A, Walter Andrew J, Baker Stephen, Magtibay Paul M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to examine the hypothesis that hysterectomy without adnexectomy after tubal interruption is associated with the development of hydrosalpinx.
STUDY DESIGN: In this case-control study, patients with a pathologic diagnosis of hydrosalpinx were compared with a group of patients undergoing adnexectomy without a hydrosalpinx. The incidence of prior tubal interruption followed by hysterectomy in the two groups was compared.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant association between the development of hydrosalpinx and a history of hysterectomy after tubal interruption. Nine of 38 cases and 2 of 45 controls had a history of tubal interruption (odds ratio 6.67, P =.019).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing hysterectomy who have had a tubal interruption may be at risk for the development of hydrosalpinx because this combination of procedures results in a segment of tube that is blocked at both ends. If further study bears out this association, consideration should be given to performing salpingectomy at the time of hysterectomy even if the ovaries are being left behind.
STUDY DESIGN: In this case-control study, patients with a pathologic diagnosis of hydrosalpinx were compared with a group of patients undergoing adnexectomy without a hydrosalpinx. The incidence of prior tubal interruption followed by hysterectomy in the two groups was compared.
RESULTS: There was a statistically significant association between the development of hydrosalpinx and a history of hysterectomy after tubal interruption. Nine of 38 cases and 2 of 45 controls had a history of tubal interruption (odds ratio 6.67, P =.019).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing hysterectomy who have had a tubal interruption may be at risk for the development of hydrosalpinx because this combination of procedures results in a segment of tube that is blocked at both ends. If further study bears out this association, consideration should be given to performing salpingectomy at the time of hysterectomy even if the ovaries are being left behind.