OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term fracture risk after hysterectomy, with or without oophorectomy. DESIGN: Population-based, cohort study. SETTING: Olmsted County, Minnesota. PATIENT(S): Women residing in Olmsted County (n = 9,258) who underwent hysterectomy in 1965-2002, compared to an equal number of age- and sex-matched community controls. INTERVENTION(S): Observational study of the effect of hysterectomy for various indications on subsequent fractures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Fractures of any type, and at osteoporotic sites (e.g., hip, spine, or wrist) alone, as assessed by electronic review of inpatient and outpatient diagnoses in the community. RESULT(S): Compared with controls, there was a significant increase (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.29) in overall fracture risk among the women with a hysterectomy, but osteoporotic fracture risk was not elevated (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.98-1.22). Most hysterectomy indications were associated with fractures generally, although these were not often statistically significant. Only operations for a uterine prolapse were associated with osteoporotic fractures (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74). Oophorectomy was not an independent predictor of fracture risk (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.98-1.15). CONCLUSION(S): Hysterectomy does not appear to pose much long-term risk for fractures, but the association of fractures with surgery for uterine prolapse deserves further attention.
OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term fracture risk after hysterectomy, with or without oophorectomy. DESIGN: Population-based, cohort study. SETTING: Olmsted County, Minnesota. PATIENT(S): Women residing in Olmsted County (n = 9,258) who underwent hysterectomy in 1965-2002, compared to an equal number of age- and sex-matched community controls. INTERVENTION(S): Observational study of the effect of hysterectomy for various indications on subsequent fractures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Fractures of any type, and at osteoporotic sites (e.g., hip, spine, or wrist) alone, as assessed by electronic review of inpatient and outpatient diagnoses in the community. RESULT(S): Compared with controls, there was a significant increase (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.29) in overall fracture risk among the women with a hysterectomy, but osteoporotic fracture risk was not elevated (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.98-1.22). Most hysterectomy indications were associated with fractures generally, although these were not often statistically significant. Only operations for a uterine prolapse were associated with osteoporotic fractures (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.01-1.74). Oophorectomy was not an independent predictor of fracture risk (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.98-1.15). CONCLUSION(S): Hysterectomy does not appear to pose much long-term risk for fractures, but the association of fractures with surgery for uterine prolapse deserves further attention.
Authors: Sulin Cheng; Harri Sievänen; Ari Heinonen; Kristi Uusi-Rasi; Laura Carbone; Frances Tylavsky; Jussi Halleen; Pekka Kannus Journal: J Bone Miner Metab Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.626
Authors: Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso; Zaraq Khan; Amy L Weaver; Cathy D Schleck; Walter A Rocca; Elizabeth A Stewart Journal: Menopause Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Lubna Pal; Susan M Hailpern; Nanette F Santoro; Ruth Freeman; David Barad; Simon Kipersztok; Vanessa M Barnabei; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller Journal: Menopause Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso; Anisha Satish; Zaraq Khan; Carin Y Smith; Walter A Rocca; Elizabeth A Stewart Journal: Menopause Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso; Zaraq Khan; Amy L Weaver; Carin Y Smith; Walter A Rocca; Elizabeth A Stewart Journal: Menopause Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Bijan J Borah; Xiaoxi Yao; Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso; Herbert C Heien; Elizabeth A Stewart Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 7.661