OBJECTIVE: To review the data on long-term outcomes in women who underwent prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy, a common surgical procedure that has more than doubled in frequency since the 1960s. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review of the published data on the consequences of prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy. Special emphasis was given to the Mayo Clinic Cohort Study of Oophorectomy and Aging. Main outcome measures Overall mortality, cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment and dementia, parkinsonism, osteoporosis, psychological wellbeing and sexual function. RESULTS: There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that the premature loss of ovarian function caused by bilateral oophorectomy performed before natural menopause is associated with several negative outcomes. In particular, studies have revealed an increased risk of premature death, cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment or dementia, parkinsonism, osteoporosis and bone fractures, decline in psychological wellbeing and decline in sexual function. The effects involve different organs (e.g. heart, bone, or brain), and different functions within organs (e.g. cognitive, motor, or emotional brain functions). Estrogen treatment may prevent some but not all of these negative outcomes. CONCLUSION: The potential adverse effects of prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy on heart health, neurological health, bone health and quality of life should be carefully weighed against its potential benefits for cancer risk reduction in women at average risk of ovarian cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To review the data on long-term outcomes in women who underwent prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy, a common surgical procedure that has more than doubled in frequency since the 1960s. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review of the published data on the consequences of prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy. Special emphasis was given to the Mayo Clinic Cohort Study of Oophorectomy and Aging. Main outcome measures Overall mortality, cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment and dementia, parkinsonism, osteoporosis, psychological wellbeing and sexual function. RESULTS: There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that the premature loss of ovarian function caused by bilateral oophorectomy performed before natural menopause is associated with several negative outcomes. In particular, studies have revealed an increased risk of premature death, cardiovascular disease, cognitive impairment or dementia, parkinsonism, osteoporosis and bone fractures, decline in psychological wellbeing and decline in sexual function. The effects involve different organs (e.g. heart, bone, or brain), and different functions within organs (e.g. cognitive, motor, or emotional brain functions). Estrogen treatment may prevent some but not all of these negative outcomes. CONCLUSION: The potential adverse effects of prophylactic bilateral oophorectomy on heart health, neurological health, bone health and quality of life should be carefully weighed against its potential benefits for cancer risk reduction in women at average risk of ovarian cancer.
Authors: Femke Atsma; Marie-Louise E L Bartelink; Diederick E Grobbee; Yvonne T van der Schouw Journal: Menopause Date: 2006 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Joanna B Madalinska; Marc van Beurden; Eveline M A Bleiker; Heiddis B Valdimarsdottir; Judith Hollenstein; Leon F Massuger; Katja N Gaarenstroom; Marian J E Mourits; René H M Verheijen; Eleonora B L van Dorst; Hans van der Putten; Ko van der Velden; Henk Boonstra; Neil K Aaronson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Walter A Rocca; Brandon R Grossardt; Mariza de Andrade; George D Malkasian; L Joseph Melton Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Barbara V Howard; Lewis Kuller; Robert Langer; JoAnn E Manson; Catherine Allen; Annlouise Assaf; Barbara B Cochrane; Joseph C Larson; Norman Lasser; Monique Rainford; Linda Van Horn; Marcia L Stefanick; Maurizio Trevisan Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-03-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rebekah Schiff; Christopher John Bulpitt; Keith A Wesnes; Chakravarthi Rajkumar Journal: Psychoneuroendocrinology Date: 2004-12-02 Impact factor: 4.905
Authors: Donna Shoupe; William H Parker; Michael S Broder; Zhimei Liu; Cindy Farquhar; Jonathan S Berek Journal: Menopause Date: 2007 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Giovanni D Aletti; Mary M Gallenberg; William A Cliby; Aminah Jatoi; Lynn C Hartmann Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: William H Parker; Michael S Broder; Zhimei Liu; Donna Shoupe; Cindy Farquhar; Jonathan S Berek Journal: Clin Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.190
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: Karen M Mustian; Lisa K Sprod; Oxana G Palesh; Luke J Peppone; Michelle C Janelsins; Supriya G Mohile; Jennifer Carroll Journal: Curr Sports Med Rep Date: 2009 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.733