OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether older postmenopausal women with a history of bilateral oophorectomy before natural menopause (surgical menopause) have a higher risk of nonvertebral postmenopausal fracture than women with natural menopause. METHODS: We used 21 years of prospectively collected incident fracture data from the ongoing Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, a cohort study of community-dwelling women without previous bilateral hip fracture who were 65 years or older at enrollment, to determine the risk of hip, wrist, and any nonvertebral fracture. χ(2) and t tests were used to compare the two groups on important characteristics. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models stratified by baseline oral estrogen use status were used to estimate the risk of fracture. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics differed significantly among the 6,616 women within the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures who underwent either surgical (1,157) or natural (5,459) menopause, including mean age at menopause (44.3 ± 7.4 vs 48.9 ± 4.9 y, P < 0.001) and current use of oral estrogen (30.2% vs 6.5%, P < 0.001). Fracture rates were not significantly increased for surgical versus natural menopause, even among women who had never used oral estrogen (hip fracture: hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.63-1.21; wrist fracture: HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.78-1.57; any nonvertebral fracture: HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.93-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide some reassurance that the long-term risk of nonvertebral fracture is not substantially increased for postmenopausal women who experienced premenopausal bilateral oophorectomy, compared with postmenopausal women with intact ovaries, even in the absence of postmenopausal estrogen therapy.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether older postmenopausal women with a history of bilateral oophorectomy before natural menopause (surgical menopause) have a higher risk of nonvertebral postmenopausal fracture than women with natural menopause. METHODS: We used 21 years of prospectively collected incident fracture data from the ongoing Study of Osteoporotic Fractures, a cohort study of community-dwelling women without previous bilateral hip fracture who were 65 years or older at enrollment, to determine the risk of hip, wrist, and any nonvertebral fracture. χ(2) and t tests were used to compare the two groups on important characteristics. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models stratified by baseline oral estrogen use status were used to estimate the risk of fracture. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics differed significantly among the 6,616 women within the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures who underwent either surgical (1,157) or natural (5,459) menopause, including mean age at menopause (44.3 ± 7.4 vs 48.9 ± 4.9 y, P < 0.001) and current use of oral estrogen (30.2% vs 6.5%, P < 0.001). Fracture rates were not significantly increased for surgical versus natural menopause, even among women who had never used oral estrogen (hip fracture: hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.63-1.21; wrist fracture: HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.78-1.57; any nonvertebral fracture: HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.93-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: These data provide some reassurance that the long-term risk of nonvertebral fracture is not substantially increased for postmenopausal women who experienced premenopausal bilateral oophorectomy, compared with postmenopausal women with intact ovaries, even in the absence of postmenopausal estrogen therapy.
Authors: S R Cummings; D M Black; M C Nevitt; W S Browner; J A Cauley; H K Genant; S R Mascioli; J C Scott; D G Seeley; P Steiger Journal: JAMA Date: 1990-02-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Garnet L Anderson; Marian Limacher; Annlouise R Assaf; Tamsen Bassford; Shirley A A Beresford; Henry Black; Denise Bonds; Robert Brunner; Robert Brzyski; Bette Caan; Rowan Chlebowski; David Curb; Margery Gass; Jennifer Hays; Gerardo Heiss; Susan Hendrix; Barbara V Howard; Judith Hsia; Allan Hubbell; Rebecca Jackson; Karen C Johnson; Howard Judd; Jane Morley Kotchen; Lewis Kuller; Andrea Z LaCroix; Dorothy Lane; Robert D Langer; Norman Lasser; Cora E Lewis; JoAnn Manson; Karen Margolis; Judith Ockene; Mary Jo O'Sullivan; Lawrence Phillips; Ross L Prentice; Cheryl Ritenbaugh; John Robbins; Jacques E Rossouw; Gloria Sarto; Marcia L Stefanick; Linda Van Horn; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Robert Wallace; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-04-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Teresa A Hillier; Joanne H Rizzo; Kathryn L Pedula; Katie L Stone; Jane A Cauley; Doug C Bauer; Steven R Cummings Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Dimitrios J Hadjidakis; Evangelos P Kokkinakis; Michael E Sfakianakis; Sotirios A Raptis Journal: Maturitas Date: 2003-04-25 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Grace Huang; Andrea Coviello; Michael P LaValley; Kristine E Ensrud; Jane A Cauley; Peggy M Cawthon; Lisa Fredman Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-09-24 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: D Kuh; S Muthuri; R Cooper; A Moore; K Mackinnon; C Cooper; J E Adams; R Hardy; K A Ward Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Ingrid E Fakkert; Eveline van der Veer; Elske Marije Abma; Joop D Lefrandt; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Jan C Oosterwijk; Riemer H J A Slart; Iris G Westrik; Geertruida H de Bock; Marian J E Mourits Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 3.240