Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Adnexectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Preoperative counseling about salpingectomy with pelvic surgery is recommended by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology for ovarian cancer risk reduction. Our objective was to determine recent practice patterns and patient factors associated with salpingectomy with vaginal hysterectomy (VH) for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) in the USA. We hypothesize that salpingectomy might have become more common in recent years.

Methods

We queried the 2014–2016 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for women with a postoperative diagnosis of POP who underwent VH with any combination of pelvic reconstructive procedures. CPT codes do not differentiate salpingectomy from salpingo-oophorectomy, so subjects were stratified by whether concurrent adnexectomy was performed. Chi-squared and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate characteristics associated with adnexectomy. Propensity score matching was utilized when evaluating postoperative complication rates.

Results

Of 5,344 women who underwent VH, 2019 (37.8%) had adnexectomy. Adnexectomy rate increased from 34.4% in 2014 to 46.8% in 2016 (p < 0.001). Adnexectomy rates of fellowship-trained urogynecologists and general gynecologists were similar (36.0% vs 38.8%, p = 0.197). On logistic regression analysis, patients more likely to undergo adnexectomy were < 65 years old (OR 0.844, CI 0.75–0.95, p = 0.004), had BMI <30 (OR 0.76, CI 0.68–0.86, p < 0.001), and were non-smokers (OR 0.78, CI 0.64–0.95, p = 0.016). Mean operative time was 17 min longer with adnexectomy (145 vs 128 min, p < 0.001). There were no differences in postoperative complications or reoperation rates between groups.

Conclusions

Adnexectomy during VH for POP is safe and increasingly utilized by gynecology surgeons in the USA.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Torre LA, Trabert B, DeSantis CE, Miller KD, Samimi G, Runowicz CD, et al. Ovarian cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(4):284–96. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21456.

  2. 2.

    Erickson BK, Conner MG, Landen CN. The role of the fallopian tube in the origin of ovarian cancer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(5):409–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2013.04.019.

  3. 3.

    Venkatesan P. Possible origin of ovarian cancer in the fallopian tubes. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(12):e714. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30834-3.

  4. 4.

    McAlpine JN, Hanley GE, Woo MM, Tone AA, Rozenberg N, Swenerton KD, et al. Opportunistic salpingectomy: uptake, risks, and complications of a regional initiative for ovarian cancer prevention. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(5):471.e471–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.003.

  5. 5.

    Hanley GE, McAlpine JN, Pearce CL, Miller D. The performance and safety of bilateral salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(3):270.e271–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2016.10.035.

  6. 6.

    Falconer H, Yin L, Gronberg H, Altman D. Ovarian cancer risk after salpingectomy: a nationwide population-based study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107(2):dju410. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju410.

  7. 7.

    Mikhail E, Salemi JL, Mogos MF, Hart S, Salihu HM, Imudia AN. National trends of adnexal surgeries at the time of hysterectomy for benign indication, United States, 1998-2011. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(5):713.e711–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.04.031.

  8. 8.

    Yoon S-H, Kim S-N, Shim S-H, Kang S-B, Lee S-J. Bilateral salpingectomy can reduce the risk of ovarian cancer in the general population: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2016;55:38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.12.003.

  9. 9.

    Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Committee opinion no. 620: salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(1):279–81. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000459871.88564.09.

  10. 10.

    Morgan DM, Kamdar NS, Swenson CW, Kobernik EK, Sammarco AG, Nallamothu B. Nationwide trends in the utilization of and payments for hysterectomy in the United States among commercially insured women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(4):425.e421–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.12.218.

  11. 11.

    Committee on Gynecologic Practice. Committee opinion no. 701 summary: choosing the route of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(6):1149–1150. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000002108.

  12. 12.

    Aarts JW, Nieboer TE, Johnson N, Tavender E, Garry R, Mol BW, et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;8:Cd003677. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003677.pub5.

  13. 13.

    Hanley GE, Kwon JS, Finlayson SJ, Huntsman DG, Miller D, McAlpine JN. Extending the safety evidence for opportunistic salpingectomy in prevention of ovarian cancer: a cohort study from British Columbia, Canada. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;219(2):172.e171–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.05.019.

  14. 14.

    User guide for the 2016 ACS NSQIP participant user file (PUF). American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. 2017. Available at https://www.facs.org/~/media/files/quality%20programs/nsqip/nsqip_puf_userguide_2016.ashx. Accessed 18 February 2019.

  15. 15.

    Parker WH, Broder MS, Liu Z, Shoupe D, Farquhar C, Berek JS. Ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy for benign disease. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106(2):219–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.Aog.0000167394.38215.56.

  16. 16.

    American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: user guide for the 2016 ACS NSQIP Participant Use Data File. 2017. Available at https://www.facs.org/~/media/files/quality%20programs/nsqip/nsqip_puf_userguide_2016.ashx. Accessed 18 February 2019.

  17. 17.

    Cadish LA, Shepherd JP, Barber EL, Ridgeway B. Risks and benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy: a decision analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(5):603.e601–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.06.007.

  18. 18.

    Cohen SL, Vitonis AF, Einarsson JI. Updated hysterectomy surveillance and factors associated with minimally invasive hysterectomy. JSLS. 2014;18(3):e2014.00096. https://doi.org/10.4293/jsls.2014.00096.

  19. 19.

    Jacoby VL, Autry A, Jacobson G, Domush R, Nakagawa S, Jacoby A. Nationwide use of laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with abdominal and vaginal approaches. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(5):1041–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b9d222.

  20. 20.

    Antosh DD, High R, Brown HW, Oliphant SS, Abed H, Philip N, et al. Feasibility of prophylactic salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(5):605.e601–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.07.017.

  21. 21.

    Robert M, Cenaiko D, Sepandj J, Iwanicki S. Success and complications of salpingectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(5):864–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2015.04.012.

  22. 22.

    Sorensen LT. Wound healing and infection in surgery. The clinical impact of smoking and smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Surg. 2012;147(4):373–83. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2012.5.

  23. 23.

    Watt J, Tricco AC, Talbot-Hamon C, Pham B, Rios P, Grudniewicz A, Wong C, Sinclair D, Straus SE (2018) Identifying older adults at risk of harm following elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med 16(1):2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0986-2.

  24. 24.

    Karp NE, Fenner DE, Burgunder-Zdravkovski L, Morgan DM. Removal of normal ovaries in women under age 51 at the time of hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(5):716.e711–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.05.062.

  25. 25.

    Cornella JL. Vaginal salpingectomy techniques in the presence of ovarian conservation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018;25(1):16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2017.06.012.

  26. 26.

    Giraudet G, Rubod C, Collinet P, Cosson M. Salpingectomy during vaginal hysterectomy: a surgical technique to make it easier. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(2):271–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000002746.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Emily A. Slopnick.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

A K Hijaz is a member of the Astellas, Inc. Speaker’s Bureau.

S T Mahajan is a member of the Astellas, Inc. Speaker’s Bureau and receives grant funding from Allergan, Inc.

The remaining authors have no financial disclosures or conflicts of interest to report.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 5 Patient characteristics associated with adnexectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse in a propensity score matched cohort

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Slopnick, E.A., Sheyn, D.D., Chapman, G.C. et al. Adnexectomy at the time of vaginal hysterectomy for pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 31, 373–379 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-03967-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Database
  • Gynecology
  • Health services research
  • Hysterectomy
  • Vaginal
  • Pelvic organ prolapse
  • Salpingectomy