Bénéfices de la conservation ovarienne post ménopausique lors d’une hystérectomie pour pathologie bénigne : mirage ou réalité ?
review
OA: closed
CC0
⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
AI-generated summary
This paper investigates the benefits of postmenopausal ovarian conservation during hysterectomy for benign pathology, questioning whether these benefits are real or illusory.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
BackgroundThis study aimed to summarize the existing literature on the benefice-risk balance for ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy for benign disease in post menopausal women not at high risk for ovarian cancer.MethodsWe searched the published English and French literature using search engines from PUBMED, Medline for studies related to outcomes following hysterectomy with bilateral oophorectomy for benign disease and risk-reducing surgery for ovarian cancer.ResultsThere are in the literature arguments to support systematic bilateral oophorectomy in post menopausal women not at high risk for ovarian cancer (prevention of ovarian cancer, ovarian benign disease and chronic pelvic pain due to postoperative ovarian adhesions). There are also arguments against postmenopausal oophorectomy (effect on endocrine function, bone density, cardiovascular disease and increased mortality). Before the age of 65, there is no formal argument allowing to recommend an attitude rather than another. On the other hand, beyond the age of 65 years, the literature is clear and a bilateral salpingooophorectomy is recommended.ConclusionBefore the age of 65 years, benefits and relative risks of bilateral oophorectomy at the time of hysterectomy for benign disease even in post menopausal patients should be considered on an individual basis by clinicians and patients. Beyond the age of 65 years, the literature is clear and a bilateral salpingooophorectomy is recommended.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood
Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.
References (69)
- Elective oophorectomy for benign gynecological disorders via openalex
- Oophorectomy vs Ovarian Conservation With Hysterectomy via openalex
- Ovarian Conservation at the Time of Hysterectomy and Long-Term Health Outcomes in the Nurses’ Health Study via openalex
- Should the ovaries be removed or retained at the time of hysterectomy for benign disease? via openalex
- The Fallopian Tube: Primary Site of Most Pelvic High-grade Serous Carcinomas via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2009.12.016 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/grf.0b013e31804a838d via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1048-891x.2004.14302.x via openalex
- doi:10.1097/01.pas.0000213335.40358.47 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/00006250-199404000-00011 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.10.004 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0020-7292(91)90315-v via openalex
- W41758773 via openalex
- W70383982 via openalex
- W143579009 via openalex
- W179515696 via openalex
- W1442973484 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(99)00241-0 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/01.gme.0000218683.97338.ea via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0090-8258(89)90533-7 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e3181cf3d79 via openalex
- doi:10.3121/cmr.2007.702 via openalex
- doi:10.1159/000293687 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0029-7844(94)00448-m via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s001980070064 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0002-9378(71)90485-6 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(78)90796-1 via openalex
- doi:10.1359/jbmr.041220 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81482-3 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2007.05.039 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1992.tb13758.x via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00921.x via openalex
- doi:10.1038/modpathol.2011.106 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.01.030 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(15)30400-2 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0378-5122(96)82005-6 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1989.tb03248.x via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0306-4530(92)90007-t via openalex
- doi:10.1586/14737175.7.11s.s35 via openalex
- doi:10.1634/theoncologist.1-5-326 via openalex
- doi:10.7326/0003-4819-137-3-200208060-00006 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0378-5122(94)00898-h via openalex
- doi:10.1359/jbmr.2003.18.5.900 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(06)70869-5 via openalex
- doi:10.1161/01.str.0000014421.15948.67 via openalex
- W2366964105 via openalex
- W2409334148 via openalex
- W2409455062 via openalex
- W2411321840 via openalex
- W2438987701 via openalex
- W2918154310 via openalex
- W6601650120 via openalex
- W6602876259 via openalex
- W6605793041 via openalex
- W6681641910 via openalex
- W6689958669 via openalex
- W6759754431 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(97)08233-0 via openalex
- doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-6781-6_6 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.ecl.2004.07.005 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0002-9610(67)90198-5 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.05.010 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.06.002 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0368-2315(05)82707-3 via openalex
- doi:10.1210/jcem.78.6.7515387 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/pas.0b013e3181ef7b16 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.mpdhp.2008.06.009 via openalex
- doi:10.1590/s1807-59322011000100013 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19950715)76:2<284::aid-cncr2820760219>3.0.co;2-5 via openalex
Cited by (1)
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-11T06:01:13.017405+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-08-06T06:41:17.185923+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK