Examining indicators of early menopause following opportunistic salpingectomy: a cohort study from British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The fallopian tube may often be the site of origin for the most common and lethal form of ovarian cancer, high-grade serous ovarian cancer. As a result, many colleges of obstetrics and gynecology, which include the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, are recommending surgical removal of the fallopian tube (bilateral salpingectomy) at the time of other gynecologic surgeries (particularly hysterectomy and tubal sterilization) in women at general population risk for ovarian cancer, collectively referred to as opportunistic salpingectomy. Previous research has illustrated no increased risk of complications after opportunistic salpingectomy. However, most studies that have examined potential hormonal consequences of opportunistic salpingectomy have had limited follow-up time and have focused on surrogate hormonal markers. OBJECTIVE: We examine whether there are differences in physician visits for menopause and filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy among women who undergo opportunistic salpingectomy in the population of British Columbia, Canada. STUDY DESIGN: We identified all women who were ≤50 years old in British Columbia who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy from 2008-2014. We compared women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy at hysterectomy with women who underwent hysterectomy alone and women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization with women who underwent tubal ligation. We used Cox Proportional hazards models to model time to physician visits for menopause and for filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy. We calculated adjusted hazards ratios for these outcomes and adjusted for other gynecologic conditions, surgical approach, and patient age. We performed an age-stratified analysis (<40, 40-44, 45-49 years) and conducted a sensitivity analysis that included only women with ≥5 years of follow up. RESULTS: We included 41,413 women in the study. There were 6861 women who underwent hysterectomy alone, 6500 who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy, 4479 who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, 18,621 who underwent tubal ligation, and 4952 who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization. In women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy, there was no difference in time to the first physician visit related to menopause for both women who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.88-1.09) and women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.10). There was also no difference in time to filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy for women who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy or opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.92; and adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-1.12; respectively). In contrast, we report significantly increase hazards for time to physician visit for menopause (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.95; 95% confidence interval, 1.78, 2.13) and filling a prescription for hormone replacement therapy (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.80; 95% confidence interval, 3.45, 4.18) among women who underwent hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. There were no increased hazards for physician visits for menopause or initiation of hormone replacement therapy among women who underwent opportunistic salpingectomy in any of the age-stratified analyses, nor among women with at least 5 years of follow up. CONCLUSION: Our results reveal no indication of an earlier age of onset of menopause among the population of women who underwent hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy and opportunistic salpingectomy for sterilization as measured by physician visits for menopause and initiation of hormone replacement therapy. Our findings are reassuring, given that earlier age at menopause is associated with increased mortality rates, particularly from cardiovascular disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".