Risk Factors for Bowel Injury in Hysterectomy for Benign Indications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence and risk factors for bowel injury in women undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among women undergoing hysterectomy for benign indications from 2012 to 2016 at institutes participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, including both inpatient and outpatient settings. Bowel injury was identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes as patients who underwent bowel repair at the time of hysterectomy or postoperatively within 30 days. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to control for patient clinical factors and perioperative factors. RESULTS: Bowel injury occurred in 610 of 155,557 (0.39%) included women. After bivariate analysis, factors associated with bowel injury included age, race, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, increased operative time, surgical approach, type of hysterectomy, lysis of adhesions, and operative indication. After adjusting for potential confounders, bowel injury was found associated with older age, surgical indication of endometriosis, and abdominal surgical approach. Compared with the surgical indication of endometriosis (n=63/10,625), the surgical indications of menstrual disorder (odds ratio [OR] 0.33, 95% CI 0.23-0.47; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.33, 95% CI 0.23-0.48; n=67/34,168), uterine leiomyomas (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.61-1.05; aOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.33-0.59; n=243/51,232), and genital prolapse (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20-0.45; aOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25-0.67; n=36/20,384) were each associated with lower odds of bowel injury. Compared with the vaginal approach to hysterectomy (n=27/27,434), the abdominal approach was found to have significantly increased odds of bowel injury (OR 10.80, 95% CI 7.31-15.95; aOR 10.49 95% CI 6.42-17.12; n=401/38,106); the laparoscopic approach had smaller but significantly increased odds (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.37-3.08; aOR 2.03 95% CI 1.24-3.34; n=182/90,017) as well. CONCLUSION: Increased risk of bowel injury is associated with endometriosis and the abdominal surgical approach to hysterectomy. These findings have implications for the surgical care of women with benign uterine 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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".