Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28716634›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2017

Utilization of apical vaginal support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy performed for benign conditions: a national estimate.

Whitney Trotter Ross, Melanie R Meister, Jonathan P Shepherd, Margaret A Olsen, Jerry L Lowder

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Sexual, bladder and bowel function following different minimally invasive techniques of radical hysterectomy in patients with early-stage cervical cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Whitney Trotter RossObstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO; Obstetrics and Gynecology, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Louis, MO. Electronic address: rossw@wudosis.wustl.edu.
Melanie R MeisterObstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO; Obstetrics and Gynecology, Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St Louis, MO.
Jonathan P ShepherdObstetrics and Gynecology, St Francis Hospital and Medical Center, Hartford, CT.
Margaret A OlsenMedicine and Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO.
Jerry L LowderObstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO.
Barnes-Jewish Hospital · USWashington University in St. Louis · USHartford Financial Services (United States)

Funding

WU INSTITUTE OF CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCESUL1TR002345 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI William G. Powderly · 2017 to 2026
$97.8M
Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS ADMINISTRATIVE DATA REPOSITORYR24HS019455 · AHRQ · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI FRASER, VICTORIA J. · 2010 to 2010
$969k
AHRQ HHS R24 HS019455NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApical vaginal support is considered the keystone of pelvic organ support. Level I evidence supports reestablishment of apical support at time of hysterectomy, regardless of whether the hysterectomy is performed for prolapse. National rates of apical support procedure performance at time of inpatient hysterectomy have not been well described.

objectiveWe sought to estimate trends and factors associated with use of apical support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy for benign indications in a large national database. STUDY

designThe National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample was used to identify hysterectomies performed from 2004 through 2013 for benign indications. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to select both procedures and diagnoses. The primary outcome was performance of an apical support procedure at time of hysterectomy. Descriptive and multivariable analyses were performed.

resultsThere were 3,509,230 inpatient hysterectomies performed for benign disease from 2004 through 2013. In both nonprolapse and prolapse groups, there was a significant decrease in total number of annual hysterectomies performed over the study period (P < .0001). There were 2,790,652 (79.5%) hysterectomies performed without a diagnosis of prolapse, and an apical support procedure was performed in only 85,879 (3.1%). There was a significant decrease in the proportion of hysterectomies with concurrent apical support procedure (high of 4.0% in 2004 to 2.5% in 2013, P < .0001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, increasing age, hospital type (urban teaching), hospital bed size (large and medium), and hysterectomy type (vaginal and laparoscopically assisted vaginal) were associated with performance of an apical support procedure. During the study period, 718,578 (20.5%) inpatient hysterectomies were performed for prolapse diagnoses and 266,743 (37.1%) included an apical support procedure. There was a significant increase in the proportion of hysterectomies with concurrent apical support procedure (low of 31.3% in 2005 to 49.3% in 2013, P < .0001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, increasing age, hospital type (urban teaching), hospital bed size (medium and large), and hysterectomy type (total laparoscopic and laparoscopic supracervical) were associated with performance of an apical support procedure.

conclusionThis national database study demonstrates that apical support procedures are not routinely performed at time of inpatient hysterectomy regardless of presence of prolapse diagnosis. Educational efforts are needed to increase awareness of the importance of reestablishing apical vaginal support at time of hysterectomy regardless of indication.

Indexed as

AdultAge FactorsFemaleHealth SurveysHospital Bed CapacityHospitals, TeachingHospitals, UrbanHumansHysterectomyLaparoscopyMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPractice Patterns, Physicians'United StatesUterine Prolapseapical support procedurehysterectomyuterovaginal prolapse

Identifiers

PMID28716634
PMCPMC5614829
OpenAlexW2735997561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.