ArticlePloS one2022
Unexpected malignancy at the time of hysterectomy performed for a benign indication: A retrospective review.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the proportion of patients undergoing hysterectomy for a benign indication who have unexpected malignancy (UM) on postoperative pathology and characterize the nature of UMs.
methodsThis was a multi-center, retrospective study of patients undergoing hysterectomy for a benign indication from July 2016 to December 2019 at 7 Ontario, Canada hospitals (4 academic, 3 community). Hysterectomies for invasive placentation, malignant, and premalignant indications were excluded. Primary outcome was rate of unexpected malignancy as defined by the number of patients with malignancy on final pathology divided by the total number of hysterectomy cases. Data was extracted from health records and electronic charts. Patient, surgical, and surgeon characteristics were compared between benign and UM groups using bivariate methods. Associations between UM status and perioperative variables were assessed using bivariate logistic regression.
resultsIn the study period, 2779 hysterectomies were performed. UM incidence was 1.8% (51 malignancies/2779 cases), with one patient having two malignancies (total UMs = 52). The most common UM types were endometrial (27/52, 51.9%) and sarcoma (13/52, 25%). Patients with UM were older (57.2 ± 11.4 years vs. 52.8 ± 12.5 years, p = .015), had more previous laparotomies (2 (1.25, 2.0) vs. 1 (1.0, 1.0), p < .001), and higher BMI (29.7 ± 7.2 kg/m2 vs. 28.0 ± 5.9 kg/m2, p = .049) and ASA class (p < .028). Regarding surgical factors, patients with UM had more adhesions (p = .001), transfusions (p = .020), and blood loss (p = .006) compared to those with benign pathology. Patient characteristics most strongly associated with UM were age (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.78-3.72, p < .001) and preoperative diagnosis of pelvic mass (OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.11-6.20, p = .019).
conclusionIncidence of UM at hysterectomy for benign indication was 1.8%. Several perioperative variables are associated with an increased chance of UM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.