ArticleSaudi journal of medicine & medical sciences
Pathologic Profile of Hysterectomy Cases in Saudi Arabia: A Tertiary Center Experience.
Article in Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hysterectomies are increasingly being replaced by more conservative management modalities and are now only used for limited clinical indications. The agreement between these indications and the final pathology is understudied. Objectives: This study aimed to correlate the preoperative clinical diagnoses with the pathological findings detected in hysterectomies in Saudi women of different age groups. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study analyzed the preoperative clinical indications and the subsequent clinical and pathological data of all hysterectomies conducted at a single tertiary care hospital in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia between January 2010 and December 2021. Results: There was no decline in the frequency of hysterectomies across the study period. Abnormal uterine bleeding was the most common clinical indication across all age groups, followed by symptomatic fibroid and uterine prolapse in women aged <50 and ≥50 years, respectively. A total of 9.2% of the cases were indicated for therapeutic reasons, either as an emergency procedure for peripartum hemorrhage or for suspected uterine premalignant and malignant lesions. Besides these, 41.2% of patients had more than one pathology, with the most common combination being leiomyoma and adenomyosis (43.4%). The difference in age between malignant and benign cases (52.3 vs. 48.8 years, respectively) was not statistically significant ( Conclusions: Most of our cohort had benign lesions. Perceptible misuse of the procedure in this cohort was unlikely, as a large proportion of the patients had more than one pathology corresponding to each clinical indication.
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.