ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2025
The potential for opportunistic salpingectomy to reduce ovarian cancer in women undergoing non-gynecologic surgery.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking ovarian cancer III: the past decade and future directions.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2026Review
- Opportunistic salpingectomy for prevention of ovarian cancer among the general population.Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2025Review
- Environment, lifestyle, and cancer in women.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Factors influencing decision-making on opportunistic salpingo-oophorectomy for ovarian cancer prevention in women with gastrointestinal cancers undergoing intra-abdominal surgery.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- New opportunities for opportunistic salpingectomy: Leveraging non-gynecologic surgeries for ovarian cancer prevention.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We sought to estimate the impact, acceptance, and additional cost of opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS) or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) during certain non-gynecologic procedures on the incidence of high grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC).STUDY
designUS population and institutional data were reviewed for three common laparoscopic non-gynecologic surgeries: Cholecystectomy (CCY), Ventral Hernia Repair (VHR), and Bariatric Surgical Procedures (BSP). Additionally, institutional review was performed on all patients, aged 35-75, undergoing these procedures from July 2016 to June 2019 to determine candidacy for OBS or BSO. Patients with history of hysterectomy or tubal sterilization were excluded. Baseline population risk (1.4%) and estimated risk reduction associated with OBS (65%) and BSO (98%) were applied to determine the impact OBS or BSO would have on incidence if applied as standard of care. Separately, patients were surveyed regarding acceptance of concurrent risk reducing procedure. Cost effective analysis (CEA) was performed using multiple models which evaluated participation of Surgery, OB/GYN, and both. Results: For the institutional review, 765 cases were identified, with 417 eligible. Extrapolating the percentage of eligible female patients from our institution undergoing CCY (63 %), VHR (57 %), and BSP (81 %) to reported annual US cases, resulted in eligible cases as follows: CCY (472,500), VHR (199,500-285,000), and BSP (184,680). Therefore, we estimate 466,891---513,488 eligible patients per year. Assuming 20,400 new ovarian cancer (OC) cases annually, between 4,248 and 4,839 cases would be eliminated (20.8-23.7 % reduced incidence). Fifty-nine patients were surveyed (13 AA, 2H) with acceptance rate of 81 %. CEA revealed that multiple models for institution of this practice would favor implementing risk reducing surgery, with OBS performing better than BSO. Conclusion: Over half of female patients undergoing three common non-gynecologic abdominal surgeries could benefit from OBS or BSO. If logistics can be arranged between surgeons and their patients, incidence of OC could be reduced by at least 20-25%.
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.