ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2025
Menopausal symptoms after hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy: a pilot study.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Opportunistic salpingectomy during hysterectomy with ovarian preservation may reduce the risk of ovarian cancer, but concerns remain that adding salpingectomy to hysterectomy could affect ovarian vascularisation and subsequent function. Objectives: To assess the feasibility of a full-scale trial to evaluate changes in menopausal symptoms based on the menopause rating scale (MRS) six months following hysterectomy, with and without opportunistic salpingectomy. Methods: A prospective observational pilot study of premenopausal women age 40 to 55 years scheduled for hysterectomy with ovarian preservation was conducted, where participants were counselled and given the option of concomitant salpingectomy or not. Main Outcome Measures: Forty-six out of 50 women chose opportunistic salpingectomy. It took 17 months to recruit 50 patients. Complete follow-up data was achieved in 43 of the 50 participants. Results: The median MRS score remained unchanged in the opportunistic salpingectomy group at 9 [interquartile range (IQR): 3-14], both before surgery and six months afterwards (n=39). In contrast, the group of women who did not undergo opportunistic salpingectomy had a median MRS score of 11 (IQR: 3-16) preoperatively, which increased to 25 (IQR: 6-32) six months postoperatively (n=4). Conclusions: The majority of patients in our cohort opted for opportunistic salpingectomy. However, no deterioration in menopausal symptoms was observed in this group after six months. A randomised controlled trial comparing hysterectomy with and without opportunistic salpingectomy in this patient population may not be feasible, given the strong patient preference for salpingectomy and slow recruitment. What is New?: The development of subjective menopausal symptoms is evaluated after hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy.
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.