ArticleCancers2026
Decade-Stratified Malignancy Risk in Hysteroscopic Polypectomy: A Multicenter Registry Analysis of 9269 Procedures.
Article in Cancers, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalignancy risk in hysteroscopic polypectomy specimens rises with age and postmenopausal status, but decade-stratified absolute rates from large, unselected cohorts remain scarce, limiting the quantitative basis for pre-procedural risk counseling.
objectiveTo estimate decade-specific absolute malignancy rates and to determine how the documented procedural indication modifies that risk.
methodsRetrospective multicenter cohort study with SNOMED-coded histology. All hysteroscopic polypectomies at five Assuta Medical Center sites from January 2019 to April 2026 with a linked histology result constituted the analytic cohort (
resultsThe overall malignancy rate was 1.63% (151/9269), increasing monotonically: 0.45% (under 50 years), 1.25% (50-59), 3.79% (60-69), and 4.58% (70 or older). Adjusted odds ratios versus the reference group were 2.02 (95% CI, 1.13-3.60), 5.77 (95% CI, 3.39-9.83), and 8.03 (95% CI, 4.51-14.30). Across all age groups, procedures with a documented postmenopausal bleeding (PMB) indication carried an overall malignancy rate of 6.32% (29/459; adjusted OR, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.96-4.72 versus incidental polyp finding); among women aged 70 or older with a documented PMB indication, the rate was 8/61 (13.1%; 95% CI, 6.8-23.8%). Procedures coded with a non-PMB uterine bleeding indication were not associated with excess malignancy risk (0.36%). Weight over 80 kg was an independent predictor of endometrial malignancy (adjusted OR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.92-4.84). Age group and the documented PMB indication were entered as independent covariates in a single multivariable model; no significant age-by-PMB interaction was detected (likelihood ratio test
conclusionsMalignancy risk rises more than tenfold from the youngest to the oldest age group. Procedures with a documented PMB indication were associated with substantially higher risk than other indications, while non-PMB bleeding was not associated with excess risk in this cohort. Age and documented procedural indication may be the most clinically useful predictors for stratifying histological examination decisions.
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.