Cochrane · systematic review · CD012858
Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy versus hysterectomy alone
van Lieshout, LAM, Steenbeek, MP, De Hullu, JA, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
Gynaecology and FertilityAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
3
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 1 · 25%Very low 2 · 50%Low 1 · 25%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy compared with hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention
Population: premenopausal women undergoing hysterectomy for benign gynaecological indications
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Incidence of epithelial ovarian cancer Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy vs hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy | no estimate extracted | 0 studies · 0 participants | Ungraded |
Surgery‐related adverse events: intraoperative complications Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy vs hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy | OR 0.66 [0.11, 3.94] | 1 study · 104 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Surgery‐related adverse events: short‐term postoperative complications Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy vs hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy | OR 0.13 [0.01, 2.14] | 1 study · 68 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Postoperative hormonal status (AMH) pmol/L Hysterectomy with opportunistic salpingectomy vs hysterectomy without opportunistic salpingectomy | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 283 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |