Cited by 120Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsUterine Myomas and TreatmentsUreteral procedures and complications

Incidence of pelvic floor repair after hysterectomy: A population-based cohort study

Open access
Blandon, Roberta E., Bharucha, Adil E., Melton, L. Joseph, Schleck, Cathy D., Babalola, Ebenezer O., Zinsmeister, Alan R., Gebhart, John B.·2007·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Abstract

Objective The objective of the study was to assess the incidence of and risk factors for pelvic floor repair (PFR) procedures after hysterectomy.Study design Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project database, we tracked the incidence of PFRs through June 2006 among 8220 Olmsted County, MN, women who had a hysterectomy for benign indications between 1965 and 2002.Results The cumulative incidence of PFR after hysterectomy was 5.1% by 30 years. This risk was not influenced by age at hysterectomy or calendar period. Future PFR was more frequently required in women who had prolapse, whether they underwent a hysterectomy alone (eg, vaginal [hazard ratio (HR) 4.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.5 to 7.3], abdominal [HR 3.9; 95% CI 1.9 to 8.0]) or a hysterectomy and PFR (ie, vaginal [HR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 2.7] or abdominal [HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.5 to 5.5]).Conclusion Compared with women without prolapse, women who had a hysterectomy for prolapse were at increased risk for subsequent PFR.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.064

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blandon, R. E., Bharucha, A. E., Melton, L. J., Schleck, C. D., Babalola, E. O., Zinsmeister, A. R., & Gebhart, J. B.
Affiliations
Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Bharucha, Adil E.
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-12
Volume
197
Issue
6
Pages
664.e1-664.e7
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982297796
Cited by
120
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD041129)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Ureteral procedures and complications
Keywords
pelvic floor reconstruction, hysterectomy, pelvic organ prolapse, post-hysterectomy complications, risk factors, incidence, benign hysterectomy, Rochester Epidemiology Project, women's health
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Child, Female, Humans, Hysterectomy, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Uterine Prolapse, Cohort Studies, Incidence, Pelvic Floor

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review