Cited by 175Endometriosis Research and TreatmentUterine Myomas and TreatmentsGynecological conditions and treatments

Surgery: Adenomyosis at hysterectomy: a study on frequency distribution and patient characteristics

Vercellini, Paolo, Parazzini, Fabio, Oldani, Sabina, Panazza, Stefania, Bramante, Tiziana, Crosignani, Pier Giorgio·1995·Human Reproduction

Abstract

To evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for adenomyosis, the clinical records of consecutive women undergoing hysterectomy during a 3 year period were retrieved. Data were collected on indication for the intervention, general sociodemographic characteristics of the patients, age at menarche, parity, abortions, and menopausal status at surgery. Adenomyosis was diagnosed in 332 of the 1334 cases (24.9%). The condition was present in 146 of the 627 patients (23.3%) with fibroids and menorrhagia, 68 of the 265 (25.7%) with prolapse, 21 of the 98 (21.4%) with ovarian cysts, 19 of the 100 (19%) with cervical cancer, 31 of the 110 (28.2%) with endometrial cancer, 16 of the 57 (28.1%) with ovarian cancer, and 19 of the 77 (24.7%) with miscellaneous indications. These differences were not statistically significant (chi 2(6) = 11.14). In comparison with nulliparous women, the odds ratio was 1.3 and 1.5 respectively in women with one and > or = two births (chi 2(1) trend = 5.76 P < 0.05). No relationship was found between age at surgery, age at menarche, indications for surgery, menopausal status at intervention, and presence of endometriosis. Our findings do not support the notion that adenomyosis is more frequently related to particular clinical conditions, and suggest that parity may be associated with an increased frequency of adenomyosis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136111

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Histologically proven adenomyosis at hysterectomy has been linked to multiparity.

    “The primary observation regarding the prevalence of adenomyosis and fecundity has linked histologically proven adenomyosis at the time of hysterectomies to multiparity (34,35).”

    From Endometrial receptivity in adenomyosis and/or endometriosis (2023) · cites this paper as [35]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vercellini, P., Parazzini, F., Oldani, S., Panazza, S., Bramante, T., & Crosignani, P. G.
Affiliations
University of Milan (IT)
Venue
Human Reproduction
Published
1995-05
Volume
10
Issue
5
Pages
1160-1162
ISSN
  • 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2350
OpenAlex
W1904515219
Cited by
175
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gynecological conditions and treatments
Keywords
adenomyosis, hysterectomy, prevalence, risk factors, parity, nulliparity, endometriosis, uterine fibroids, menorrhagia, pelvic organ prolapse, ovarian cysts, cervical cancer, endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, age at menarche, menopausal status
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Endometriosis, Female, Humans, Hysterectomy, Italy, Middle Aged, Parity, Risk Factors, Uterine Diseases

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