Risk of thyroid cancer following hysterectomy

The risk of thyroid cancer after hysterectomy and oophorectomy: a meta-analysis

Objectives

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to assess whether there is an association between hysterectomy and oophorectomy and risk of primary thyroid cancer.

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies published from database inception to May 13, 2024, using medical subject headings (MeSH) and keywords. All statistical analyses were performed using Stata statistical software (version 14.0). If P > 0.1 and I2 ≤ 50%, a fixed-effects model was adopted. If I2 > 50% a random-effects model was adopted. The funnel plot and Egger's test were used to evaluate publication bias.

Results

A total of 11 studies explored the association between a history of hysterectomy, oophorectomy and the risk of thyroid cancer. The pooling analysis shows that a history of hysterectomy, oophorectomy is associated with an increased risk of thyroid cancer (HR = 1.597; 95% CI: 1.467-1.738; I2 = 57.1%, P = 0.01 < 0.1). In the subgroup analysis, a follow-up duration exceeding 20 years is linked to an elevated risk of thyroid cancer (HR = 1.772; 95% CI: 1.301-2.414; I² = 81.70%, P = 0.004 > 0.001). Hysterectomy combined with salpingo-oophorectomy is associated with a higher risk of thyroid cancer incidence (HR = 1.633; 95% CI: 1.449-1.841; I² = 51.10%, P = 0.069 > 0.001). Studies that balanced smoking, alcohol consumption, and history of thyroid disease demonstrated an association between hysterectomy and increased risk of thyroid disease (HR = 1.734; 95% CI: 1.591-1.891; I² = 31.30%, P = 0.225 > 0.001).

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis reveals a heightened risk of primary thyroid cancer following hysterectomy and oophorectomy. These findings underscore the importance of considering potential cancer risks when determining surgical approaches and implementing preventive measures prior to these procedures.The meta-analysis was conducted in adherence to the guidelines outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (1). The protocol was pre-registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) platform, with the registration number CRD42024546451.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42024546451.

Thyroid cancer risk in women after hysterectomy: A nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Hysterectomy is commonly performed for benign uterine pathologies but there is some controversy over whether it is associated with an increased risk of thyroid cancer. This study examines the associations of hysterectomy with ovarian conservation or with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and thyroid cancer incidence in Taiwan.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a nationwide health insurance claims database and identified 29,577 women aged ≥30 years who underwent hysterectomy with ovarian conservation or hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy between 2000 and 2016. Propensity score-matching analyses were performed at ratios of 1:1 for the hysterectomy and no-hysterectomy groups, to reduce selection bias. We monitored thyroid cancer occurrence in both groups until 2017. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios with 95 % confidence intervals and determine thyroid cancer risk in women who underwent hysterectomy.

RESULTS

The study comprised 29,577 patients who underwent any hysterectomy and 29,577 participants who did not. The mean follow-up period was 10.03 ± 4.92 years. Patients who underwent hysterectomy had higher thyroid cancer incidence (4.72 per 10,000 person-years) than those who did not (3.06 per 10,000 person-years) and a greater risk of any thyroid cancer (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.40; 95 % confidence interval = 1.08-1.82). However, there was no association between hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and thyroid cancer incidence (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that women who undergo hysterectomy are at a higher risk of developing thyroid cancer than those who do not.

Hysterectomy and thyroid cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Incidence rates of thyroid cancer have increased. Recent studies findings suggest that women who underwent a hysterectomy have an elevated relative risk of thyroid cancer. The aim of our meta-analysis is to summarize the evidence about the association between hysterectomy and thyroid cancer risk.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus database were searched for studies published up to 5 September 2023. The PRISMA statement was followed. Heterogeneity was explored with Q statistic and the I2 statistic. Publication bias was assessed with Begg's and Egger's tests.

Results

Sixteen studies met the criteria. The pooled analysis showed a significantly 64% increment of thyroid cancer risk in association with any hysterectomy (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.48-1.81; I2 = 28.68%, p = 0.156). Hysterectomy without oophorectomy was a stronger predictor of risk than hysterectomy with oophorectomy. The pooled analysis of data regarding hysterectomy without oophorectomy showed a statistically significant increment of thyroid cancer risk by 59%. Hysterectomy with oophorectomy was associated with an increase of thyroid cancer risk of 39% (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.16-1.67; I2 = 42.10%, p = 0.049). Significant publication bias was not detected.

Conclusions

Our findings help with decision making around these surgeries.

Prevalence of Hysterectomy by Self-Reported Disability Among Canadian Women: Findings from a National Cross-Sectional Survey

Introduction: Our objective was to investigate differences in prevalence of hysterectomy by self-reported disability status among Canadian women.

Materials and Methods: We analyzed cross-sectional data from the Canadian Community Health Survey 2012 on 30,170 women aged ≥20 years. Disability was defined as reports of sometimes or often (vs. never) experiencing functional limitations or reduction in daily activities at home, school, or work. Frequency of these limitations was used as a proxy for disability severity. The outcome was self-reported hysterectomy status. Modified Poisson regression was used to quantify the prevalence ratio (PR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for hysterectomy according to any, functional, or activity-limiting disability, after adjustment for household income, employment, education, ethnicity, and marital status. Results were stratified by age at time of data collection, categorized as childbearing (20–44 years), perimenopausal (45–59 years), and postmenopausal (60 years and older).

Results: Disability was significantly and consistently associated with higher prevalence of hysterectomy in women. The strength of association was inversely related to age category, and PRs for a given age category were similar across disability types and severity levels. PRs for the association between any disability and hysterectomy were 2.18 (95% CI 1.36–3.50) for childbearing-aged women, 1.48 (95% CI 1.21–1.80) for perimenopausal women, and 1.12 (95% CI 1.02–1.24) for postmenopausal women.

Conclusions: Prevalence of hysterectomy is disproportionately higher among women with self-reported disabilities compared with women without disabilities, with these differences most pronounced in women of childbearing age.