4.2 Article

Incidence and lifetime risk of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Denmark from 1977 to 2009

期刊

INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 49-55

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-014-2413-y

关键词

Pelvic organ prolapse; Incidence; Age; Lifetime risk

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of the study was to describe the incidence of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgeries in Denmark during the last 30 years, age distribution over time, and the lifetime risk of undergoing POP surgery. We carried out a population-based registry study. The setting was the Danish National Patient Registry. The sample consisted of Danish women of all ages undergoing prolapse surgery during the period 1977-2009. Data were retrieved from the Danish National Patient Registry. Prolapse surgery included surgery for any type of genital prolapse including hysterectomy due to prolapse. The main outcome measures were incidence of POP, age distribution over time, and lifetime risk of undergoing POP surgery. Surgical interventions for POP decreased by 47 % from 1977 (288 procedures/100,000 women) to 1999 (153 procedures/100,000 women). Subsequently, they increased to 75 % of the original incidence rate; in 2008, the incidence of total POP procedures was 201 out of 100,000 women and the incidence of women undergoing POP surgery was 139 out of 100,000 women. During the study period, the age-specific incidence of POP surgeries increased for women over the age of 65-69 years and decreased for women below that age. In 2008, the lifetime risk for an 80-year-old woman of undergoing at least one POP surgery was 18.7 %. The incidence of POP surgery varied up to 50 % during the study period. The age distribution changed so that more elderly and less young women had surgery in 2008 compared with 1978. Finally, we found that the lifetime risk of undergoing POP surgery for an 80-year-old was 26.9 % in 1978, 20.5 % in 1988, 17.2 % in 1998, and 18.7 % in 2008.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据