Trends in Hysterectomy Incidence Rates During 2000–2015 in Denmark: Shifting from Abdominal to Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures

References

• Evans EC, Matteson KA, Orejuela FJ, et al. Salpingo-oophorectomy at the time of benign hysterectomy: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(3):476–485. doi:10.1097/AOG.000000000000159227500347
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer A, Rositch AF, Kahlert J, Gravitt PE, Blaakaer J, Søgaard M. Global epidemiology of hysterectomy: possible impact on gynecological cancer rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(1):23–29. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.02.01925724402
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikhail E, Salemi JL, Mogos MF, Hart S, Salihu HM, Imudia AN. National trends of adnexal surgeries at the time of hysterectomy for benign indication, United States, 1998–2011. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(5):713.e1–713.e13. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.04.031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moss EL, Morgan G, Martin AP, Sarhanis P, Ind T. Surgical trends, outcomes and disparities in minimal invasive surgery for patients with endometrial cancer in England: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2020;10(9):e036222. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lykke R, Blaakær J, Ottesen B, Gimbel H. Hysterectomy in Denmark 1977–2011: changes in rate, indications, and hospitalization. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;171(2):333–338. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.09.01124094821
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brummer THI, Jalkanen J, Fraser J, et al. FINHYST, a prospective study of 5279 hysterectomies: complications and their risk factors. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1741–1751. doi:10.1093/humrep/der11621540244
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson LF, Pandeya N, Byles J, Mishra GD. Hysterectomy and perceived physical function in middle-aged Australian women: a 20-year population-based prospective cohort study. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(6):1501–1511. doi:10.1007/s11136-018-1812-929450856
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandsborg B, Dueholm M, Nikolajsen L, Kehlet H, Jensen TS. Prospective study of risk factors for pain persisting. Clin J Pain. 2009;25(4):263–268. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e31819655ca19590472
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berner E, Qvigstad E, Myrvold AK, Lieng M. Pelvic pain and patient satisfaction after laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy: prospective trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014;21(3):406–411. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2013.10.01124177452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson L, Pandeya N, Byles J, Mishra G. Hysterectomy and incidence of depressive symptoms in midlife women: the Australian longitudinal study on women’s health. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2018;27(4):381–392. doi:10.1017/S204579601600122028190411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingelsson E, Lundholm C, Johansson ALV, Altman D. Hysterectomy and risk of cardiovascular disease: a population-based cohort study. Eur Heart J. 2011;32(6):745–750. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehq47721186237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, et al. Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(2 Pt 1):233–241. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e318299a6cf23969789
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson LF, Pandeya N, Mishra GD. Hysterectomy trends in Australia, 2000–2001 to 2013–2014: joinpoint regression analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96(10):1170–1179. doi:10.1111/aogs.1318228627047
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundholm C, Forsgren C, Johansson ALV, Cnattingius S, Altman D. Hysterectomy on benign indications in Sweden 1987–2003: a nationwide trend analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2009;88(1):52–58. doi:10.1080/0001634080259601719140043
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rositch AF, Nowak RG, Gravitt PE. Increased age and race-specific incidence of cervical cancer after correction for hysterectomy prevalence in the United States from 2000 to 2009. Cancer. 2014;120(13):2032–2038. doi:10.1002/cncr.2854824821088
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer A, Kahlert J, Rositch A, et al. The temporal and age-dependent patterns of hysterectomy-corrected cervical cancer incidence rates in Denmark: a population-based cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96(2):150–157. doi:10.1111/aogs.1305727861705
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gustafson LW, Booth BB, Kahlert J, et al. Trends in hysterectomy-corrected uterine cancer mortality rates during 2002 to 2015: mortality of nonendometrioid cancer on the rise? Int J Cancer. 2021;148:584–592.32683690
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer A, Kahlert J, Gravitt PE, Rositch AF. Hysterectomy-corrected cervical cancer mortality rates in Denmark during 2002–2015: a registry-based cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(8):1063–1069. doi:10.1111/aogs.1360830868579
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beavis AL, Gravitt PE, Rositch AF. Hysterectomy-corrected cervical cancer mortality rates reveal a larger racial disparity in the United States. Cancer. 2017;123(6):1044–1050. doi:10.1002/cncr.3050728112816
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stang A. Impact of hysterectomy on the age-specific incidence of cervical and uterine cancer in Germany and other countries. Eur J Public Health. 2013;23(5):879–883. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cks08022711786
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stang A, Merrill RM, Kuss O. Prevalence-corrected hysterectomy rates by age and indication in Germany 2005–2006. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012;286(5):1193–1200. doi:10.1007/s00404-012-2415-222718096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT. The Danish civil registration system as a tool in epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol. 2014;29:541–549. doi:10.1007/s10654-014-9930-324965263
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt M, Schmidt SAJ, Sandegaard JL, Ehrenstein V, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT. The Danish national patient registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential. Clin Epidemiol. 2015;7:449–490. doi:10.2147/CLEP.S9112526604824
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim HJ, Fay MP, Feuer EJ, Midthune DN. Permutation tests for joinpoint regression with applications to cancer rates. Stat Med. 2000;19(3):335–351. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(20000215)19:3<335::AID-SIM336>3.0.CO;2-Z10649300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doll KM, Dusetzina SB, Robinson W. Trends in inpatient and outpatient hysterectomy and oophorectomy rates among commercially insured women in the United States, 2000–2014. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(9):876–877. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.080427168235
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Settnes A, Topsoee MF, Moeller C, et al. Reduced complications following implementation of laparoscopic hysterectomy: a Danish population-based cohort study of minimally invasive benign gynecologic surgery between 2004 and 2018. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020;27(6):1344–1353.e3. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2019.11.00531740432
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mäkinen J, Brummer T, Jalkanen J, et al. Ten years of progress - Improved hysterectomy outcomes in Finland 1996–2006: a longitudinal observation study. BMJ Open. 2013;3(10):1–8. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz G, Unzurrunzaga DA, Brewster DH, Wild SH. Declining hysterectomy prevalence and the estimated impact on uterine cancer incidence in Scotland. Cancer Epidemiol. 2019;59:227–231. doi:10.1016/j.canep.2019.02.00830836220
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rahib L, Smith BD, Aizenberg R, Rosenzweig AB, Fleshman JM, Matrisian LM. Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: the unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res. 2014;74(11):2913–2921. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-015524840647
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Temkin SM, Minasian L, Noone AM. The end of the hysterectomy epidemic and endometrial cancer incidence: what are the unintended consequences of declining hysterectomy rates? Front Oncol. 2016;6:1–6. doi:10.3389/fonc.2016.0008926858933
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simms KT, Yuill S, Killen J, et al. Historical and projected hysterectomy rates in the USA: implications for future observed cervical cancer rates and evaluating prevention interventions. Gynecol Oncol. 2020;158(3):710–718. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.03032723676
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, et al. Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(20):1895–1904. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa180639530380365
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janda M, Gebski V, Davies LC, et al. Effect of total laparoscopic hysterectomy vs total abdominal hysterectomy on disease-free survival among women with stage i endometrial cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA - J Am Med Assoc. 2017;317(12):1224–1233. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.2068
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiser A, Holcroft CA, Tulandi T, Abenhaim HA. Abdominal versus laparoscopic hysterectomies for benign diseases: evaluation of morbidity and mortality among 465,798 cases. Gynecol Surg. 2013;10(2):117–122. doi:10.1007/s10397-013-0781-9
   Google Scholar
• Mallick R, English J, Waters N. Total laparoscopic hysterectomy versus total abdominal hysterectomy in the treatment of benign gynaecological disease: a retrospective review over 5 years. Obstet Gynecol Int J. 2016;5(7). doi:10.15406/ogij.2016.05.00186
   Google Scholar
• Nieboer TE, Hendriks JCM, Bongers MY, Vierhout ME, Kluivers KB. Quality of life after laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(1):85–91. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31823d3b0022183215
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jørgensen SL, Mogensen O, Wu C, et al. Nationwide introduction of minimally invasive robotic surgery for early-stage endometrial cancer and its association with severe complications. JAMA Surg. 2019;154(6):530–538. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.584030810740
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren L, Ladapo JA, Borah BJ, Gunnarsson CL. Open abdominal versus laparoscopic and vaginal hysterectomy: analysis of a large United States payer measuring quality and cost of care. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2009;16(5):581–588. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2009.06.01819835801
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen UJ, Kruse AR, Olesen PG, Lauszus FF, Kesmodel US, Forman A. Outpatient vs inpatient total laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(11):1420–1428. doi:10.1111/aogs.1367031148146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brummer THI, Jalkanen J, Fraser J, et al. FINHYST 2006 - National prospective 1-year survey of 5 279 hysterectomies. Hum Reprod. 2009;24(10):2515–2522. doi:10.1093/humrep/dep22919592483
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brummer THI, Seppälä TT, Härkki PSM. National learning curve for laparoscopic hysterectomy and trends in hysterectomy in Finland 2000–2005. Hum Reprod. 2008;23(4):840–845. doi:10.1093/humrep/den00618238905
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr L, Garry R. Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2005;25:330.
   Google Scholar
• Albright BB, Witte T, Tofte AN, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2016;23(1):18–27. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2015.08.00326272688
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lönnerfors C, Reynisson P, Persson J. A randomized trial comparing vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy vs robot-assisted hysterectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(1):78–86. doi:10.1016/j.jmig.2014.07.01025045857
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melamed A, Margul DJ, Chen L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(20):1905–1914. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa180492330379613
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar