Laughlin-Tommaso, Shannon K.

Abstract Objective: The aim of the study was to determine the long-term risk of cardiovascular disease and metabolic conditions in women undergoing hysterectomy with bilateral ovarian conservation compared with age-matched referent women. Methods: Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project records-linkage system, we identified 2,094 women who underwent hysterectomy with ovarian conservation for benign indications between 1980 and 2002 in Olmsted County, Minnesota. Each woman was age-matched (±1 y) to a referent woman residing in the same county who had not undergone prior hysterectomy or any oophorectomy. These two cohorts were followed historically to identify de novo cardiovascular or metabolic diagnoses. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for 20 preexisting chronic conditions and other potential confounders. We also calculated absolute risk increases and reductions from Kaplan–Meier estimates. Results: Over a median follow-up of 21.9 years, women who underwent hysterectomy experienced increased risks of de novo hyperlipidemia (HR 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.25), hypertension (HR 1.13; 95% CI, 1.03-1.25), obesity (HR 1.18; 95% CI, 1.04-1.35), cardiac arrhythmias (HR 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32), and coronary artery disease (HR 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.58). Women who underwent hysterectomy at age ≤35 years had a 4.6-fold increased risk of congestive heart failure and a 2.5-fold increased risk of coronary artery disease. Conclusions: Even with ovarian conservation, hysterectomy is associated with an increased long-term risk of cardiovascular and metabolic conditions, especially in women who undergo hysterectomy at age ≤35 years. If these associations are causal, alternatives to hysterectomy should be considered to treat benign gynecologic conditions.

Cost-effectiveness modeling studies of global endometrial ablation (GEA) for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a US perspective are lacking. The objective of this study was to model the cost-effectiveness of GEA vs. hysterectomy for treatment of AUB in the United States from both commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives. The study team developed a 1-, 3-, and 5-year semi-Markov decision-analytic model to simulate 2 hypothetical patient cohorts of women with AUB—1 treated with GEA and the other with hysterectomy. Clinical and economic data (including treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, direct costs, and productivity costs) came from analyses of commercial and Medicaid claims databases. Analysis results show that cost savings with simultaneous reduction in treatment complications and fewer days lost from work are achieved with GEA versus hysterectomy over almost all time horizons and under both the commercial payer and Medicaid perspectives. Cost-effectiveness metrics also favor GEA over hysterectomy from both the commercial payer and Medicaid payer perspectives—evidence strongly supporting the clinical-economic value about GEA versus hysterectomy. Results will interest clinicians, health care payers, and self-insured employers striving for cost-effective AUB treatments. ( Population Health Management 2015;18:373–382)