medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2024, Número 03

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2024; 92 (03)


Histerectomía abdominal y deterioro de la función física en mujeres adultas mayores colombianas

Monterrosa CA, Castilla-Casalins A, Rincón TD

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 42
Paginas: 114-126
Archivo PDF: 242.24 Kb.


RESUMEN

Objetivo: Estimar, en mujeres adultas mayores colombianas, la asociación entre histerectomía abdominal con el deterioro de la función física y con la limitación para las actividades de la vida diaria.
Materiales y Métodos: Estudio transversal llevado a cabo en mujeres colombianas entre 60 y 75 años que firmaron el consentimiento informado, permitieron mediciones antropométricas y contestaron un formulario con preguntas acerca de datos sociodemográficos y clínicos. Se aplicó la subescala de función física del Cuestionario SF-36. Se realizaron regresiones logísticas bivariadas: limitación para las actividades habituales o deterioro en la función física (variables dependientes) con el antecedente de histerectomía con o sin ooforectomía en la pre o posmenopausia (variables independientes). Además, se aplicaron cuatro modelos de regresión logística ajustada.
Resultados: Se evaluaron 700 mujeres con promedio de edad de 67.0 ± 4.8 años y 18.9 ± 6.3 años trascurridos a partir de la menopausia. A todas se les practicó histerectomía con ooforectomía durante los años de premenopausia (4.2%); histerectomía sin ooforectomía en la premenopausia (18.1%); histerectomía con ooforectomía en la posmenopausia (2.1%) e histerectomía sin ooforectomía en la posmenopausia (8.4). La histerectomía con ooforectomía, o sin esta última en la premenopausia, se relacionó con deterioro de la función física (RM: 2.67; IC95%:1.19-5.97) y 2.02 (IC95%:1.34- 3.09). Igual sucedió con las actividades habituales (p ‹ 0.05). La histerectomía con preservación o extirpación ovárica durante la posmenopausia no se asoció con deterioro de la función física (p › 0.05).
Conclusión: En la muestra estudiada se encontró relación entre la histerectomía con limitación para actividades diarias y con deterioro de la función física. La histerectomía con o sin ooforectomía practicada durante los años de premenopausia, a diferencia de la adelantada en posmenopausia, se asoció, significativamente, con deterioro del funcionamiento físico.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Monterrosa-Castro A, Monterrosa-Blanco A, Beltrán-Barrios T. Insomnia and sexual dysfunction associated withsevere worsening of the quality of life in sexually activehysterectomized women. Sleep Sci 2018; 11 (2): 99-05.https://doi.org/10.5935/1984-0063.20180019

  2. Chen IJ, Shoupe D, Karim R, Stanczyk FZ, Kono N, SriprasertI, Hodis HN, Mack WJ. The association of hysterectomy withor without ovarian conservation with subclinical atherosclerosisprogression in healthy postmenopausal women.Menopause 2023; 30 (7): 692-02. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000002192

  3. Rannestad T. Hysterectomy: effects on quality of life andpsychological aspects. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol2005; 19 (3): 419-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2005.01.007

  4. Kuppermann M, Learman LA, Schembri M, Gregorich SE,Jackson RA, Jacoby A, Lewis J, Washington AE. Contributionsof hysterectomy and uterus-preserving surgery tohealth-related quality of life. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122(1): 15-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0b013e318292aea4

  5. Stang A, Merrill RM, Kuss O. Hysterectomy in Germany:a DRG-based nationwide analysis, 2005-2006. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108 (30): 508-14. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2011.0508

  6. Simms KT, Yuill S, Killen J, Smith MA, Kulasingam S, de KokIMCM, van Ballegooijen M, Burger EA, Regan C, Kim JJ, CanfellK. Historical and projected hysterectomy rates in the USA:Implications for future observed cervical cancer rates andevaluating prevention interventions. Gynecol Oncol 2020;158 (3): 710-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.030

  7. Singh A, Govil D. Hysterectomy in India: Spatial andmultilevel analysis. Women’s Health (Lond) 2021;17: 17455065211017068. https://doi.org/10.1177/17455065211017068

  8. Prusty RK, Choithani C, Gupta SD. Predictors of hysterectomyamong married women 15-49 years in India.Reprod Health 2018; 15 (1):3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0445-8

  9. Briët JM, Mourits MJ, van Leeuwen BL, van den HeuvelER, Kenkhuis MJ, Arts HJ, de Bock GH. Age should not be alimiting factor in laparoscopic surgery: a prospective multicentercohort study on quality of life after laparoscopichysterectomy. Clin Interv Aging 2018; 13: 2517-26. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S172965

  10. Moore BJ, Steiner CA, Davis PH, Stocks C, Barrett. Trends inHysterectomies and Oophorectomies in Hospital Inpatientand Ambulatory Settings, 2005–2013. 2016 Nov. In: HealthcareCost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs[Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Researchand Quality (US); 2006 Feb-. Statistical Brief #214. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK409175/

  11. Gallo Vallejo JL. Ovarian-conserving surgery versus bilateraloophorectomy in patients undergoing hysterectomy forbenign processes. Clin Invest Ginecol Obstet 2009; 36 (3):94-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gine.2009.01.001

  12. Rocca WA, Grossardt BR, Shuster LT. Oophorectomy,menopause, estrogen, and cognitive aging: the timinghypothesis. Neurodegener Dis 2010; 7 (1-3): 163-6. https://doi.org/10.1159/000289229

  13. Iyer TK, Manson JE. Hysterectomy with or without ovarianconservation: similar associations with vascular health?Menopause 2023; 30 (7): 687-89. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000002208

  14. Hess R, Thurston RC, Hays RD, Chang CC, Dillon SN, et al. Theimpact of menopause on health-related quality of life: resultsfrom the STRIDE longitudinal study. Qual Life Res 2012;21 (3): 535-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9959-7

  15. Monterrosa-Castro Á, Prada-Tobar M, Monterrosa-BlancoA, Pérez-Romero D, Salas-Becerra C, Redondo-MendozaV. Clinical suspicion of sarcopenic obesity and probablesarcopenic obesity in Colombian women with a historyof surgical menopause: a cross-sectional study. Menopause2022; 29 (6): 664-70. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000001960

  16. Finch A, Metcalfe KA, Chiang JK, Elit L, McLaughlin J, etal. The impact of prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy onmenopausal symptoms and sexual function in women whocarry a BRCA mutation. Gynecol Oncol 2011; 121 (1):163-8.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.12.326

  17. Farquhar CM, Sadler L, Harvey SA, Stewart AW. The associationof hysterectomy and menopause: a prospectivecohort study. BJOG 2005; (7): 956-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00696.x

  18. Huang Y, Wu M, Wu C, Zhu Q, Wu T, et al. Effect of hysterectomyon ovarian function: a systematic review andmeta-analysis. J Ovarian Res 2023; 16 (1): 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-023-01117-1

  19. Rock JA. Quality-of-life assessment in gynecologic surgery.J Reprod Med 2001; 46 (5 Suppl): 515-19. PMID: 11396385

  20. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The Strengtheningthe Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology(STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observationalstudies. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 573-77.doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010

  21. World Health Organization (WHO). Physical status: theuse and interpretation of anthropometry. Report of aWHO Expert Committee. World Health Organ Tech RepSer 1995; 854: 1-452.

  22. Buendía R, Zambrano M, Díaz Á, et al. Waist circumferencecut-off points for the diagnosis of abdominal obesityin Colombian population by means of bioimpedance as areference standard. (Spanish). Rev Colomb Cardiol 2016;

  23. 23: 19-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rccar.2015.07.01123. Alberti KG, Zimmet PZ. Definition, diagnosis and classificationof diabetes mellitus and its complications.Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitusprovisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabet Med1998; 15 (7): 539-53. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9136(199807)15:7<539::AID-DIA668>3.0.CO;2-S

  24. Bahat G, Tufan A, Tufan F, Kilic C, Akpinar TS, Kose M, et al.Cut-off points to identify sarcopenia according to EuropeanWorking Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP)definition. Clin Nutr 2016; 35 (6): 1557-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnu.2016.02.002

  25. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, CederholmT, et al. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition anddiagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopeniain Older People. Age Ageing 2010; 39 (4): 412-23.https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afq034

  26. Cuestionario de Salud SF-36 (versión 2) Versión españolade SF-36v2™ Health Survey © 1996, 2000. adaptada porJ. Alonso y col 2003. Ahttp://saludpublica.cucs.udg.mx/cursos/medicion_exposicion/SF-36.pdf

  27. Alonso J, Prieto L, Antó JM. The Spanish version of theSF-36 Health Survey (the SF-36 health questionnaire): aninstrument for measuring clinical results. Med Clin (Barc)1995;104 (20): 771-6.

  28. Alonso J, Prieto L, Ferrer M, Vilagut G, Broquetas JM, RocaJ, Batlle JS, Antó JM. Testing the measurement propertiesof the Spanish version of the SF-36 Health Survey amongmale patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Quality of Life in COPD Study Group. J Clin Epidemiol1998; 51 (11): 1087-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00100-0

  29. República de Colombia. Departamento AdministrativoNacional de Estadísticas DANE. Datos poblacionales deColombia. https://www.dane.gov.co/index.php/estadisticas-por-tema/demografia-y-poblacion/censo-nacional-depoblacion-y-vivenda-2018/cuantos-somos

  30. Cohen RA, Marsiske MM, Smith GE. Neuropsychology ofaging. Handb Clin Neurol 2019; 167: 149-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804766-8.00010-8

  31. Lord SR, Delbaere K, Sturnieks DL. Aging. Handb Clin Neurol2018; 159: 157-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63916-5.00010-0

  32. Martín AI, Priego T, López-Calderón A. Hormones andMuscle Atrophy. Adv Exp Med Biol 2018; 1088: 207-33.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1435-3_9

  33. United Nations World Population Ageing 1950-2050.http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldageing19502050/

  34. World Health Organization Ageing and health- February 5, 2018.http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs404/en/

  35. Hsia J, Barad D, Margolis K, Rodabough R, McGovern PG,Limacher MC, Oberman A, Smoller S; Women's HealthInitiative Research Group. Usefulness of prior hysterectomyas an independent predictor of Framingham risk score(The Women's Health Initiative). Am J Cardiol 2003; 92 (3):264-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(03)00621-0

  36. Fletcher HM, Bennett F, Simms-Stewart D, Reid M, WilliamsNP, Wharfe GH, Wilks RJ, Mitchell S, Scott P. Cardiovasculardisease risk factors in menopausal Jamaican black womenafter hysterectomy and bilateral oophorectomy: an observationalstudy. West Indian Med J 2010; 59 (6): 625-32.

  37. Rocca WA, Grossardt BR, Shuster LT, Stewart EA. Hysterectomy,oophorectomy, estrogen, and the risk of dementia.Neurodegener Dis 2012; 10 (1-4): 175-8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000334764

  38. Yeh JS, Cheng HM, Hsu PF, Sung SH, Liu WL, Fang HL,Chuang SY. Hysterectomy in young women associateswith higher risk of stroke: a nationwide cohort study. Int JCardiol 2013; 168 (3): 2616-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.03.042.

  39. Rodríguez MC, Chedraui P, Schwager G, Hidalgo L, Pérez-López FR. Assessment of sexuality after hysterectomy usingthe Female Sexual Function Index. J Obstet Gynaecol2012; 32 (2): 180-4. https://doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2011.634035

  40. Brown JS, Sawaya G, Thom DH, Grady D. Hysterectomyand urinary incontinence: a systematic review. Lancet2000; 356 (9229): 535-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02577-0

  41. Desai S, Campbell OM, Sinha T, Mahal A, Cousens S. Incidenceand determinants of hysterectomy in a low-incomesetting in Gujarat, India. Health Policy Plan 2017; 32 (1):68-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czw099

  42. Gold EB, Bromberger J, Crawford S, Samuels S, GreendaleGA, Harlow SD, Skurnick J. Factors associated with ageat natural menopause in a multiethnic sample of midlifewomen. Am J Epidemiol 2001; 153 (9): 865-74. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/153.9.865




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com