» Articles » PMID: 36497314

Quality of Life After Risk-Reducing Hysterectomy for Endometrial Cancer Prevention: A Systematic Review

Overview
Journal Cancers (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Oncology
Date 2022 Dec 11
PMID 36497314
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Risk-reducing hysterectomy (RRH) is the gold-standard prevention for endometrial cancer (EC). Knowledge of the impact on quality-of-life (QoL) is crucial for decision-making. This systematic review aims to summarise the evidence.

Methods: We searched major databases until July 2022 (CRD42022347631). Given the paucity of data on RRH, we also included hysterectomy as treatment for benign disease. We used validated quality-assessment tools, and performed qualitative synthesis of QoL outcomes.

Results: Four studies (64 patients) reported on RRH, 25 studies (1268 patients) on hysterectomy as treatment for uterine bleeding. There was moderate risk-of-bias in many studies. Following RRH, three qualitative studies found substantially lowered cancer-worry, with no decision-regret. Oophorectomy (for ovarian cancer prevention) severely impaired menopause-specific QoL and sexual-function, particularly without hormone-replacement. Quantitative studies supported these results, finding low distress and generally high satisfaction. Hysterectomy as treatment of bleeding improved QoL, resulted in high satisfaction, and no change or improvements in sexual and urinary function, although small numbers reported worsening.

Conclusions: There is very limited evidence on QoL after RRH. Whilst there are benefits, most adverse consequences arise from oophorectomy. Benign hysterectomy allows for some limited comparison; however, more research is needed for outcomes in the population of women at increased EC-risk.

References
1.
Kalamo M, Maenpaa J, Seppala T, Mecklin J, Huhtala H, Sorvettula K . Factors associated with decision-making on prophylactic hysterectomy and attitudes towards gynecological surveillance among women with Lynch syndrome (LS): a descriptive study. Fam Cancer. 2020; 19(2):177-182. PMC: 7101284. DOI: 10.1007/s10689-020-00158-5. View

2.
Sculpher M, Dwyer N, Byford S, Stirrat G . Randomised trial comparing hysterectomy and transcervical endometrial resection: effect on health related quality of life and costs two years after surgery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996; 103(2):142-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09666.x. View

3.
Bofill Rodriguez M, Lethaby A, Fergusson R . Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021; 2:CD000329. PMC: 8095059. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub4. View

4.
Clarke-Pearson D, Geller E . Complications of hysterectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 121(3):654-673. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182841594. View

5.
Fergusson R, Bofill Rodriguez M, Lethaby A, Farquhar C . Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 8:CD000329. PMC: 6713886. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub3. View