• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在剖宫产时行择期输卵管切除术与标准输卵管结扎术以降低卵巢癌风险的成本效益比较。

The cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy versus standard tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery for ovarian cancer risk reduction.

机构信息

University of Alabama at Birmingham, Center for Women's Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Birmingham, AL, United States of America.

University of Utah, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.

出版信息

Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Jan;152(1):127-132. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.11.009. Epub 2018 Nov 23.

DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.11.009
PMID:30477808
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6321779/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Opportunistic salpingectomy is a cost-effective strategy recommended for ovarian cancer (OvCa) risk reduction at the time of gynecologic surgery in women who have completed childbearing. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy compared to standard tubal ligation (TL) during cesarean delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

A cost-effectiveness analysis using decision modeling to compare opportunistic salpingectomy to TL at the time of cesarean using probabilities of procedure completion derived from a trial. Probability and cost inputs were derived from local data and the literature. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in 2017 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100,000/QALY. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses were performed for all variables. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis determined the proportion of simulations in which each strategy would be cost-effective.

RESULTS

Opportunistic salpingectomy was cost-effective compared to TL with an ICER of $26,616 per QALY. In 10,000 women desiring sterilization with cesarean, opportunistic salpingectomy would result in 17 fewer OvCa diagnoses, 13 fewer OvCa deaths, and 25 fewer unintended pregnancies compared to TL - with an associated cost increase of $4.7 million. The model was sensitive only to OvCa risk reduction from salpingectomy and TL. Opportunistic salpingectomy was not cost-effective if its cost was >$3163.74 more than TL, if the risk-reduction of salpingectomy was <41%, or if the risk-reduction of TL was >46%. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis opportunistic salpingectomy was cost effective in 75% of simulations.

CONCLUSIONS

In women undergoing cesarean with sterilization, opportunistic salpingectomy is likely cost-effective and may be cost-saving in comparison to TL for OvCa risk reduction.

摘要

目的

在已完成生育的女性接受妇科手术时,机会性输卵管切除术是一种具有成本效益的策略,推荐用于降低卵巢癌(OvCa)风险。我们旨在评估与剖宫产时标准输卵管结扎术(TL)相比,机会性输卵管切除术的成本效益。

研究设计

使用决策模型进行成本效益分析,比较在剖宫产时行机会性输卵管切除术与 TL 的情况,使用来自试验的程序完成概率。概率和成本输入来自当地数据和文献。主要结果是在 2017 年以美元计算的每质量调整生命年(QALY)增量成本效益比(ICER),成本效益阈值为 10 万美元/QALY。对所有变量进行了单因素和双因素敏感性分析。概率敏感性分析确定了每种策略具有成本效益的模拟比例。

结果

与 TL 相比,机会性输卵管切除术具有成本效益,ICER 为每 QALY 26616 美元。在 10000 名希望通过剖宫产进行绝育的女性中,与 TL 相比,机会性输卵管切除术将导致 OvCa 诊断减少 17 例,OvCa 死亡减少 13 例,意外妊娠减少 25 例 - 相关成本增加 4700 万美元。该模型仅对输卵管切除术和 TL 的 OvCa 风险降低敏感。如果机会性输卵管切除术的成本比 TL 高出 >3163.74 美元,如果输卵管切除术的风险降低 <41%,或者 TL 的风险降低 >46%,则机会性输卵管切除术没有成本效益。在概率敏感性分析中,75%的模拟中机会性输卵管切除术具有成本效益。

结论

在接受剖宫产并进行绝育的女性中,与 TL 相比,机会性输卵管切除术可能具有成本效益,并且可能会降低 OvCa 风险,从而节省成本。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1915/6321779/02ab9fdebbf4/nihms-1514355-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1915/6321779/444cd18e8d9c/nihms-1514355-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1915/6321779/02ab9fdebbf4/nihms-1514355-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1915/6321779/444cd18e8d9c/nihms-1514355-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1915/6321779/02ab9fdebbf4/nihms-1514355-f0002.jpg

相似文献

1
The cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy versus standard tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery for ovarian cancer risk reduction.在剖宫产时行择期输卵管切除术与标准输卵管结扎术以降低卵巢癌风险的成本效益比较。
Gynecol Oncol. 2019 Jan;152(1):127-132. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2018.11.009. Epub 2018 Nov 23.
2
Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy vs tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery.剖宫产时行随机输卵管切除术与输卵管结扎术的成本效益比较。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan;220(1):106.e1-106.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.08.032. Epub 2018 Aug 28.
3
Postpartum Opportunistic Salpingectomy Compared With Bilateral Tubal Ligation After Vaginal Delivery for Ovarian Cancer Risk Reduction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.产后机会性输卵管切除术与经阴道分娩后双侧输卵管结扎术降低卵巢癌风险的比较:一项成本效益分析
Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Apr 1;141(4):819-827. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005118. Epub 2023 Mar 9.
4
The impact of opportunistic salpingectomy on ovarian cancer mortality and healthcare costs: a call for universal insurance coverage.预防性输卵管切除术对卵巢癌死亡率和医疗保健成本的影响:呼吁普遍保险覆盖。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Oct;225(4):397.e1-397.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.03.032. Epub 2021 Mar 31.
5
Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention.机会性输卵管切除术预防卵巢癌的成本效益
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Aug;146(2):373-379. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
6
Paradigm shift from tubal ligation to opportunistic salpingectomy at cesarean delivery in the United States.美国剖宫产术中从输卵管结扎到偶然输卵管切除术的范式转变。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Oct;225(4):399.e1-399.e32. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.06.074. Epub 2021 Jun 26.
7
Costs and benefits of opportunistic salpingectomy as an ovarian cancer prevention strategy.作为卵巢癌预防策略的机会性输卵管切除术的成本与效益
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Feb;125(2):338-345. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000630.
8
The Cost-Effectiveness of Salpingectomies for Family Planning in the Prevention of Ovarian Cancer.输卵管切除术用于计划生育以预防卵巢癌的成本效益分析
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018 Mar;40(3):317-327. doi: 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.06.038. Epub 2017 Oct 18.
9
Complete salpingectomy versus tubal ligation during cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis.剖宫产时行输卵管切除术与输卵管结扎术的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021 Nov;34(22):3794-3802. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1690446. Epub 2019 Nov 21.
10
Salpingectomy Compared With Tubal Ligation at Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.剖宫产时行输卵管切除术与结扎术的比较:一项随机对照试验。
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;132(1):29-34. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002674.

引用本文的文献

1
Prophylactic salpingectomy as a preventative strategy for ovarian cancer in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.预防性输卵管切除术作为一般人群卵巢癌的预防策略:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Gynecol Oncol. 2025 Jan;36(1):e8. doi: 10.3802/jgo.2025.36.e8.
2
Ovarian cancer prevention through opportunistic salpingectomy during abdominal surgeries: A cost-effectiveness modeling study.通过腹部手术中的机会性输卵管切除术预防卵巢癌:一项成本效益建模研究。
PLoS Med. 2025 Jan 30;22(1):e1004514. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004514. eCollection 2025 Jan.
3
Effect of salpingectomy versus tubal ligation on postoperative wound infection in patients: A meta-analysis.

本文引用的文献

1
Feasibility of Complete Salpingectomy Compared With Standard Postpartum Tubal Ligation at Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.剖宫产时行输卵管切除术与标准产后输卵管结扎术的可行性比较:一项随机对照试验。
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;132(1):20-27. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002646.
2
Salpingectomy Compared With Tubal Ligation at Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.剖宫产时行输卵管切除术与结扎术的比较:一项随机对照试验。
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;132(1):29-34. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002674.
3
Mortality in the United States, 2016.
输卵管切除术与输卵管结扎术对患者术后伤口感染的影响:一项荟萃分析。
Int Wound J. 2024 Jan;21(1):e14543. doi: 10.1111/iwj.14543.
4
Beyond Sterilization: A Comprehensive Review on the Safety and Efficacy of Opportunistic Salpingectomy as a Preventative Strategy for Ovarian Cancer.超越绝育:机会性输卵管切除术作为卵巢癌预防策略的安全性和有效性的全面综述。
Curr Oncol. 2023 Nov 28;30(12):10152-10165. doi: 10.3390/curroncol30120739.
5
Salpingectomy for the Primary Prevention of Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review.输卵管切除术用于卵巢癌的一级预防:系统评价。
JAMA Surg. 2023 Nov 1;158(11):1204-1211. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.4164.
6
Salpingectomy and the Risk of Ovarian Cancer in Ontario.输卵管切除术与安大略省卵巢癌风险。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Aug 1;6(8):e2327198. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.27198.
7
Ovarian cancer prevention by opportunistic salpingectomy is a new de facto standard in Germany.在德国,通过机会性输卵管切除术预防卵巢癌已成为新的事实上的标准。
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2023 Aug;149(10):6953-6966. doi: 10.1007/s00432-023-04578-5. Epub 2023 Feb 27.
8
Cost-Effectiveness of Risk-Reducing Surgery for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Prevention: A Systematic Review.降低乳腺癌和卵巢癌风险手术的成本效益:一项系统评价
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Dec 12;14(24):6117. doi: 10.3390/cancers14246117.
9
Patients' perceptions toward and the driving factors of decision-making for opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy at the time of cesarean section.剖宫产时患者对机会性双侧输卵管切除术的认知及决策驱动因素
Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Jun;17(2):115-122. doi: 10.4274/tjod.galenos.2020.12129. Epub 2020 Jul 29.
10
The rationale of opportunistic bilateral salpingectomies (OBS) during benign gynaecological and obstetric surgery: a consensus text of the Flemish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (VVOG).良性妇产科手术中进行机会性双侧输卵管切除术(OBS)的基本原理:弗拉芒妇产科协会(VVOG)的共识文本
Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2019 Jun;11(2):177-187.
美国2016年的死亡率
NCHS Data Brief. 2017 Dec(293):1-8.
4
Cost of Care for the Initial Management of Ovarian Cancer.卵巢癌初始治疗的护理费用。
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Dec;130(6):1269-1275. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002317.
5
Salpingectomy for Sterilization: Change in Practice in a Large Integrated Health Care System, 2011-2016.绝育输卵管切除术:2011 - 2016年大型综合医疗保健系统中的实践变化
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Nov;130(5):961-967. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002312.
6
The Evolution of and Evidence for Opportunistic Salpingectomy.机会性输卵管切除术的演变与证据
Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Oct;130(4):814-824. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002243.
7
Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention.机会性输卵管切除术预防卵巢癌的成本效益
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Aug;146(2):373-379. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.05.034. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
8
Ovarian reserve following cesarean section with salpingectomy vs tubal ligation: a randomized trial.剖宫产同时行输卵管切除术与输卵管结扎术后的卵巢储备功能:一项随机试验
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Oct;217(4):472.e1-472.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.04.028. Epub 2017 Apr 25.
9
Total bilateral salpingectomy versus partial bilateral salpingectomy for permanent sterilization during cesarean delivery.剖宫产术中全双侧输卵管切除术与部分双侧输卵管切除术用于永久性绝育的比较。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017 May;295(5):1185-1189. doi: 10.1007/s00404-017-4340-x. Epub 2017 Mar 11.
10
Efficacy of salpingectomy at hysterectomy to reduce the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer: a systematic review.子宫切除术时行输卵管切除术以降低上皮性卵巢癌风险的疗效:系统评价。
BJOG. 2017 May;124(6):880-889. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14601.