Welcome to NGC. Skip directly to: Search Box, Navigation, Content.


Brief Summary

GUIDELINE TITLE

Elective and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCE(S)

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Elective and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2008 Jan. 11 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 89). [82 references]

GUIDELINE STATUS

This is the current release of the guideline.

This guideline updates a previous version: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Prophylactic oophorectomy. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 1999 Sep. 7 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 7).

BRIEF SUMMARY CONTENT

 
RECOMMENDATIONS
 EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS
 IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND AVAILABILITY
 DISCLAIMER

 Go to the Complete Summary

RECOMMENDATIONS

MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

The grades of evidence (I-III) and levels of recommendations (A-C) are defined at the end of "Major Recommendations" field.

The following conclusion is based on good and consistent scientific evidence (Level A):

  • In women ages 50 to 79 years who have had a hysterectomy, use of estrogen therapy has shown no increased risk of breast cancer or heart disease with up to 7.2 years of use.

The following recommendation is based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence (Level B):

  • Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy should be offered to women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations after completion of childbearing.

The following recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion (Level C):

  • Women with family histories suggestive of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations should be referred for genetic counseling and evaluation for BRCA testing.
  • For women with an increased risk of ovarian cancer, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy should include careful inspection of the peritoneal cavity, pelvic washings, removal of the fallopian tubes, and ligation of the ovarian vessels at the pelvic brim.
  • Strong consideration should be made for retaining normal ovaries in premenopausal women who are not at increased genetic risk of ovarian cancer.
  • Given the risk of ovarian cancer in postmenopausal women, ovarian removal at the time of hysterectomy should be considered for these women.
  • Women with endometriosis, pelvic inflammatory disease, and chronic pelvic pain are at higher risk of reoperation; consequently, the risk of subsequent ovarian surgery if the ovaries are retained should be weighed against the benefit of ovarian retention in these patients.

Definitions:

Grades of Evidence

I Evidence obtained from at least one properly designed randomized controlled trial

II-1 Evidence obtained from well-designed controlled trials without randomization

II-2 Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies, preferably from more than one center or research group

II-3 Evidence obtained from multiple time series with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in uncontrolled experiments could also be regarded as this type of evidence.

III Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience, descriptive studies, or reports of expert committees

Levels of Recommendations

  1. The recommendations are based on good and consistent scientific evidence.
  2. The recommendations are based on limited or inconsistent scientific evidence.
  3. The recommendations are based primarily on consensus and expert opinion.

CLINICAL ALGORITHM(S)

None provided

EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS

TYPE OF EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS

The type of supporting evidence is identified and graded for each recommendation (see "Major Recommendations").

IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND AVAILABILITY

BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCE(S)

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Elective and risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 2008 Jan. 11 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 89). [82 references]

ADAPTATION

Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source.

DATE RELEASED

1999 Sep (revised 2008 Jan)

GUIDELINE DEVELOPER(S)

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists - Medical Specialty Society

SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG)

GUIDELINE COMMITTEE

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics

COMPOSITION OF GROUP THAT AUTHORED THE GUIDELINE

Not stated

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Not stated

GUIDELINE STATUS

This is the current release of the guideline.

This guideline updates a previous version: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Prophylactic oophorectomy. Washington (DC): American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG); 1999 Sep. 7 p. (ACOG practice bulletin; no. 7).

GUIDELINE AVAILABILITY

AVAILABILITY OF COMPANION DOCUMENTS

None available

PATIENT RESOURCES

None available

NGC STATUS

This NGC summary was completed by ECRI on January 14, 2005. This summary was updated by ECRI Institute on April 21, 2008.

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

This NGC summary is based on the original guideline, which is subject to the guideline developer's copyright restrictions.

DISCLAIMER

NGC DISCLAIMER

The National Guideline Clearinghouse™ (NGC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the guidelines represented on this site.

All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public or private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, and similar entities.

Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion.aspx .

NGC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC, AHRQ, or its contractor ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.

Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer.


 

 

   
DHHS Logo