Overview of hysterectomies performed through the single health system of Maranhão between 2011 and 2020
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55892/jrg.v7i15.1390Keywords:
Hysterectomy, Hysterectomy, Vaginal, Women's Health, Gynecology, Gynecologic Surgical ProceduresAbstract
Introduction: Hysterectomy, a procedure for surgically removing the uterus, has a history fraught with events obscured by the passage of time. There are accounts of its realization in 50 BC. by Themison of Athens and, later, by several other physicians, mainly in obstetric emergencies. Hysterectomy is currently the second most common gynecological surgical procedure performed among women of reproductive age in Brazil and has evolved into several types of procedures, each with its own benefits and limitations. According to DATASUS, in 2017, 49,121 surgeries were performed for total removal of the uterus by the Unified Health System. In this scenario, this study seeks to analyze the profile and trend of hysterectomies performed in Maranhão, through the Unified Health System (SUS), between 2011 and 2020. Methods: Descriptive and analytical cross-sectional study carried out in the state of Maranhão, using data available on the DATASUS online platform. Results: In the period considered in this study, 56,667 hospitalizations were registered for the procedure of removal of the uterus in residents of the state of Maranhão. There is an irregularity in the records and the absence of important variables for the socioeconomic analysis. The age group from 40 to 59 years old was the most representative in the sample (63.2%) and the most prevalent race/color was brown (46.2%). The most frequent procedure was total hysterectomy (62.63%), followed by hysterectomy with adnexectomy (23.86%) and vaginal hysterectomy (5.68%). Among the diagnoses, uterine leiomyomatosis predominated (63.7%), followed by malignant neoplasms of the uterus (9%) and endometriosis (7.13%). The data collected, in general, are in line with the available literature. Conclusion: Drawing an epidemiological profile that accurately describes the socioeconomic and clinical aspects of the population undergoing surgery is challenging, as records in hospital databases or secondary data sources are not uniform and lack a variety of information.
Downloads
References
AARTS, J. W. et al. Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, v. 2015, n. 8, 12 ago. 2015.
ALMEIDA, M. F. DE et al. Sistemas de informação e mortalidade perinatal: conceitos e condições de uso em estudos epidemiológicos. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, v. 9, n. 1, p. 56–68, mar. 2006.
ARAÚJO, T. V. B. DE; AQUINO, E. M. L. Fatores de risco para histerectomia em mulheres brasileiras. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, v. 19, n. suppl 2, p. S407–S417, 2003.
AUGUSTO, C. F.; CARAÇA, D. B.; PODGAEC, S. Epidemiological analysis of hysterectomies performed at the public health system in the largest Brazilian city. Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, v. 67, n. 7, p. 937–941, jul. 2021.
AZIZ, A. et al. Perimenopausal androgen decline after oophorectomy does not influence sexuality or psychological well-being. Fertility and Sterility, v. 83, n. 4, p. 1021–1028, abr. 2005.
BENASSI, L. et al. Abdominal or vaginal hysterectomy for enlarged uteri: A randomized clinical trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, v. 187, n. 6, p. 1561–1565, dez. 2002.
BRASIL; SECRETARIA MUNICIPAL DA SAÚDE; COORDENAÇÃO DE EPIDEMIOLOGIA E INFORMAÇÃO. Análise do Quesito Raça/Cor a partir de Sistemas de Informação da Saúde do SUS. São Paulo: [s.n.].
CARONE, I.; BENTO, M. A. SILVA. (ORG. ). Psicologia social do racismo: estudos sobre branquitude e branqueamento no Brasil. 3. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2007.
COSTA, A. A. R.; AMORIM, M. M. R. DE; CURSINO, T. Histerectomia vaginal versus histerectomia abdominal em mulheres sem prolapso genital, em maternidade-escola do Recife: ensaio clínico randomizado. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, v. 25, n. 3, 2003.
DATASUS. Sistema de Informação de Agravos de Notificação. Disponível em: <http://www2.datasus.gov.br/DATASUS/index.php?area=02>.
DATASUS. PROCEDIMENTOS HOSPITALARES DO SUS - POR LOCAL DE INTERNAÇÃO.
DAVIES, A. et al. How to increase the proportion of hysterectomies performed vaginally. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, v. 179, n. 4, p. 1008–1012, out. 1998.
EDLER, K. et al. Rates and Routes of Hysterectomy for Benign Indications in Austria 2002 – 2014. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, v. 77, n. 05, p. 482–486, 24 maio 2017.
IBGE. IBGE cidades - Maranhão.
JACOBSON, G. F. et al. Hysterectomy Rates for Benign Indications. Obstetrics & Gynecology, v. 107, n. 6, p. 1278–1283, jun. 2006.
JONSDOTTIR, G. M. et al. Increasing Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy. Obstetrics & Gynecology, v. 117, n. 5, p. 1142–1149, maio 2011.
KOVAC, S. R. et al. Guidelines for the selection of the route of hysterectomy: application in a resident clinic population. Am J Obstet Gynecol, v. 187, n. 6, p. 1521–1527, 2002.
LETHABY, A.; MUKHOPADHYAY, A.; NAIK, R. Total versus subtotal hysterectomy for benign gynaecological conditions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 18 abr. 2012.
LUNGU, D. A. et al. The Impact of New Surgical Techniques on Geographical Unwarranted Variation: The Case of Benign Hysterectomy. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, v. 18, n. 13, p. 6722, 22 jun. 2021.
MÄKINEN, J. et al. Ten years of progress—improved hysterectomy outcomes in Finland 1996–2006: a longitudinal observation study. BMJ Open, v. 3, n. 10, p. e003169, out. 2013.
MESQUITA, Y. C. S. et al. Perfil epidemiológico dos casos de histerectomia em um Hospital Universitário Terciário. Medicina (Ribeirão Preto), v. 54, n. 1, p. e174293, 16 jul. 2021.
RADOSA, J. C. et al. Influences of Different Hysterectomy Techniques on Patients’ Postoperative Sexual Function and Quality of Life. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, v. 11, n. 9, p. 2342–2350, set. 2014.
ROSA, T. DE P. et al. Prevalência De Doenças Ginecológicas Em Mulheres Acima De 40 Anos Diagnosticadas Através De Ultrassonografia Transvaginal. Brazilian journal of ultrasonography, v. 18, p. 21–26, mar. 2015.
SANDBERG, E. M. et al. Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, v. 24, n. 2, p. 206- 217.e22, fev. 2017.
SETTNES, A. et al. Complications after benign hysterectomy, according to procedure: a population‐based prospective cohort study from the Danish hysterectomy database, 2004–2015. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, v. 127, n. 10, p. 1269–1279, set. 2020.
SUTTON, C. J. G. The History of Hysterectomy. Em: Hysterectomy. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. p. 3–28.
THAKAR, R. et al. Outcomes after Total versus Subtotal Abdominal Hysterectomy. New England Journal of Medicine, v. 347, n. 17, p. 1318–1325, 24 out. 2002.
TOHIC, A. LE et al. Hysterectomy for Benign Uterine Pathology Among Women Without Previous Vaginal Delivery. Obstetrics & Gynecology, v. 111, n. 4, p. 829–837, abr. 2008.
WEYL, B. P. How to increase the proportion of vaginal hysterectomies—Bipolar coagulation. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, v. 181, n. 3, p. 768, set. 1999.
WRIGHT, K. N. et al. Costs and Outcomes of Abdominal, Vaginal, Laparoscopic and Robotic Hysterectomies. JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, v. 16, n. 4, p. 519–524, 2012.
