Ovarian vein thrombosis after an oophorectomy: A commonly missed finding yet of little significance

Tarek Khalife, Daniel T. Myers, Shobhana Talukdar, Adnan R. Munkarah

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the frequency of ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT) after oophorectomy and to identify comorbidities. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective review of patients who underwent oophorectomy between January 2008 and December 2009. Overall, 195 patients were identified; 9 patients were excluded for being on anticoagulation preoperatively. Eighty-nine patients underwent postoperative abdominal computed tomography imaging within 18 months postoperatively. Patient characteristics, operative details, and periopera-tive morbidities were analyzed. A radiologist reviewed the scanned images and identified OVT. Statistical analyses were performed using univariate Fisher’s exact tests for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS: Twelve (13.4%) of the patients had OVT diagnosed. Three were diagnosed with a pulmonary em-bolus in the ovarian thrombosis group. On univariate analysis, OVT was associated with a longer hospital stay (p=0.013) and otherwise was not associated with an increased risk of other complications. Specifically, there was no temporal cause and effect association between OVT and pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: OVT after oophorectomy was less frequent in this study than pre- viously reported. There was no temporal association to suggest that OVT leads to pulmonary embolization or other complications.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)21-26
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Reproductive Medicine
Volume63
Issue number1
StatePublished - Feb 2018
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Deep vein thrombosis
  • Oophorectomy
  • Ovarian vein thrombosis
  • Pulmonary embolism

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Ovarian vein thrombosis after an oophorectomy: A commonly missed finding yet of little significance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this