Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (24)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chen, C.-R.
Right arrow Articles by Wactawski-Wende, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chen, C.-R.
Right arrow Articles by Wactawski-Wende, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 153, No. 1 : 20-26
Copyright © 2001 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health


ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Risk Factors for Uterine Fibroids among Women Undergoing Tubal Sterilization

Chao-Ru Chen1, Germaine M. Buck1,1, Norman G. Courey2, Kimberly M. Perez1,3 and Jean Wactawski-Wende1,2

1 Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State of New York, Buffalo, NY.
2 Department of Gynecology-Obstetrics, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State of New York, Buffalo, NY.
3 Department of Community and Family Medicine, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH.

Uterine leiomyomas are reported to be the most common benign gynecologic tumors affecting premenopausal women, and they are often associated with considerable morbidity. The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for uterine fibroids among women undergoing tubal sterilization. Cases comprised women aged 17–44 years whose uterine fibroids were first visualized at the time of tubal sterilization (1978–1979 or 1985–1987) or who reported a history of uterine fibroids (n = 317). Controls were randomly selected from women with no laparoscopic evidence of or history of fibroids (n = 1,268). Adjusted odds ratios were estimated using unconditional logistic regression separately for White (n = 1,235) and African-American(n = 350) women. Risk factors for White women included: age 40–44 years (odds ratio (OR) = 6.3; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.5, 11.6), >=5 years since last delivery (OR = 1.9; 95% CI: 1.1, 3.1), lifetime cigarette smoking of >=1 pack/day (OR = 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.3), menstrual cycle length of >30 days (OR = 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1, 3.3), and menstrual bleeding for >=6 days (OR = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.0, 2.0). Parous women were at reduced risk compared with nulliparous women (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.3). Advancing age was the only significant risk factor for African-American women (ages 40–44 years, OR = 27.5; 95% CI: 5.6, 83.6). Current oral contraceptive use and elective abortion were not associated with fibroids.

ethnic groups; leiomyoma; risk factors; sterilization, tubal; uterine diseases

Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
M. Brannstrom, C. A. Wranning, and A. Altchek
Experimental uterus transplantation
Hum. Reprod. Update, November 7, 2009; (2009) dmp049v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
S. C. Goodwin and J. B. Spies
Uterine Fibroid Embolization
N. Engl. J. Med., August 13, 2009; 361(7): 690 - 697.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
B. Eskenazi, M. Warner, S. Samuels, J. Young, P. M. Gerthoux, L. Needham, D. Patterson, D. Olive, N. Gavoni, P. Vercellini, et al.
Serum Dioxin Concentrations and Risk of Uterine Leiomyoma in the Seveso Women's Health Study
Am. J. Epidemiol., July 1, 2007; 166(1): 79 - 87.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Reproductive SciencesHome page
K. M. Gooden, J. C. Schroeder, K. E. North, M. D. Gammon, K. E. Hartmann, J. Taylor, and D. D. Baird
Val153Met Polymorphism of Catechol-O-Methyltransferase and Prevalence of Uterine Leiomyomata
Reproductive Sciences, February 1, 2007; 14(2): 117 - 120.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
R. Boynton-Jarrett, J. Rich-Edwards, S. Malspeis, S. A. Missmer, and R. Wright
A Prospective Study of Hypertension and Risk of Uterine Leiomyomata
Am. J. Epidemiol., April 1, 2005; 161(7): 628 - 638.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
J.L. Marino, B. Eskenazi, M. Warner, S. Samuels, P. Vercellini, N. Gavoni, and D. Olive
Uterine leiomyoma and menstrual cycle characteristics in a population-based cohort study
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2004; 19(10): 2350 - 2355.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
L. A. Wise, J. R. Palmer, B. L. Harlow, D. Spiegelman, E. A. Stewart, L. L. Adams-Campbell, and L. Rosenberg
Reproductive Factors, Hormonal Contraception, and Risk of Uterine Leiomyomata in African-American Women: A Prospective Study
Am. J. Epidemiol., January 15, 2004; 159(2): 113 - 123.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
H. Klip, F. E. van Leeuwen, R. Schats, C.W. Burger, and for the OMEGA project group
Risk of benign gynaecological diseases and hormonal disorders according to responsiveness to ovarian stimulation in IVF: a follow-up study of 8714 women
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2003; 18(9): 1951 - 1958.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
S. M. Schwartz
Invited Commentary: Studying the Epidemiology of Uterine Leiomyomata--Past, Present, and Future
Am. J. Epidemiol., January 1, 2001; 153(1): 27 - 29.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
C.-R. Chen, G. M. Buck, J. Wactawski-Wende, and K. M. Perez
Chen et al. Respond to "Studying the Epidemiology of Uterine Leiomyomata" by Schwartz
Am. J. Epidemiol., January 1, 2001; 153(1): 30 - 30.
[Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.