1984
DOI: 10.2214/ajr.142.2.337
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Upper reproductive tract radiographic findings in DES-exposed female offspring

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Endometrial cancer incidence was significantly lower in the exposed than in the general population; this would not be due to greater prevalence of hysterectomies in the exposed women, as we were able to account for that in the comparisons to unexposed participants. DES associated hypoplasia of the uterus [Kaufman et al, ; Kaufman, ; Nunley et al, ] could explain the lower risk in the exposed women, however, there was no difference in the HRs for DES and endometrial cancer in parous and nulliparous women, with the latter more likely to have uterine abnormalities. Pancreatic cancer incidence was elevated in exposed women compared with population rates and was highly elevated, but not statistically significant, compared with unexposed women.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Endometrial cancer incidence was significantly lower in the exposed than in the general population; this would not be due to greater prevalence of hysterectomies in the exposed women, as we were able to account for that in the comparisons to unexposed participants. DES associated hypoplasia of the uterus [Kaufman et al, ; Kaufman, ; Nunley et al, ] could explain the lower risk in the exposed women, however, there was no difference in the HRs for DES and endometrial cancer in parous and nulliparous women, with the latter more likely to have uterine abnormalities. Pancreatic cancer incidence was elevated in exposed women compared with population rates and was highly elevated, but not statistically significant, compared with unexposed women.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of these, 729 were duplicates and 1674 were excluded after reading the title and abstract as they were not related to T‐shaped uterus (Figure 1). We evaluated 132 potentially eligible records in full text, of which 112 were excluded because T‐shaped uterus was related to DES exposure ( n = 64) 5,13–75 ; the article was not related to T‐shaped uterus ( n = 26) 76–101 ; the study included fewer than 10 women with a T‐shaped uterus ( n = 15) 4,102–115 ; no detailed results for T‐shaped uterus were reported ( n = 4) 116–119 ; and the article was a descriptive review ( n = 3) 120–122 . Therefore, 20 studies were eventually included in this systematic review 2,9,123–140 (Figure 1).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%