Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2008 Oct 6.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Dec;197(6):664.e1–664.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.064

TABLE 5.

Multiple variable analysis of risk factors for subsequent pelvic floor repair among Olmsted County women undergoing hysterectomy, 1965-2002

Risk factor (n) Number at risk
at 20 ya
Cumulative incidence
at 20 y, % (95% CI)
HR (95% CI) P value
Age (per 1 y) (n = 8220) NA NA 1.00 (0.99, 1.01) .84
Years since procedure (year 1965 = 0) (n = 8220) NA NA 0.99 (0.97, 1.01) .30
Procedure type/indication
 Hys only/abdominal/no prolapse (n = 2942)  990 2.1 (1.3, 2.8) 1.0 (ref)
 Hys only/vaginal/no prolapse (n = 1905)  486 1.9 (1.0, 2.8) 0.81 (0.48, 1.35) .41
 Hys plus PFR/abdominal/no prolapse (n = 43)b  17 0 0.0
 Hys plus PFR/vaginal/no prolapse (n = 119)b  29 0 0.0
 Hys only/abdominal/prolapse (n = 225)  14 5.2 (1.7, 13.6) 3.88 (1.87, 8.04) .0003
 Hys only/vaginal/prolapse (n = 264)  86 9.5 (5.1, 14.6) 4.30 (2.53, 7.31) < .0001
 Hys plus PFR/abdominal/prolapse (n = 195)  95 6.7 (2.5, 10.8) 2.87 (1.49, 5.52) .002
 Hys plus PFR/vaginal/prolapse (n = 2527) 1052 4.4 (3.4, 5.4) 1.87 (1.3, 2.66) .0005

Hys, hysterectomy; NA, not applicable.

a

n, number of women with the risk factor.

b

No events occurred in these groups.