ライフサイエンスコーパス: tubal ligation

1 e in part to oral contraceptive (OC) use and tubal ligation.

2 f 17 to 55 years (mean 29 years) including 9 tubal ligations, 3 neurosurgeries, 3 cholecystectomies,

3 r relations across racial/ethnic groups, but tubal ligation and family history of breast or ovarian c

4 No interactions between ever having had a tubal ligation and other covariates were observed.

5 ere analyzed to examine the relation between tubal ligation and ovarian cancer mortality in a large p

6 s, transgastric liver biopsies, transgastric tubal ligation and transvaginal cholecystectomy without

7 er, nulliparity, oral contraceptive use, and tubal ligation) and by number of risk factors (0, 1, and

8 ator for breast-feeding, and availability of tubal ligations); and (3) clinical outcomes, including s

9 actors of pregnancy, oral contraceptive use, tubal ligation, and body mass index.

10 sely associated with oral contraceptive use, tubal ligation, and childbearing.

11 d experience pregnancy (ie, not pregnant, no tubal ligation, and not infertile).

12 ions associated with oral contraceptive use, tubal ligation, and parity.

13 ved for oral contraceptive (OC) use, parity, tubal ligation, and smoking.

14 Our results suggest IUD use and tubal ligation are not associated with higher circulatin

15 Standard outpatient procedures such as tubal ligation are now being joined by ambulatory laparo

16 or a control surgery (hysterectomy alone or tubal ligation) between 2008 and 2017, with follow-up un

17 btained from 37 women undergoing surgery for tubal ligation, ectopic pregnancy, or other gynecologic

18 cancer, duration of oral contraception use, tubal ligation, gravidity, education, and site.

19 ctomy in the retrospective cohort, 241 had a tubal ligation/hysterectomy (54.2%) and 204 had other ab

20 Furthermore, tubal ligation, intrauterine device use, and infertility

21 d 32 080 who underwent hysterectomy alone or tubal ligation (mean [SD] age, 38.2 [7.9] years; median

22 ory, inflammation, reproductive factors, and tubal ligation-modulate the risk of ovarian cancer.

23 6% (p < 0.001) for noncarriers), history of tubal ligation (odds ratio = 0.68 (95% CI: 0.25, 1.90) f

24 endectomies (eight), liver biopsies (three), tubal ligation (one), and cholecystectomies (three).

25 Several gynecologic procedures including tubal ligation, oophorectomy, and partial hysterectomy h

26 a low risk for pregnancy due to factors like tubal ligation or abstinence.

27 ulting in permanent contraception (bilateral tubal ligation or hysterectomy without concurrent salpin

28 ered for permanent contraception (in lieu of tubal ligation) or ovarian cancer prevention (performed

29 Attributable fractions associated with tubal ligation, oral contraceptive use, and obesity were

30 These data suggest that tubal ligation reduces the risk of fatal ovarian cancer.

31 f other, less studied contraceptive methods (tubal ligation, rhythm method, diaphragm, condoms, intra

32 Tubal ligation (RR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.87) was assoc

33 femoral) and then omental fat biopsy during tubal ligation surgery.

34 The existence of a post-tubal-ligation syndrome of menstrual abnormalities has b

35 ase patients) and from 0 of 44 women seeking tubal ligations (the control subjects) at Kenyatta Natio

36 Tubal ligation was significantly associated with a decre

37 ilarly, age at menopause, endometriosis, and tubal ligation were only associated with endometrioid an

38 es at the time of hysterectomy or instead of tubal ligation while leaving ovaries intact.

39 e the most strongly related to pregnancy and tubal ligation, while clear cell tumors were the only ty

40 ined the association of OC use, IUD use, and tubal ligation with plasma levels of C-reactive protein

41 The inverse association for tubal ligation with risk was most pronounced for Native

42 pian tubes during hysterectomy or instead of tubal ligation without removal of ovaries, is recommende