Roe v. Wade didn't decide that there was a right to privacy, but instead built on prior cases finding that the Constitution protected certain private matters from government regulation, including, most famously, Griswold v. Connecticut, which held that the government couldn't prohibit married couples from using contraception. It's since been applied to overturn other non-abortion laws, such as the ban on sodomy in Lawrence v. Texas. If you read the decision, available here, you will understand it much better.

Not sure I am clear on your question — are you asking why other laws impacting personal privacy (non-abortion-related) were not automatically invalidated by the Roe v Wade decision? Or are you asking why the arguments made and conclusions reached in Roe have not been used as a basis to subsequently invalidate laws impacting personal privacy?