Endometrial ablation

Periostin's role in uterine leiomyoma development: a mini-review on the potential periostin poses as a pharmacological intervention for uterine leiomyoma

Uterine leiomyomas, also known as fibroids or myomas, occur in an estimated 70-80% of reproductive aged women. Many experience debilitating symptoms including pelvic pain, abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), dyspareunia, dysmenorrhea, and infertility. Current treatment options are limited in preserving fertility, with many opting for sterilizing hysterectomy as a form of treatment. Currently, surgical interventions include hysterectomy, myomectomy, and uterine artery embolization in addition to endometrial ablation to control AUB. Non-surgical hormonal interventions, including GnRH agonists, are connotated with negative side effects and are unacceptable for women desiring fertility. Periostin, a regulatory extra cellular matrix (ECM) protein, has been found to be expressed in various gynecological diseases including leiomyomas. We previously determined that periostin over-expression in immortalized myometrial cells led to the development of a leiomyoma-like cellular phenotype. Periostin is induced by TGF-β, signals through the PI3K/AKT pathway, induces collagen production, and mediates wound repair and fibrosis, all of which are implicated in leiomyoma pathology. Periostin has been linked to other gynecological diseases including ovarian cancer and endometriosis and is being investigated as pharmacological target for treating ovarian cancer, post-surgical scarring, and numerous other fibrotic conditions. In this review, we provide discussion linking pathological inflammation and wound repair, with a TGF-β-periostin-collagen signaling in the pathogenesis of leiomyomas, and ultimately the potential of periostin as a druggable target to treat leiomyomas.

Endometrial ablation techniques in treating menorrhagia

Menorrhagia is a frequent gynecological problem that is clinically described as excessive blood loss of 80 mL per menstrual cycle. It has the potential to lower their quality of life and to induce anemia. Medical therapy has typically been the first line of treatment; however, it is frequently ineffectual. Hysterectomy, on the other hand, is clearly 100 percent effective in stopping bleeding, but it is more expensive and can cause serious problems. So, the endometrial ablation is preferred when the endometrial layer is destroyed or removed during the procedure. To "ablate" (remove) the endometrial lining, a variety of procedures has been devised. The gold standard resectoscopic procedures (laser, transcervical endometrial resection, and rollerball) require hysteroscopic visualization of the uterus and while safe, necessitate expert surgeons. Several innovative procedures have lately been developed, the majority of which may be conducted blindly and take less time. Many nonresectoscopic procedures are still in the process of being developed, refined, and investigated. This article discusses the various techniques and procedures used in endometrial ablation, the importance of the physician using endometrial thinning agents because success rates are higher when thinning agents are used, and the importance of women understanding the complications mainly related to pregnancy. Women should be helped to make informed management decisions by discussing the risks and benefits of each treatment with their consultant. Since there are many treatment options available, with no one option being superior in all respects, patient preference and treatment preferences should be considered when deciding on management.

Evaluation of Hysteroscopic Endometrectomy: A Reappraisal

Endometrial ablation can be performed using a variety of techniques, including resectoscopic or non-resectoscopic approaches. In this study, we compared 2 resectoscopic endometrial ablation techniques. The first technique was rollerball coagulation followed by endometrectomy (type A; n = 103), and the second was the reverse (type B; n = 107). Besides excessive bleeding in 4 cases, the procedures were uneventful in both groups of patients. We did not encounter uterine perforation or cervical laceration. Satisfaction rates were 97% and 99% with an overall hysterectomy rate of 2.9%. These results compared favorably with those in the literature. The results of our study show that hysteroscopic endometrectomy is effective with few associated complications.

Endometrial Cryoablation for the Treatment of Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: 36-Month Outcomes from the CLARITY Study

Study Objective

To examine long-term outcomes from the pivotal study that evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the Cerene^® Cryotherapy Device (Channel Medsystems, Berkeley, CA) in premenopausal women with heavy menstrual bleeding due to benign causes who have completed childbearing.

Methods

The prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study had eight sites in the USA, one in Mexico, and two in Canada. Inclusion criteria included uterine sound ≤10 cm, endometrial cavity length 2.5 to 6.5 cm, age 25 to 50 years, a pictorial blood loss assessment chart score of ≥150, no submucosal myomata and/or uterine obstruction, distortion, or abnormality. A total of 242 subjects underwent a 2.5-minute cryoablation. Long-term follow-up visits were conducted at Month 24 and Month 36. Data collected included gynecological adverse events, description of last menstrual period, contraception status, self-report of pregnancy, medical or surgical interventions to treat abnormal uterine bleeding, satisfaction, recommendation, and quality of life (QoL). QoL outcomes were measured with the Menorrhagia Impact Questionnaire (MIQ) and the Premenstrual Symptoms Impact Survey (PMSIS™).

Results

201 subjects completed their Month 36 final study visit. Subject outcomes were comparable to those at Month 12. Eighty-nine percent of subjects reported amenorrhea, a lighter-than-normal, or normal period, 91% of subjects had no or slight limitations in MIQ measured activities, and 85% reported premenstrual symptoms at a low frequency. Eighty-five percent of the subjects were satisfied or very satisfied. The cumulative incidence of hysterectomy was 5% and reintervention was 8.7%. Forty-nine gynecologic adverse events (AE) were reported; one non-serious AE, postcoital bleeding, was reported as related to the procedure. No serious device-related or procedure-related AEs were reported.

Conclusion

Study data demonstrate that the positive effects of Cerene Cryotherapy Device treatment are sustained through Month 36 and that the risks associated with the device and procedure are low (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT02842736).

Interventions for heavy menstrual bleeding; overview of Cochrane reviews and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is excessive menstrual blood loss that interferes with women's quality of life, regardless of the absolute amount of bleeding. It is a very common condition in women of reproductive age, affecting 2 to 5 of every 10 women. Diverse treatments, either medical (hormonal or non-hormonal) or surgical, are currently available for HMB, with different effectiveness, acceptability, costs and side effects. The best treatment will depend on the woman's age, her intention to become pregnant, the presence of other symptoms, and her personal views and preferences.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, systematically assess and summarise all evidence from studies included in Cochrane Reviews on treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), using reviews with comparable participants and outcomes; and to present a ranking of the first- and second-line treatments for HMB.

METHODS

We searched for published Cochrane Reviews of HMB interventions in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The primary outcomes were menstrual bleeding and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, adverse events and the requirement of further treatment. Two review authors independently selected the systematic reviews, extracted data and assessed quality, resolving disagreements by discussion. We assessed review quality using the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool and evaluated the certainty of the evidence for each outcome using GRADE methods. We grouped the interventions into first- and second-line treatments, considering participant characteristics (desire for future pregnancy, failure of previous treatment, candidacy for surgery). First-line treatments included medical interventions, and second-line treatments included both the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and surgical treatments; thus the LNG-IUS is included in both groups. We developed different networks for first- and second-line treatments. We performed network meta-analyses of all outcomes, except for quality of life, where we performed pairwise meta-analyses. We reported the mean rank, the network estimates for mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and the certainty of evidence (moderate, low or very low certainty). We also analysed different endometrial ablation and resection techniques separately from the main network: transcervical endometrial resection (TCRE) with or without rollerball, other resectoscopic endometrial ablation (REA), microwave non-resectoscopic endometrial ablation (NREA), hydrothermal ablation NREA, bipolar NREA, balloon NREA and other NREA.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library up to July 2021. We updated the reviews that were over two years old. In July 2020, we started the overview with no new reviews about the topic. The included medical interventions were: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid), combined oral contraceptives (COC), combined vaginal ring (CVR), long-cycle and luteal oral progestogens, LNG-IUS, ethamsylate and danazol (included to provide indirect evidence), which were compared to placebo. Surgical interventions were: open (abdominal), minimally invasive (vaginal or laparoscopic) and unspecified (or surgeon's choice of route of) hysterectomy, REA, NREA, unspecified endometrial ablation (EA) and LNG-IUS. We grouped the interventions as follows. First-line treatments Evidence from 26 studies with 1770 participants suggests that LNG-IUS results in a large reduction of menstrual blood loss (MBL; mean rank 2.4, MD -105.71 mL/cycle, 95% CI -201.10 to -10.33; low certainty evidence); antifibrinolytics probably reduce MBL (mean rank 3.7, MD -80.32 mL/cycle, 95% CI -127.67 to -32.98; moderate certainty evidence); long-cycle progestogen reduces MBL (mean rank 4.1, MD -76.93 mL/cycle, 95% CI -153.82 to -0.05; low certainty evidence), and NSAIDs slightly reduce MBL (mean rank 6.4, MD -40.67 mL/cycle, -84.61 to 3.27; low certainty evidence; reference comparator mean rank 8.9). We are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining interventions and the sensitivity analysis for reduction of MBL, as the evidence was rated as very low certainty. We are uncertain of the true effect of any intervention (very low certainty evidence) on the perception of improvement and satisfaction. Second-line treatments Bleeding reduction is related to the type of hysterectomy (total or supracervical/subtotal), not the route, so we combined all routes of hysterectomy for bleeding outcomes. We assessed the reduction of MBL without imputed data (11 trials, 1790 participants) and with imputed data (15 trials, 2241 participants). Evidence without imputed data suggests that hysterectomy (mean rank 1.2, OR 25.71, 95% CI 1.50 to 439.96; low certainty evidence) and REA (mean rank 2.8, OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.29 to 5.66; low certainty evidence) result in a large reduction of MBL, and NREA probably results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 2.0, OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.53 to 7.23; moderate certainty evidence). Evidence with imputed data suggests hysterectomy results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 1.0, OR 14.31, 95% CI 2.99 to 68.56; low certainty evidence), and NREA probably results in a large reduction of MBL (mean rank 2.2, OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.29 to 6.05; moderate certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the true effect for REA (very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect on amenorrhoea (very low certainty evidence). Evidence from 27 trials with 4284 participants suggests that minimally invasive hysterectomy results in a large increase in satisfaction (mean rank 1.3, OR 7.96, 95% CI 3.33 to 19.03; low certainty evidence), and NREA also increases satisfaction (mean rank 3.6, OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.33; low certainty evidence), but we are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining interventions (very low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests LNG-IUS is the best first-line treatment for reducing menstrual blood loss (MBL); antifibrinolytics are probably the second best, and long-cycle progestogens are likely the third best. We cannot make conclusions about the effect of first-line treatments on perception of improvement and satisfaction, as evidence was rated as very low certainty. For second-line treatments, evidence suggests hysterectomy is the best treatment for reducing bleeding, followed by REA and NREA. We are uncertain of the effect on amenorrhoea, as evidence was rated as very low certainty. Minimally invasive hysterectomy may result in a large increase in satisfaction, and NREA also increases satisfaction, but we are uncertain of the true effect of the remaining second-line interventions, as evidence was rated as very low certainty.

Hysteroscopic endometrial resection vs. hysterectomy for abnormal uterine bleeding: impact on quality of life and sexuality. Evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of hysterectomy and hysteroscopic endometrial resection in improving quality of life (QoL), sexual function and psychological wellbeing of women abnormal uterine bleeding.

RECENT FINDINGS

We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase for original studies written in English (registered in PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019133632), using the terms 'endometrial ablation', 'endometrial destruction', 'endometrial resection', 'hysterectomy', 'menorrhagia', 'dysfunctional uterine bleeding', 'quality of life', 'sexuality' published up to April 2019. Our literature search produced 159 records. After exclusions, nine studies were included showing the following results: both types of treatment significantly improve QoL and psychological wellbeing; hysterectomy is associated with higher rates of satisfaction; hysterectomy is not associated with a significant deterioration in sexual function.

SUMMARY

Hysterectomy is currently more advantageous in terms of improving abnormal uterine bleeding and satisfaction rates than hysteroscopic endometrial destruction techniques. Furthermore, there is some evidence of a greater improvement in general health for women undergoing hysterectomy. However, high-quality prospective randomized controlled trials should be implemented to investigate the effectiveness of hysterectomy and endometrial ablation in the improvement of QoL outcomes in larger patient cohorts.

Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is common in otherwise healthy women of reproductive age, and can affect physical health and quality of life. Surgery is usually a second-line treatment of HMB. Endometrial resection/ablation (EA/ER) to remove or ablate the endometrium is less invasive than hysterectomy. Hysterectomy is the definitive treatment and can be via open (laparotomy) approach, or via minimally invasive approaches (vaginally or laparoscopically). Each approach has its own advantages and risk profile.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness, acceptability and safety of endometrial resection or ablation versus different routes of hysterectomy (open, minimally invasive hysterectomy, or unspecified route) for the treatment of HMB.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility specialised register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (July 2020), and reference lists, grey literature and trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared techniques of endometrial resection/ablation with hysterectomy (by any technique) for the treatment of HMB in premenopausal women.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 RCTs (1966 participants) comparing EA/ER to hysterectomy (open (abdominal), minimally invasive (laparoscopic or vaginal), or unspecified (or at surgeon's discretion) route of hysterectomy). The results were rated as moderate-, low- and very low-certainty evidence. Endometrial resection/ablation versus open hysterectomy We found two trials. Women having EA/ER are probably less likely to perceive an improvement in HMB compared to women having open hysterectomy (risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 0.95; 2 studies, 247 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and probably have a 13% risk of requiring further surgery for treatment failure (compared to 0 on the open hysterectomy group; 2 studies, 247 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Both treatments probably lead to similar quality of life at two years (mean difference (MD) -5.30, 95% CI -11.90 to 1.30; 1 study, 155 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and satisfaction rate at one year (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.00; 1 study, 194 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be no difference in serious adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.32 to 5.20; 2 studies, 247 women; low-certainty evidence). EA/ER probably reduces time to return to normal activity compared to open hysterectomy (MD -21.00 days, 95% CI -24.78 to -17.22; 1 study, 197 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Endometrial resection/ablation versus minimally invasive hysterectomy We found five trials. The proportion of women with perception of improvement in HMB at two years may be similar between groups (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.04; 1 study, 79 women; low-certainty evidence). Blood loss may be higher in the EA/ER group when assessed using the Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart (MD 44.00, 95% CI 36.09 to 51.91; 1 study, 68 women; low-certainty evidence). Quality of life is probably lower in the EA/ER group compared to the minimally invasive hysterectomy group at two years according to the 36-item Short Form (SF-36) (MD -10.71, 95% CI -15.11 to -6.30; 2 studies, 145 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95; 1 study, 616 women; moderate-certainty evidence). EA/ER probably increases the risk of further surgery for HMB compared to minimally invasive hysterectomy (RR 7.70, 95% CI 2.54 to 23.32; 4 studies, 922 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and treatments probably have similar rates of any serious adverse events (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.59; 4 studies, 809 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Women with EA/ER are probably less likely to be satisfied with treatment at one year (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.94; 1 study, 558 women; moderate-certainty evidence). We were unable to pool data for time to return to work or normal life because of extreme heterogeneity (99%); however, the three studies reporting this all had the same direction of effect favouring EA/ER. Endometrial resection/ablation versus unspecified route of hysterectomy We found three trials. EA/ER may lead to a lower perception of improvement in HMB compared to unspecified route of hysterectomy (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.95; 2 studies, 403 women; low-certainty evidence). Although EA/ER may lead to similar quality of life using the SF-36 General Health Perception at two years' follow-up (MD -1.90, 95% CI -8.67 to 4.87; 1 study, 209 women; low-certainty evidence), the proportion of women with improvement in general health at one year may be lower (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.95; 1 study, 185 women; low-certainty evidence). EA/ER probably has a risk of 5.4% of requiring further surgery for treatment failure (compared to 0 with total hysterectomy; 2 studies, 374 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and reduces the proportion of women with any serious adverse event (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.80; 2 studies, 374 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Both treatments probably lead to a similar satisfaction rate at one year' follow-up (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04; 3 studies, 545 women; moderate-certainty evidence). EA/ER may lead to shorter time to return to normal activity (MD -18.90 days, 95% CI -24.63 to -13.17; 1 study, 172 women; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Endometrial resection/ablation (EA/ER) offers an alternative to hysterectomy as a surgical treatment for HMB. Effectiveness varies with EA/ER compared to different hysterectomy approaches. The perception of improvement in HMB with EA/ER is probably lower compared to open and unspecified route of hysterectomy, but may be similar compared to minimally invasive. Quality of life with EA/ER is probably similar to open and unspecified route of hysterectomy, but lower compared to minimally invasive hysterectomy. Further surgery for treatment failure is probably more likely with EA/ER compared to all routes of hysterectomy. Satisfaction rates also vary. EA/ER probably has a similar rate of satisfaction compared to open and unspecified route of hysterectomy, but a lower rate of satisfaction compared to minimally invasive hysterectomy. The proportion having any serious adverse event appears similar in all groups, but specific adverse events did reported difference between EA/ER and different routes. We were unable to draw conclusions about the time to return to normal activity, but the direction of effect suggests it is likely to be shorter with EA/ER.

A study of pregnancy after endometrial ablation using linked population data

INTRODUCTION

Endometrial ablation encapsulates a range of procedures undertaken to destroy the endometrial lining of the uterus as a treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in women who no longer wish to bear children. Pregnancy following ablation, while unlikely, can occur and may carry higher rates of complications. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with post-endometrial ablation pregnancy and to describe pregnancy and birth outcomes for post-endometrial ablation pregnancies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This population-based data linkage study included all female residents of New South Wales, Australia, aged 15-50 years with a hospital admission between July 2001 to June 2014 who birthed between July 2001 and June 2015. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate associations between women's characteristics and post-endometrial ablation pregnancy of at least 20 weeks' gestation. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize pregnancy and birth outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 18 559 women with an endometrial ablation, 575 (3.1%) had a post-ablation pregnancy of at least 20 weeks' gestation. Nulliparity (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 12.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.1-16.2), older age (35-39 years: aHR 0.39, 95% CI 0.29-0.51; 40-44 years: aHR 0.06, 95% CI 0.04-0.11), marital status (single: aHR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.83; widowed/divorced/separated: aHR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36-0.94) and a diagnosis of heavy menstrual bleeding (aHR 0.09, 95% CI 0.07-0.13) were associated with post-ablation pregnancy. There were high rates of cesarean delivery (43%), preterm birth (13%), twin or higher order pregnancies (9%) and stillbirth (13.3/1000 births) among these post-ablation pregnancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Nulliparity at the time of endometrial ablation is associated with increased risk of post-ablation pregnancy, highlighting the importance of careful discussion and consideration of treatment options for heavy menstrual bleeding.

Histologic findings in hysterectomies after endometrial ablation

BACKGROUND

Endometrial ablation for abnormal uterine bleeding is used as a less invasive alternative to hysterectomy, however, in cases of treatment failure hysterectomy may be finally performed. The histologic changes in these post-treatment uteri are not well-described.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the histological findings in post-endometrial ablation uteri.

STUDY DESIGN

During a ten-year period, 321 patients were treated with endometrial ablation. Twenty-five patients (7.8%), 10 treated with NovaSure® and 15 treated with ThermaChoice® endometrial ablation were finally subjected to hysterectomy mostly due to persistent uterine bleeding. Histologic features of these hysterectomies are described.

RESULTS

The patients' age ranged from 33 to 73 years (mean 44.5) and 34-53 (mean 42) for the NovaSure® and ThermaChoice® group, respectively. The time from endometrial ablation to hysterectomy was 2-24 months (mean 8.8) and 2-60 months (mean 23.2) for the two groups, respectively (p = 0.01). Hysterectomies performed later (mean 22 months) showed no fibrosis (p = 0.04) compared with those performed earlier (mean 5 months). Endometrial lining was found more frequently in hysterectomies performed later (mean 13 months) than those performed earlier (mean 2 months, p = 0.0004). Abundant necrotic tissue of myometrial origin was found in 28% of the cases, but it was not associated with the time of hysterectomy (p = 0.2). A zonation effect and vascular changes also seen. Granulomatous reaction was not found. Ten patients (40%) harbored adenomyosis and another three (12%) extensive leiomyomas/diffuse leiomyomatosis.

CONCLUSION

Necrosis, fibrosis and vascular changes are found during the first year of post-thermal uterine effect. Hysterectomies performed later show less prominent changes and almost normal endometrial lining. Adenomyosis is found in an important part of post-endometrial ablation hysterectomies.

Epidemiology and management of uterine fibroids

Uterine leiomyomas are one of the most common and yet understudied diseases in women. These tumors, commonly known as fibroids, affect women mainly during their reproductive years and are diagnosed in up to 70% of white women and more than 80% of women of African ancestry during their lifetime. This disease has a profound impact on health care delivery and costs worldwide. Though most women with fibroids are asymptomatic, approximately 30% of them will present with severe symptoms which can include abnormal uterine bleeding, anemia, pelvic pain and pressure, back pain, urinary frequency, constipation, or infertility, and will require intervention. Furthermore, fibroids have been associated with poor obstetrical outcomes. The current options for symptomatic fibroid treatment include expectant, medical, and surgical management, and interventional radiology procedures. This article reviews the recent progress and available management strategies for uterine fibroids and highlights areas where further research is needed to find new therapeutic targets and better personalize treatments.

Employer-perspective cost comparison of surgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding

Aim: To estimate direct and indirect costs of surgical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a self-insured employer's perspective. Methods: Employer-sponsored insurance claims data were analyzed to estimate costs owing to absence and short-term disability 1 year following global endometrial ablation (GEA), outpatient hysterectomy (OPH) and inpatient hysterectomy (IPH). Results: Costs for women who had GEA are substantially less than costs for women who had either OPH or IPH, with the difference ranging from approximately $7700 to approximately $10,000 for direct costs and approximately $4200 to approximately $4600 for indirect costs. Women who had GEA missed 21.8-24.0 fewer works days. Conclusion: Study results suggest lower healthcare costs associated with GEA versus OPH or IPH from a self-insured employer perspective.

[The second generation endometrial ablation (NovaSure) improves efficacy of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in management of adenomyosis]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of second generation endometrial ablation (NovaSure) combined with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) in the treatment of adenomyosis.

METHODS

Clinical data of patients with adenomyosis admitted in Women's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine from January 2015 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Among 66 patients, 44 received Mirena placement only (control group) and 22 received Mirena placement and NovaSure treatment (study group). The menstruation blood loss, dysmenorrhea score, uterine size, expulsion rate of Mirena and the patients' satisfaction rate were assessed in two groups.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in menstruation blood loss (P<0.05) and significant improvement in dysmenorrhea (P<0.05) after the treatment in both groups. The patients in study group had more marked improvement in menstruation blood loss than those in control group (P<0.05). The patients' satisfaction was higher and the expulsion rate of Mirena was lower in study group than that in control group (all P<0.05). The score of dysmenorrhea and the size of uterine had no significant difference between two groups (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

NovaSure can improve the efficacy of Mirena in treatment of adenomyosis.

Radiofrequency endometrial ablation for treating heavy menstrual bleeding in women with chronic renal failure

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency endometrial ablation in treating heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) in women with chronic renal failure (CRF).

METHOD

Fifty-eight patients with CRF undergoing radiofrequency endometrial ablation in our hospital between January 2013 and July 2017 and for whom complete follow-up data were available were included. Outcome measures included amenorrhea, treatment failure and operative complications.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 41.4 ± 7.7 years, the mean preoperative hemoglobin level was 69.6 ± 19.3 g/dL, the mean preoperative serum creatinine level was 879.1 ± 415.4 µmol/L, and the mean urea level was 18.2 ± 7.1 mmol/L. The mean treatment time for radiofrequency endometrial ablation was 61.7 ± 18.8 s. The median volume of estimated blood loss during the procedure was 10 mL (a range of 2-50 mL). On average, the study subjects were monitored for 24.4 months (a range of 6-60 months). The average amenorrhea rate was 89.7%. Only 2 (3.4%) patients required additional gynecologic surgery after endometrial ablation. Intra- and postoperative complications were not observed.

CONCLUSION

Radiofrequency endometrial ablation was demonstrated to be safe and effective for the treatment of HMB in women with CRF.

A Prospective, Multicenter, Pivotal Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of the AEGEA Vapor Endometrial Ablation System

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the AEGEA Vapor System (Aegea Medical System, Menlo Park, CA) for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB).

DESIGN

A prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, clinical trial. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 24 hours; 2 weeks; and 3, 6, and 12 months after the endometrial ablation procedure (Canadian Task Force Classification II-1).

SETTING

A private practice and outpatient and hospital settings at 15 sites in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the Netherlands.

PATIENTS

One hundred fifty-five premenopausal women aged 30 to 50years with HMB as determined by a pictorial blood loss assessment score ≥150. Preoperative evaluation included ultrasound, sonohysterography or hysteroscopy, and endometrial biopsy. Screening inclusion allowed treatment of up to 12-cm uterine sound lengths and nonobstructing myomata.

INTERVENTIONS

Endometrial ablation (120-second treatment time) was performed under varying anesthesia regimens using the vapor system from September 2014 to May 2015.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary effectiveness end point was the reduction of menstrual blood loss to a pictorial blood loss assessment score ≤75. Success was judged based on the Food and Drug Administration's objective performance criteria, derived from the success rates of the first 5 global endometrial ablation pivotal clinical trials. The secondary effectiveness end points included quality of life and patient satisfaction as assessed using the Menorrhagia Impact Questionnaire and the Aberdeen Menorrhagia Severity Score as well as the need for surgical or medical intervention to treat abnormal bleeding at any time within the first 12 months after treatment. All adverse events, including device- and procedure-related events, were recorded. At 12 months, the primary effectiveness end point was achieved in 78.7% of subjects exceeding the OPC (p = .0004); 90.8% of subjects were satisfied or very satisfied with the treatment. Ninety-nine percent of subjects showed improvement in quality of life scores with an average decrease in the Menorrhagia Impact Questionnaire score by 8.1, 72% had less dysmenorrhea, and 85% of women whose sex lives were affected by their menses reported improvement in their sex lives. There were no reported serious adverse device effects or any reported serious adverse events that were procedure related.

CONCLUSION

The AEGEA Vapor System is a safe, effective, and minimally invasive option for performing in-office endometrial ablation under minimal anesthesia for the purpose of treating women who suffer from HMB.