Thermachoice endometrial ablation in the outpatient setting, without local anesthesia or intravenous sedation: A prospective cohort study

Short-term recovery after NovaSure® endometrial ablation: a prospective cohort study

Background

Endometrial ablation is a frequently performed treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding, but detailed information about recovery to help inform patients is lacking.

Objective

To gain more insight into the short-term recovery after NovaSure® endometrial ablation, with the goal of improving preprocedural counselling.

Materials and Methods

A total of 61 women who underwent endometrial ablation between March 2019 and November 2021 in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands were included in this prospective cohort study.

Main outcome measures

Short-term recovery was investigated through questionnaires in the first week after the procedure. The primary outcome was the Recovery Index (RI-10). Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), pain intensity, use of analgesics, nausea, vaginal discharge, capability of performing activities (domestic chores, sports, work), self-rated health (EQ-VAS) and the feeling of full recovery.

Results

A total of 33 women underwent the procedure under local anaesthesia and 28 women under procedural sedation. The RI-10 increased in the first week; median scores on day one, two and seven were 34 (IQR 28.5-41.5), 38.5 (IQR 31-47), and 42 (IQR 37.5-48), respectively. The median time for full recovery was five days. However, 23% of all women were not fully recovered within seven days. Women needed a median time of two days for returning to their work and 5.5 days for sporting activities. There were no differences in recovery between both anaesthesia techniques.

Conclusions

Women undergoing endometrial ablation can be informed that most will fully recover within the first week of the procedure and that there is no difference in expected recovery time according to whether the procedure is undertaken with local anaesthesia or conscious sedation.

What is New?

The short-term recovery after endometrial ablation has been mapped in this trial. This information can be used in counselling women with heavy menstrual bleeding.

Utility of anesthetic block for endometrial ablation pain: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Second-generation endometrial ablation has been demonstrated safe for abnormal uterine bleeding treatment, in premenopausal women who have completed childbearing, in short-stay surgical centers and in physicians' offices. However, no standard regarding anesthesia exists, and practice varies depending on physician or patient preference and hospital policy and setting.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether local anesthetic, in combination with general anesthesia, affects postoperative pain and associated narcotic use following endometrial ablation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted in an academic-affiliated community hospital. A total of 84 English-speaking premenopausal women, aged 30 to 55 years, who were undergoing outpatient endometrial ablation for benign disease were randomized to receive standardized paracervical injection of 20 mL 0.25% bupivacaine (treatment group) or 20 mL normal saline solution (control group) upon completion of ablation. The study was designed to test a 40% 1-hour mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score difference with an average standard deviation of 75% of both groups' mean VAS scores, using a 2-tailed test, a type I error of 5%, and statistical power of 80%. A sample of 36 patients per study group was required. Assuming a 15% attrition rate, the study enrolled 42 patients per study arm randomized in blocks of 2 (84 total). Two-tailed cross-tabulations with Fisher exact significance values where appropriate and Student t tests were used to compare patient characteristics. Backward stepwise regressions were conducted to control for confounding.

RESULTS

Between April 2016 and February 2017, a total of 108 women scheduled for endometrial ablation were screened (refusals, n = 21; ineligible, n = 3) to determine whether there were meaningful differences in postoperative VAS pain scores and postoperative narcotic use. Of the 84 randomized women, 2 age-ineligible women were excluded. Intent-to-treat analyses included 1 incorrect randomization (in which the provider consciously decided to provide analgesia regardless of the protocol, after which the provider was excluded from further study participation) and 3 women having no ablation because of operative difficulties. Three were lost to second-day follow-up. Treatment group patients (n = 41) experienced 1.3 points lower 1-hour postoperative VAS pain scores than the control group (n = 41, P = .02). The difference diminished by 4 hours (P = .31) and was negligible by 8 hours (P = .62). Treatment group patients used 3.6 less morphine equivalents of postoperative pain medication (P = .05). Regression analyses controlled for confounding reduced the 1-hour postoperative treatment group pain score difference to 0.8 (confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to 0.1) but slightly increased the average postoperative morphine equivalents to 3.7 (CI, -6.8 to -0.7).

CONCLUSION

This randomized controlled trial found that local anesthetic with low risk for complications, used in conjunction with general anesthesia, decreased postoperative pain at 1 hour and significantly reduced postoperative narcotic use following endometrial ablation. Further research is needed to determine whether the study results are generalizable and whether post procedure is the best time to administer the paracervical block to decrease endometrial ablation pain.

Does postoperative pain predict the outcome of endometrial ablation?

AIM

In this article, we hypothesized that significant pain in the immediate postoperative period is due to a deeper degree of thermal ablation, down to the myometrial layer, and consequently an increased likelihood of successful outcome.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 87 subjects who underwent thermal balloon endometrial ablation as the sole procedure under general anesthesia, administered by the same anesthetist using a standard protocol over a 10-year period from 2000 to 2010 at Thornbury Hospital, Sheffield, UK. All the cases were performed by the same surgeon in one hospital.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight (32.2%) subjects experienced severe or intractable pain within 1 h after the thermal balloon endometrial ablation procedure, while 26 (29.9%) subjects required morphine injection in the postoperative period. Overall, more than 70% of women experienced significant reduction in their menstrual flow. There was no difference in the clinical outcome between those who did or did not experience severe pain or between those who did or did not require morphine injection in the postoperative period.

CONCLUSION

The amount of postoperative pain did not predict the outcome of thermal balloon endometrial ablation.

Outpatient Thermachoice endometrial balloon ablation: long-term, prognostic and quality-of-life measures

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate short- and long-term treatment outcomes of outpatient local anaesthetic thermal balloon endometrial ablation (LA-TBEA) and identify any prognostic factors.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective observational study in a UK teaching hospital involving 102 menorrhagic women undergoing LA-TBEA between 2001 and 2005. Women underwent either Gynecare® Thermachoice I (n = 51) or Thermachoice III (n = 51) TBEA performed in the outpatient setting under local anaesthesia without conscious sedation. The main outcome measures were: treatment completion, pain and analgesia, duration of stay (from admission to discharge), duration of follow-up, primary treatment success and nature of any secondary treatment, menstrual symptoms and amenorrhoea, patient satisfaction, and quality of life.

RESULTS

TBEA was completed in 97% of women. Mean duration of stay was 8.0 h (95% CI 6.6-9.3). Mean follow-up was 30 months (95% CI 26-32). Secondary treatment with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system, repeat TBEA or hysterectomy occurred in 19/102 (19%). Overall, 50% of surgical re-interventions occurred by 19 months. There were high rates of amenorrhoea (29%) and treatment satisfaction (76%). Higher mean intrauterine ablation pressure was associated with increased treatment satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

TBEA can be successfully performed in the outpatient setting. Higher endometrial ablation pressure may improve long-term treatment outcome.

Second-generation endometrial ablation technologies: the hot liquid balloons

Hysteroscopic endometrial ablation (HEA) was introduced in the 1980s to treat menorrhagia. Its use required additional training, surgical expertise and specialized equipment to minimize emergent complications such as uterine perforations, thermal injuries and excessive fluid absorption. To overcome these difficulties and concerns, thermal balloon endometrial ablation (TBEA) was introduced in the 1990s. Four hot liquid balloons have been introduced into clinical practice. All systems consist of a catheter (4-10mm diameter), a silicone balloon and a control unit. Liquids used to inflate the balloons include internally heated dextrose in water (ThermaChoice, 87 degrees C), and externally heated glycine (Cavaterm, 78 degrees C), saline (Menotreat, 85 degrees ) and glycerine (Thermablate, 173 degrees C). All balloons require pressurization from 160 to 240 mmHg for treatment cycles of 2 to 10 minutes. Prior to TBEA, preoperative endometrial thinning, including suction curettage, is optional. Several RCTs and cohort studies indicate that the advantages of TBEA include portability, ease of use and short learning curve. In addition, small diameter catheters requiring minimal cervical dilatation (5-7 mm) and short duration of treatment cycles (2-8 min) allow treatment under minimal analgesia/anesthesia requirements in a clinic setting. Following TBEA serious adverse events, including thermal injuries to viscera have been experienced. To minimize such injuries some surgeons advocate the use of routine post-dilatation hysteroscopy and/or ultrasonography to confirm correct intrauterine placement of the balloon prior to initiating the treatment cycle. After 10 years of clinical practice, TBEA is thought to be the preferred first-line surgical treatment of menorrhagia in appropriately selected candidates. Economic modeling also suggested that TBEA may be more cost-effective than HEA.

Thermal balloon endometrial ablation: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study is to review the role of thermal balloon endometrial ablation (TBEA) as an alternative in treating abnormal uterine bleeding.

METHODS

Articles relevant to our review and relevant references from the initially identified articles on the field that were archived by May 2007, were retrieved from Pubmed.

RESULTS

Success rates ranged from 83 up to 94%, with patient's satisfaction ranging from 57 up to 94%. Persisted menorrhagia could reach 17% in some studies.

CONCLUSION

TBEA is an effective alternative method used in the treatment of menorrhagea which results in a significant reduction in menstrual bleeding and high satisfaction rates. However, a longer follow-up is required to determine the role of such a treatment.

Management of Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: Is Hysterectomy the Radical Mastectomy of Gynecology?

Both hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding and radical mastectomy for breast cancer are steeped in the history of surgery and have recently been challenged as being too radical for the disorder at hand. Radical mastectomy has largely been replaced with local removal of the tumor with subsequent radiation and/or chemotherapy. Alternatives to hysterectomy include a number of medical interventions, most notably intrauterine progestin-releasing systems, and endometrial ablation, a procedure that has a relatively high success rate and one that is now feasible for many women in an office or procedure room setting. However, although radical mastectomy rates have dropped precipitously, hysterectomy rates, at least in the United States remain relatively stable. Determining the proportion of hysterectomies that are done for heavy menstrual bleeding is difficult, largely because of coding issues, so it is difficult to measure the impact of new medical and minimally invasive surgical procedures. Nevertheless, it seems clear that many women are not exposed to the plethora of options to hysterectomy, a fact that may reflect a number of issues that may include training, skill, and financial incentives or disincentives. Clearly, options to hysterectomy are not a panacea, but if women are empowered to select from all of the options available, the rate of hysterectomy for bleeding should decrease while maintaining, or even enhancing the patient's satisfaction with care.

Greek experience in the use of Thermachoice for treating heavy menstrual bleeding: prospective study

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) occurs in a considerable percentage of the general population and is one of the main causes due to which a patient is referred to health services. Despite the efforts for pharmaceutical interventions, the symptom usually persists, therefore operative techniques are needed to control the bleeding. Today, apart from the choice of hysterectomy, other less aggressive techniques have been invented. The first results of the Greek Study Group on Gynecological Endoscopy regarding the use of the Thermachoice device are hereby presented. One hundred patients suffering HMB were treated with the Thermachoice device following a standard protocol designed by the Study Group. The follow-up meetings with the patients were held at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. It seems that the overall effectiveness rate (96%) is satisfactory and it is similar to the overall effectiveness rate reported in other relevant studies upon the Thermachoice device.

Endometrial Ablation: Where Have We Been? Where Are We Going?

Endometrial ablation (EA) is targeted destruction of the endothelial surface of the uterine cavity. The procedure was originally designed as a less invasive alternative to hysterectomy for the symptom of heavy menstrual bleeding unrelated to structural pathology of the uterus, that was not responsive to medical therapy. More recently it has become apparent that the procedure can be performed in the presence of submucous leiomyomas, providing they meet a number of size and location criteria. The first EA serie as published in Germany in the 1930s, but the procedure did not attract much attention until the latter part of the 20th century. Currently, EA can be performed under endoscopic direction with the neodymium:yttrium alumnum garnet laser, with a radiofrequency resectoscope, or with an expanding array of nonresectoscopic EA systems. It is apparent that most but not all of the complications associated with resectoscopic endometrial ablation are eliminated with nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation, but serious morbidity has been reported with all of the newer systems to date. Success and patient satisfaction seem to be enduring in the majority of well-selected patients treated in clinical trials, but repeat surgery, usually hysterectomy, is performed in 25% to 40% by 5 years after surgery. Increased efficiencies should be realized if the procedure could be moved to an office setting.

Assessment of New Technology in the Treatment of Idiopathic Menorrhagia and Uterine Leiomyomata

New technologies available for the treatment of idiopathic menorrhagia include five global endometrial ablation devices that use differing ablative methods, including thermal balloon, circulated hot fluid, cryotherapy, radiofrequency electrosurgery, and microwave energy. All have been compared with rollerball endometrial ablation by way of randomized clinical trials and are associated with high patient satisfaction rates, regardless of method, but a wide range of amenorrhea rates (13.9-55.3%). They are associated with low complication rates when performed by well-trained physicians following protocols in Food and Drug Administration trials. Some serious complications have been reported subsequently. Strict adherence to patient selection criteria and manufacturer protocols is strongly recommended. New technologies for the treatment of uterine leiomyomata include uterine artery embolization, magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasonography, laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion, and cryomyolysis. There is sound evidence for shorter hospital stay, quicker return to work, and a similar major complication rate compared with hysterectomy. Uterine artery embolization appears to be effective for up to 5 years in reducing bulk symptoms and menorrhagia associated with leiomyomata. The chance of reoperation for leiomyoma-related symptoms within 5 years is 20-29%. Women who wish to become pregnant should be cautioned about potential complications during pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence to recommend uterine artery embolization in postmenopausal women. With regard to magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasonography, cryomyolysis, and laparoscopic uterine artery occlusion, although the initial symptom reduction outcomes have been reported as favorable, more data are needed to better understand the durability of these results.

Clinical and health service implications of second generation endometrial ablation devices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review evaluates the current evidence on the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of the ever-increasing number of second-generation endometrial ablation devices.

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature covered by this review includes (1) evidence on long-term benefit, avoidance of hysterectomy and improvement in quality of life, (2) applicability of these techniques in the outpatient environment under local or no anaesthesia, (3) frequency and nature of early and delayed complications associated with these devices, (4) impact on clinical practice and the health service, and (5) implications for research.

SUMMARY

Where appropriate, second-generation devices are rapidly becoming the first-line surgical choice for the management of heavy menstrual bleeding. This has both cost-savings and negative implications for the health service. There is also emerging evidence that improvement in quality of life is more relevant to women than amenorrhoea rates. What has come to light from this review is the lack of accurate data on adverse events rate, and the urgent need for a better appreciation of the frequency and nature of complications.

Hysteroscopic endometrial ablation using the Hydro ThermAblator in an outpatient hysteroscopy clinic: Feasibility and acceptability

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility and patient acceptability of global endometrial ablation using the Hydro ThermAblator (HTA) in an outpatient hysteroscopy clinic setting under local anaesthesia.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

University hospital in the United Kingdom.

PATIENTS

Forty patients with medication-resistant menorrhagia.

INTERVENTION

Oral mefenamic acid was administered 8 hours before the procedure. A combined cervical/paracervical block using lignocaine 1% adrenaline 1:200,000 was used before hysteroscopic endometrial ablation using the HTA device.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A successful procedure was defined as a completed HTA treatment cycle. Failure was defined as premature termination or inability to carry out the HTA procedure after scheduling the patient. Pain scores were estimated at three stages during and after the procedure using a visual-analog scale. A questionnaire was used before discharge to assess acceptability. Forty patients were successfully treated. The median pain score during the ablation was 6.4 (range 4.0-8.9). Eighty-eight percent of patients found the procedure acceptable. No serious complications occurred. All patients were discharged home within 2 hours of the procedure.

CONCLUSION

Selected patients suffering from menorrhagia may be treated with the HTA device using local anesthesia in an outpatient setting.

Anaesthesia and analgesia for ambulatory hysteroscopic surgery

Although ambulatory hysteroscopy is well established in dedicated centres, there is a delay in its general implementation. One reason for this may be the lack of consensus regarding a protocol for analgesia and anaesthesia in ambulatory hysteroscopy. This review looks at the various methods in use. These include the paracervical or intracervical injection of anaesthetic to establish a block. Topical anaesthetic may be applied to the surface of the endometrium in the uterine cavity or to the cervix. Oral analgesia is also used. A vaginoscopic approach to the uterine cavity without any anaesthesia is also becoming popular. Finally, combinations of the above methods have been employed for hysteroscopic surgical procedures, including the newer generation of endometrial ablation methods.