Extirpated uterine endometrial cryoablation with ultrasound visualization

New surgical treatments for menorrhagia

CONTEXT

Hysterectomy is a common and effective treatment for menorrhagia but is associated with substantial post-operative convalescence time and morbidity. In the early 1990s endometrial resection or ablation became a well-established day-case alternative for the surgical treatment of menorrhagia. Both endometrial resection and ablation require general anaesthesia, a high level of skill in hysteroscopic surgery, and can be long procedures. More recently, various new techniques have been developed that can be done in an outpatient setting under local anaesthesia and with a low risk of complications. The effectiveness of most new second-generation ablation technologies has not been confirmed in randomised trials and it is possible that these techniques will not prove to be as effective or as safe as originally thought.

STARTING POINT

Massimiliano Pellicano and colleagues (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 545-50) compared a second-generation ablation technique, thermal destruction of the endometrium with a heated-water-filled silicone balloon with hysteroscopic endometrial resection. 82 women were randomised and followed up for 2 years. Thermal destruction was quicker than hysteroscopic resection, and was associated with a similar level of postoperative satisfaction and reintervention rate. This study suggests that thermal destruction is as effective a technique as endometrial resection. WHERE NEXT? Many second-generation ablation techniques are now available. Some may prove more effective than others, but much larger studies are needed to address safety. The development of progestagen-releasing intrauterine devices, which provide effective treatment for menorrhagia and are also an effective and reversible form of contraception, may mean that the uptake of second-generation surgical ablation techniques is less widespread than some proponents of these new technologies suggest.

A randomized study comparing endometrial cryoablation and rollerball electroablation for treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of endometrial cryoablation in comparison with rollerball electroablation.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized study (Canadian Task Force classification I).

SETTING

Ten university and private medical centers in the United States.

PATIENTS

Two hundred seventy-nine women with menorrhagia due to benign causes.

INTERVENTION

Endometrial ablation using a Her Option cryoablation device in 193 women and rollerball electroablation in 86.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Women treated by cryoablation received significantly less general anesthesia (46%) than those treated by electroablation (92%). Subjects maintained menstrual diaries for at least one cycle before and for 12 months after the procedure. Success was defined as reduction of menstrual bleeding to a score of 75 or less in the absence of retreatment. Success rates in the cryoablation and electroablation groups were 77.3% and 83.8%, respectively. Bleeding declined by 92% and 94%, respectively. Both procedures led to significant improvements in a broad range of symptoms including menses-related pain, mood, and overall improvement in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Endometrial cryoablation is a safe and effective procedure in treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Its advantages include technical ease of performance, direct ultrasonographic view of depth of ablation, little anesthetic, and avoidance of potential complications related to distention media.

Advances in endometrial ablation

The evolution of the surgical treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding has resulted in the design and manufacture of instrumentation that is minimally invasive, has a low risk profile, and is technically simple to operate. Whereas hysterectomy was the only definitive surgical option before 1981, operative hysteroscopy with transcervical resection of the endometrium and rollerball ablation of the endometrium gained favor in the mid-1980s and 1990s. During the past 10 years, devices dedicated entirely to the ablation (or destruction) of the endometrium have been designed, modeled, tested, and approved for clinical use in the United States. This review describes the methods by which the technologies are evaluated and approved for clinical use by the Food and Drug Administration. In addition, the reported efficacy of each approved device is reviewed. The complications associated with the devices, as well as the potential long-term risks of endometrial ablation, also are reported. Finally, the cost for device disposables and nondisposables is presented.

TARGET AUDIENCE

Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After completion of this article, the reader will be able to list the various FDA-approved uterine ablation devices, compare the effectiveness of the various uterine ablation devices, and summarize the various adverse events associated with the use of the uterine ablation devices.

GLOBAL ENDOMETRIAL ABLATION

Hysteroscopic endometrial ablation was introduced in the 1980's as an alternative to hysterectomy in women who failed medical management. Global endometrial ablation was introduced in the 1990's as an easier, safe, and equally effective alternative to hysteroscopic ablation. Several devices have been introduced, some of which are still undergoing feasibility studies or clinical trials. These devices include: three hot water intrauterine balloons, two intrauterine free saline solutions, a multielectrode electrocoagulating balloon, a 3-D bipolar electrocoagulation probe, a microwave, a diode fibre laser, and at least three cryoprobes. These devices require less operator skill and no irrigant or distending solutions. All require either heat or cold to destroy the endometrium. Although all devices are promising and have produced impressive preliminary results, the long-term efficacy, complication rates, and cost effectiveness have not been established. This review describes all devices as they appeared chronologically and presents only peer-reviewed data.