A multicenter evaluation of endometrial ablation by Hydro ThermAblator and rollerball for treatment of menorrhagia

First and second-generation endometrial ablation devices: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

First-generation and second-generation endometrial ablation (EA) techniques, along with medical treatment and invasive surgery, are considered successful lines of management for abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB). We set out to determine the efficacy of first and second-generation ablation techniques compared with medical treatment, invasive surgery and different modalities of the EA techniques themselves.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis using a frequentist network.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline (Ovid), PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, EBSCO and Scopus for all published studies up to 1 March 2021 using relevant keywords.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared premenopausal women with AUB receiving the intervention of second-generation EA techniques.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

49 high-quality RCTs with 8038 women were included. We extracted and pooled the data and then analysed to estimate the network meta-analysis models within a frequentist framework. We used the random-effects model of the netmeta package in R (V.3.6.1) and the 'Meta-Insight' website.

RESULTS

Our network meta-analysis showed many varying results according to specific outcomes. The uterine balloon ablation had significantly higher amenorrhoea rates than other techniques in both short (hydrothermal ablation (risk ratio (RR)=0.51, 95% CI 0.37; 0.72), microwave ablation (RR=0.43, 95% CI 0.31; 0.59), first-generation techniques (RR=0.44, 95% CI 0.33; 0.59), endometrial laser intrauterine therapy (RR=0.18, 95% CI 0.10; 0.32) and bipolar radio frequency treatments (RR=0.22, 95% CI 0.15; 0.31)) and long-term follow-up (microwave ablation (RR=0.11, 95% CI 0.01; 0.86), bipolar radio frequency ablation (RR=0.12, 95% CI 0.02; 0.90), first generation (RR=0.12, 95% CI 0.02; 0.90) and endometrial laser intrauterine thermal therapy (RR=0.04, 95% CI 0.01; 0.36)). When calculating efficacy based only on calculated bleeding scores, the highest scores were achieved by cryoablation systems (p-score=0.98).

CONCLUSION

Most second-generation EA systems were superior to first-generation systems, and statistical superiority between devices depended on which characteristic was measured (secondary amenorrhoea rate, treatment of AUB, patient satisfaction or treatment of dysmenorrhoea). Although our study was limited by a paucity of data comparing large numbers of devices, we conclude that there is no evidence at this time that any one of the examined second-generation systems is clearly superior to all others.

Variation of outcome reporting in studies of interventions for heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review

Background: Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) detrimentally effects women. It is important to be able to compare treatments and synthesise data to understand which interventions are most beneficial, however, when there is variation in outcome reporting, this is difficult. Objectives: To identify variation in reported outcomes in clinical studies of interventions for HMB. Materials and methods: Searches were performed in medical databases and trial registries, using the terms ‘heavy menstrual bleeding’, menorrhagia*, hypermenorrhoea*, HMB, “heavy period „period“, effective*, therapy*, treatment, intervention, manage* and associated MeSH terms. Two authors independently reviewed and selected citations according to pre-defined selection criteria, including both randomised and observational studies. The following data were extracted- study characteristics, methodology and quality, and all reported outcomes. Analysis considered the frequency of reporting. Results: There were 14 individual primary outcomes, however reporting was varied, resulting in 45 specific primary outcomes. There were 165 specific secondary outcomes. The most reported outcomes were menstrual blood loss and adverse events. Conclusions: A core outcome set (COS) would reduce the evident variation in reporting of outcomes in studies of HMB, allowing more complete combination and comparison of study results and preventing reporting bias. What is new? This in-depth review of past research into heavy menstrual bleeding shows that there is the need for a core outcome set for heavy menstrual bleeding.

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.

Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a significant health problem in premenopausal women; it can reduce their quality of life and can cause social disruption and physical problems such as iron deficiency anaemia. First-line treatment has traditionally consisted of medical therapy (hormonal and non-hormonal), but this is not always successful in reducing menstrual bleeding to acceptable levels. Hysterectomy is a definitive treatment, but it is more costly and carries some risk. Endometrial ablation may be an alternative to hysterectomy that preserves the uterus. Many techniques have been developed to 'ablate' (remove) the lining of the endometrium. First-generation techniques require visualisation of the uterus with a hysteroscope during the procedure; although it is safe, this procedure requires specific technical skills. Newer techniques for endometrial ablation (second- and third-generation techniques) have been developed that are quicker than previous approaches because they do not require hysteroscopic visualisation during the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of endometrial destruction techniques to reduce heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) in premenopausal women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycInfo (from inception to May 2018). We also searched trials registers, other sources of unpublished or grey literature, and reference lists of retrieved studies, and we made contact with experts in the field and with pharmaceutical companies that manufacture ablation devices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different endometrial ablation or resection techniques for women reporting HMB without known uterine pathology, other than fibroids outside the uterine cavity and smaller than 3 centimetres, were eligible. Outcomes included improvement in HMB and in quality of life, patient satisfaction, operative outcomes, complications, and the need for further surgery, including hysterectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trials for risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for clarification of methods or for additional data. We assessed adverse events only if they were separately measured in the included trials. We undertook comparisons with individual techniques as well as an overall comparison of first- and second-generation ablation methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this update 28 studies (4287 women) with sample sizes ranging from 20 to 372. Most studies had low risk of bias for randomisation, attrition, and selective reporting. Less than half of these studies had adequate allocation concealment, and most were unblinded. Using GRADE, we determined that the quality of evidence ranged from moderate to very low. We downgraded evidence for risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency.Overall comparison of second-generation versus first-generation (i.e. gold standard hysteroscopic ablative) techniques revealed no evidence of differences in amenorrhoea at 1 year and 2 to 5 years' follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.27; 12 studies; 2145 women; I² = 77%; and RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.72; 672 women; 4 studies; I² = 80%; very low-quality evidence) and showed subjective improvement at 1 year follow-up based on a Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart (PBAC) (< 75 or acceptable improvement) (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.09; 5 studies; 1282 women; I² = 0%; and RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.28; 236 women; 1 study; low-quality evidence). Study results showed no difference in patient satisfaction between second- and first-generation techniques at 1 year follow-up (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.04; 11 studies; 1750 women; I² = 36%; low-quality evidence) nor at 2 to 5 years' follow-up (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.13; 672 women; 4 studies; I² = 81%).Compared with first-generation techniques, second-generation endometrial ablation techniques were associated with shorter operating times (mean difference (MD) -13.52 minutes, 95% CI -16.90 to -10.13; 9 studies; 1822 women; low-quality evidence) and more often were performed under local rather than general anaesthesia (RR 2.8, 95% CI 1.8 to 4.4; 6 studies; 1434 women; low-quality evidence).We are uncertain whether perforation rates differed between second- and first-generation techniques (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.01; 1885 women; 8 studies; I² = 0%).Trials reported little or no difference between second- and first-generation techniques in requirement for additional surgery (ablation or hysterectomy) at 1 year follow-up (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.26; 6 studies: 935 women; low-quality evidence). At 5 years, results showed probably little or no difference between groups in the requirement for hysterectomy (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.22; 4 studies; 758 women; moderate-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Approaches to endometrial ablation have evolved from first-generation techniques to newer second- and third-generation approaches. Current evidence suggests that compared to first-generation techniques (endometrial laser ablation, transcervical resection of the endometrium, rollerball endometrial ablation), second-generation approaches (thermal balloon endometrial ablation, microwave endometrial ablation, hydrothermal ablation, bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation, endometrial cryotherapy) are of equivalent efficacy for heavy menstrual bleeding, with comparable rates of amenorrhoea and improvement on the PBAC. Second-generation techniques are associated with shorter operating times and are performed more often under local rather than general anaesthesia. It is uncertain whether perforation rates differed between second- and first-generation techniques. Evidence was insufficient to show which second-generation approaches were superior to others and to reveal the efficacy and safety of third-generation approaches versus first- and second-generation techniques.

Evaluation of the Effect of Uterine Fibroids on Microwave Endometrial Ablation Profiles

Thermal ablation of the endometrial lining of the uterus is a minimally-invasive technique for treatment of menorrhagia. We have previously presented a 915 MHz microwave triangular loop antenna for endometrial ablation. Uterine fibroids are benign pelvic tumors, of considerably different water content compared to normal uterus, and may change the shape of the uterus. Collectively, these changes introduced by fibroids may alter the pattern of microwave endometrial ablation. In this study, we have investigated the effect of 1 - 3 cm diameter uterine fibroids in different locations around the uterine cavity on ablation profiles following 60 W, 150 s microwave exposure with a loop antenna. Our computational model predicts ablation zone extents within 1 ± 0.8 of ablation zones observed in experiments in ex vivo tissue. The maximum change in simulated ablation depths due to the presence of fibroids was 1.1 mm. In summary, this simulation study suggests that 1 - 3 cm diameter uterine fibroids can be expected to have minimal impact on the extent of microwave endometrial ablation patterns.

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.

Endometrial ablation

Endometrial ablation (EA) includes a spectrum of procedures performed with or without hysteroscopic direction, designed to destroy the endometrium for the treatment of the symptom of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) secondary to a spectrum of causes, but most commonly those that are endometrial in origin (AUB-E) or ovulatory disorders (AUB-O). Resectoscopic endometrial ablation (REA) is often mistakenly referred to as the "first generation" technique, while proprietary devices that do not use the resectoscope (nonresectoscopic EA or NREA) are often misperceived as "second generation" devices. Indeed, the origins of NREA date back to the late 19th century with the use of steam, and the early and mid 20th century, when radiofrequency and cryotherapy based NREA techniques were published - long before the resectoscope was used and reported. The NREA devices have also been mislabeled as "global", a misleading term borrowed from the marketing departments of device manufacturers - there is no device that predictably treats the entire endometrium. Consequently, none can be construed as being "global". Instead, EA is a procedure designed for women as an alternative to hysterectomy, or, perhaps, medical therapy, when future fertility is no longer desired. Women who select EA should anticipate a relatively low risk procedure that will likely reduce their HMB to normal levels or less. This paper will review the spectrum of EA techniques and devices, their clinical outcomes and adverse events, and explore their value compared to hysterectomy and selected medical therapies.

Endometrial Ablation

The destruction of the endometrium in women with heavy menstrual bleeding has been used for well over a century, and the various techniques of delivering forms of thermal energy have been modified over the years to ensure a safe and effective treatment approach. Today, 6 nonresectoscopic devices are approved for use in the United States in addition to resectoscopic techniques that rely on the skillful use of the operative hysteroscope. Regardless of the technique used, endometrial ablation uniformly reduces menstrual blood loss, improves general and menstrual-related quality of life, and prevents hysterectomy in 4 of 5 women who undergo the procedure. When patients are appropriately selected, outcomes are optimized, and risks of serious complications are minimized. This article reviews the literature with singular reference to nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation procedures including historical background, appropriate patient selection, clinical outcomes data, complications, and special or unique considerations.

A Randomized Controlled Multicenter US Food and Drug Administration Trial of the Safety and Efficacy of the Minerva Endometrial Ablation System: One-Year Follow-Up Results

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and effectiveness of the Minerva Endometrial Ablation System for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding in premenopausal women.

DESIGN

Multicenter, randomized, controlled, international study (Canadian Task Force classification I).

SETTING

Thirteen academic and private medical centers.

PATIENTS

Premenopausal women (n = 153) suffering from heavy menstrual bleeding (PALM-COEIN: E, O).

INTERVENTION

Patients were treated using the Minerva Endometrial Ablation System or rollerball ablation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

At 1-year post-treatment, study success (alkaline hematin ≤80 mL) was observed in 93.1% of Minerva subjects and 80.4% of rollerball subjects with amenorrhea reported by 71.6% and 49% of subjects, respectively. The mean procedure times were 3.1 minutes for Minerva and 17.2 minutes for rollerball. There were no intraoperative adverse events and/or complications reported.

CONCLUSION

The results of this multicenter randomized controlled trial demonstrate that at the 12-month follow-up, the Minerva procedure produces statistically significantly higher rates of success, amenorrhea, and patient satisfaction as well as a shorter procedure time when compared with the historic criterion standard of rollerball ablation. Safety results were excellent and similar for both procedures.

Endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding

Endometrial ablation can be described as one of the great gynecological success stories. It has changed the management of heavy menstrual bleeding dramatically. The development of newer (second generation) endometrial ablative techniques has enabled clinicians to set up comprehensive 'one stop clinics' based on an outpatient service to treat heavy menstrual bleeding effectively without the need for general anesthetic or conscious sedation. This article describes the rationale and evidence for use of different endometrial auto-ablative systems along with relevant technical and clinical aspects. It also addresses the essentials of a successful approach to outpatient endometrial ablation along with discussion on risks, complications and contraindications of the procedure.

One-Year Follow-Up Results of a Multicenter, Single-Arm, Objective Performance Criteria-Controlled International Clinical Study of the Safety and Efficacy of the Minerva Endometrial Ablation System

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and effectiveness of the Minerva endometrial ablation system for treating excessive uterine bleeding in premenopausal women.

DESIGN

Multicenter, single-arm, objective performance criteria (OPC)-controlled international study (Canadian Task Force classification II-1).

SETTING

Seven academic medical centers.

PATIENTS

105 premenopausal women symptomatic for menorrhagia secondary to dysfunctional uterine bleeding.

INTERVENTION

Patients were treated using the Minerva endometrial ablation system.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Study success, based on a pictorial blood loss assessment chart (PBLAC) score ≤75, was observed in 96.2% of the patients at 1 year posttreatment. Some 69.5% of the patients experienced amenorrhea (PBLAC score 0). The mean duration of the procedure was 3.9 minutes. General anesthesia was used in 9% of cases, with the balance being performed under local and/or intravenous or spinal anesthesia regimens. No intraoperative adverse events and/or complications were reported. No patient required hysterectomy or any additional medical and/or surgical interventions to control bleeding during 1 year of follow-up. Efficacy (success) results were compared between the Minerva system and the OPC, which served as a statistical control. The OPC comprised the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) reported success rates of all FDA-approved endometrial ablation systems. The Minerva system had a statistically significantly superior success rate compared with the OPC control.

CONCLUSION

The Minerva system was found to be safe and effective for treating patients suffering from menorrhagia. The procedure is quick and effective, does not require endometrial pretreatment, and precludes the need for additional surgical interventions to manage menorrhagia.

Evaluation of the NovaSure endometrial ablation procedure in women with uterine cavity length over 10 cm

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate procedure-related adverse events, post-procedure menstrual bleeding status, and surgical re-intervention in women with a sounded uterine length > 10 cm compared to women with a sounded uterine length ≤ 10 cm who underwent the NovaSure endometrial ablation procedure.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 188 women from a Canadian community-based gynaecology practice. Eighty-seven women had a sounded uterine length > 10 cm, and 101 patients had a sounded length ≤ 10 cm. Procedure-related adverse events, post-procedure menstrual bleeding status, and surgical re-interventions were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Mean uterine sounding lengths were 11.0 ± 0.6 cm and 8.9 ± 0.8 cm in the > 10 cm and ≤ 10 cm groups, respectively. There were no differences between the groups in demographic characteristics or gynaecologic history, with the exception of higher BMI in the > 10 cm group and a greater prevalence of dysmenorrhea in the ≤ 10 cm group. Overall, 44.1% of all participants had been unsuccessfully treated with hormonal therapy, and 20.7% had failed non-hormonal treatment before the ablation procedure. The remaining 35.2% of participants had declined alternative therapy and proceeded directly to endometrial ablation. No serious procedure-related adverse events occurred in either group. Menstrual bleeding status at follow-up at 30.4 ± 15.3 months (> 10 cm group) and 30.5 ± 15.5 months (≤ 10 cm group) was not different between the groups (P = 0.85). In women who did not undergo surgical re-intervention after the initial ablation, amenorrhea was reported by 51.9% in the > 10 cm group and 65.9% in the ≤ 10 cm group.

CONCLUSION

The NovaSure endometrial ablation procedure was associated with successful menstrual bleeding outcomes in women with sounded uterine length > 10 cm. No serious procedure-related adverse events occurred, and the need for surgical re-intervention was low. There was no significant difference in bleeding rates between the > 10 cm and ≤ 10 cm uterine length cohorts.

The long-term outcomes of endometrial ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Long-term data from the studies of various endometrial ablation techniques are beginning to emerge. This review appraises the current literature on endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding, with particular emphasis on second-generation techniques, and their effectiveness, rates of repeat and further interventions and adverse events occurring 1 year or more after the procedure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Second-generation, nonhysteroscopic techniques are marginally superior to hysteroscopic approaches, in terms of amenorrhoea, refractory menorrhagia and satisfaction rates. Hysterectomy rates are around 20% at 2 years, with a further 3-5% having repeat ablations. Bipolar radiofrequency and microwave ablation give rise to higher amenorrhoea rates than thermal balloon ablation, and are less likely to require repeat or further intervention.

SUMMARY

Endometrial ablation is a well tolerated and effective procedure for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. Second-generation techniques provide greater benefit than hysteroscopic techniques, with shorter procedural times and the possibility of outpatient treatment. Chronic pelvic pain frequently resolves after ablation, but can also develop de novo. Pregnancy outcomes are poor and continuing contraception is recommended.

Assessment of periodic blood loss: interindividual and intraindividual variations of pictorial blood loss assessment chart registrations

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To explore the interindividual and intraindividual variation of Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart (PBAC) registrations of subjective perception of minimal, normal, and heavy menstrual bleeding in women using their usual sanitary protection.

DESIGN

Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-3).

SETTING

University tertiary hospital.

PATIENTS

Women who had participated in 4 previously published prospective studies using PBAC as the outcome measure.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients underwent hysteroscopic removal of polyps, laparoscopic occlusion of uterine vessels, or uterine artery embolization, and control subjects received no treatment.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

PBAC scores, hemoglobin concentration, and subjective assessment of periodic blood loss were recorded in 429 women during 1049 menstrual cycles. The median PBAC values in groups of women who assessed their bleeding as light, normal, and heavy were 45.0, 116.0, and 254.5, respectively (p < .001). Sensitivity and specificity for specific PBAC cutoff points were calculated using a receiver operating characteristic curve. The maximum sensitivity for assessment of heavy periodic blood loss (78.5) was reached at a PBAC score of 160. The corresponding specificity was 75.8. At PBAC values below 130, 90% of the women reported normal blood loss, and 91% had hemoglobin values >12.0 g/dL. The reliability of repeated PBAC scores for individual measures was assessed via calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient, which for repeated PBAC measurements was 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.90) for average measures.

CONCLUSION

The interindividual variation was high, and the intraindividual variation was low. A low PBAC score may be used to define treatment end points for clinical use or in trials.

Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a significant health problem in premenopausal women; it can reduce their quality of life and cause anaemia. First-line therapy has traditionally been medical therapy but this is frequently ineffective. On the other hand, hysterectomy is obviously 100% effective in stopping bleeding but is more costly and can cause severe complications. Endometrial ablation is less invasive and preserves the uterus, although long-term studies have found that the costs of ablative surgery approach the cost of hysterectomy due to the requirement for repeat procedures. A large number of techniques have been developed to 'ablate' (remove) the lining of the endometrium. The gold standard techniques (laser, transcervical resection of the endometrium and rollerball) require visualisation of the uterus with a hysteroscope and, although safe, require skilled surgeons. A number of newer techniques have recently been developed, most of which are less time consuming. However, hysteroscopy may still be required as part of the ablative techniques and some of these techniques must be considered to be still under development, requiring refinement and investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, safety and acceptability of of endometrial destruction techniques to reduce heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) in premenopausal women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycInfo, (from inception to June 2013). We also searched trials registers, other sources of unpublished or grey literature and reference lists of retrieved studies, and made contact with experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies that manufacture ablation devices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different endometrial ablation techniques in women with a complaint of HMB without uterine pathology were eligible. The outcomes included reduction of HMB, improvement in quality of life, operative outcomes, satisfaction with the outcome, complications and need for further surgery or hysterectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trials for risk of bias and extracted data. Attempts were made to contact authors for clarification of data in some trials. Adverse events were only assessed if they were separately measured in the included trials. Comparisons were made with individual techniques and an overall comparison between first and second-generation ablation methods was also undertaken.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty five trials (4040 women) with sample sizes ranging from 20 to 372 were included in the review. A majority of the trials had a specified method of randomisation, adequate description of dropouts and no evidence of selective reporting. Less than half had adequate allocation concealment and most were unblinded.There was insufficient evidence to suggest superiority of a particular technique in the pairwise comparisons between individual ablation and resection methods.In the overall comparison of the newer 'blind' techniques (second-generation) with the gold standard hysteroscopic ablative techniques (first-generation) there was no evidence of overall differences in the improvement in HMB (12 RCTs) or patient satisfaction (11 RCTs).Surgery was an average of 15 minutes shorter (mean difference (MD) 14.9, 95% CI 10.1 to 19.7, 9 RCTs; low quality evidence), local anaesthesia was more likely to be employed (relative risk (RR) 2.8, 95% CI 1.8 to 4.4, 6 RCTs; low quality evidence) and equipment failure was more likely (RR 4.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 12.4, 3 RCTs; moderate quality evidence) with second-generation ablation. Women undergoing newer (second-generation) ablative procedures were less likely to have fluid overload, uterine perforation, cervical lacerations and hematometra than women undergoing the more traditional type of ablation and resection techniques (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.79, 4 RCTs; RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.0, 8 RCTs; RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.61, 8 RCTs; and RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.85, 5 RCTs; all moderate quality evidence, respectively). However, women were more likely to have nausea and vomiting and uterine cramping (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.0, 4 RCTs; and RR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.4, 2 RCTs; both moderate quality evidence, respectively). The risk of requiring either further surgery of any kind or hysterectomy specifically was reduced with second-generation ablative methods compared to first-generation ablation up to 10 years after surgery (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.99, 1 RCT; and RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.96, 1 RCT; both moderate quality evidence, respectively) but not at earlier follow up. Additional research is required to confirm this finding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Endometrial ablation techniques offer a less invasive surgical alternative to hysterectomy. The rapid development of a number of new methods of endometrial destruction has made systematic comparisons between individual methods and with the 'gold standard' first-generation techniques difficult. Most of the newer techniques are technically easier to perform than traditional hysteroscopy-based methods but technical difficulties with the new equipment need to be addressed. Overall, the existing evidence suggests that success, satisfaction rates and complication profiles of newer techniques of ablation compare favourably with hysteroscopic techniques.

Second generation endometrial ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding: network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative effectiveness of second generation ablation techniques in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.

DESIGN

Network meta-analysis on the primary outcome measures of amenorrhoea, heavy bleeding, and patients' dissatisfaction with treatment.

DATA SOURCES

Nineteen randomised controlled trials (involving 3287 women) were identified through electronic searches of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and PsycINFO databases from inception to April 2011. The reference lists of known relevant articles were searched for further articles. Two reviewers independently selected articles without language restrictions.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials involving second generation endometrial destruction techniques for women with heavy menstrual bleeding unresponsive to medical treatment.

RESULTS

Of the three most commonly used techniques, network meta-analysis showed that bipolar radiofrequency and microwave ablation resulted in higher rates of amenorrhoea than thermal balloon ablation at around 12 months (odds ratio 2.51, 95% confidence interval 1.53 to 4.12, P<0.001; and 1.66, 1.01 to 2.71, P=0.05, respectively), but there was no evidence of a convincing difference between the three techniques in the number of women dissatisfied with treatment or still experiencing heavy bleeding. Compared with bipolar radio frequency and microwave devices, an increased number of women still experienced heavy bleeding after free fluid ablation (2.19, 1.07 to 4.50, P=0.03; and 2.91, 1.23 to 6.88, P=0.02, respectively). Compared with radio frequency ablation, free fluid ablation was associated with reduced rates of amenorrhoea (0.36, 0.19 to 0.67, P=0.004) and increased rates of dissatisfaction (4.79, 1.07 to 21.5, P=0.04). Of the less commonly used devices, endometrial laser intrauterine thermotherapy was associated with increased rates of amenorrhoea compared with all the other devices, while cryoablation led to a reduced rate compared with bipolar radio frequency and microwave.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar radio frequency and microwave ablative devices are more effective than thermal balloon and free fluid ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding with second generation endometrial ablation devices.

Percutaneous selective myoablation in plastic surgery

A new technique in aesthetic plastic surgery termed "myoablation" is described. Thermal energy is applied via the percutaneous route for ablation of selected facial muscles to modify the facial dynamics. Myoablation was found to be useful in ameliorating noticeable frown wrinkles caused by muscular hyperactivity. A series of 30 patients underwent myoablation as the sole procedure with encouraging results. In 80% of the cases, good to excellent aesthetic results were achieved. This report presents the electrophysiologic bases, technique, animal experiments, and initial clinical experience of myoablation.

Does hydrothermal ablation avoid hysterectomy? Long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the long-term success rate of the HydroThermAblator system (HTA).

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 376 patients who underwent HTA at our hospital during an 8-year period, following case note review and distribution of a validated menorrhagia questionnaire.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 43 years. Operative complications included 3 women (0.8%) who experienced intraoperative burns. Of the 248 (66%) returned questionnaires, satisfaction rates were high at 77%. The amenorrhea rate was 38%, with a further 37% of women reporting a substantial decrease in their blood loss. In all, 29 (11%) women underwent subsequent hysterectomy for persistent menorrhagia or dysmenorrhea. Younger women had a significantly higher chance of proceeding to subsequent (P < .05) hysterectomy.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the long-term patient satisfaction with HTA and that the overall probability of proceeding to subsequent hysterectomy over 8 years was only 11%.

Hysterectomy, endometrial destruction, and levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) for heavy menstrual bleeding: systematic review and meta-analysis of data from individual patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relative effectiveness of hysterectomy, endometrial destruction (both "first generation" hysteroscopic and "second generation" non-hysteroscopic techniques), and the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of data from individual patients, with direct and indirect comparisons made on the primary outcome measure of patients' dissatisfaction.

DATA SOURCES

Data were sought from the 30 randomised controlled trials identified after a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases, reference lists, and contact with experts. Raw data were available from 2814 women randomised into 17 trials (seven trials including 1359 women for first v second generation endometrial destruction; six trials including 1042 women for hysterectomy v first generation endometrial destruction; one trial including 236 women for hysterectomy v Mirena; three trials including 177 women for second generation endometrial destruction v Mirena). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials comparing hysterectomy, first and second generation endometrial destruction, and Mirena for women with heavy menstrual bleeding unresponsive to other medical treatment.

RESULTS

At around 12 months, more women were dissatisfied with outcome with first generation hysteroscopic techniques than with hysterectomy (13% v 5%; odds ratio 2.46, 95% confidence interval 1.54 to 3.9, P<0.001), but hospital stay (weighted mean difference 3.0 days, 2.9 to 3.1 days, P<0.001) and time to resumption of normal activities (5.2 days, 4.7 to 5.7 days, P<0.001) were longer for hysterectomy. Unsatisfactory outcomes were comparable with first and second generation techniques (odds ratio 1.2, 0.9 to 1.6, P=0.2), although second generation techniques were quicker (weighted mean difference 14.5 minutes, 13.7 to 15.3 minutes, P<0.001) and women recovered sooner (0.48 days, 0.20 to 0.75 days, P<0.001), with fewer procedural complications. Indirect comparison suggested more unsatisfactory outcomes with second generation techniques than with hysterectomy (11% v 5%; odds ratio 2.3, 1.3 to 4.2, P=0.006). Similar estimates were seen when Mirena was indirectly compared with hysterectomy (17% v 5%; odds ratio 2.2, 0.9 to 5.3, P=0.07), although this comparison lacked power because of the limited amount of data available for analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

More women are dissatisfied after endometrial destruction than after hysterectomy. Dissatisfaction rates are low after all treatments, and hysterectomy is associated with increased length of stay in hospital and a longer recovery period. Definitive evidence on effectiveness of Mirena compared with more invasive procedures is lacking.

Endometrial resection / ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a significant health problem in premenopausal women; it can reduce their quality of life and cause anaemia. First-line therapy has traditionally been medical therapy but this is frequently ineffective. On the other hand, hysterectomy is obviously 100% effective in stopping bleeding but is more costly and can cause severe complications. Endometrial ablation is less invasive and preserves the uterus, although long-term studies have found that the costs of ablative surgery approach the cost of hysterectomy due to the requirement for repeat procedures. A large number of techniques have been developed to 'ablate' (remove) the lining of the endometrium. The gold standard techniques (laser, transcervical resection of the endometrium and rollerball) require visualisation of the uterus with a hysteroscope and, although safe, require skilled surgeons. A number of newer techniques have recently been developed, most of which are less time consuming. However, hysteroscopy may still be required as part of the ablative techniques and some of them must be considered to be still under development, requiring refinement and investigation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy, safety and acceptability of methods used to destroy the endometrium to reduce HMB in premenopausal women.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials (from inception to August 2009). We also searched trial registers and other sources of unpublished or grey literature, reference lists of retrieved studies, experts in the field and made contact with pharmaceutical companies that manufactured ablation devices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing different endometrial ablation techniques in women with a complaint of heavy menstrual bleeding without uterine pathology. The outcomes included reduction of heavy menstrual bleeding, improvement in quality of life, operative outcomes, satisfaction with the outcome, complications and need for further surgery or hysterectomy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed trials for quality and extracted data. Attempts were made to contact authors for clarification of data in some trials. Adverse events were only assessed if they were separately measured in the included trials.

MAIN RESULTS

In the comparison of the newer 'blind' techniques (second generation) with the gold standard hysteroscopic ablative techniques (first generation), there was no evidence of overall differences in the improvement in HMB or patient satisfaction.Surgery was an average of 15 minutes shorter (weighted mean difference (WMD) 14.9, 95% CI 10.1 to 19.7), local anaesthesia was more likely to be employed (odds ratio (OR) 6.4, 95% CI 3.0 to 13.7) and equipment failure was more likely (OR 4.6, 95% CI 1.5 to 14.0) with second-generation ablation. Women undergoing newer ablative procedures were less likely to have fluid overload, uterine perforation, cervical lacerations and hematometra than women undergoing the more traditional type of ablation and resection techniques (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.77; OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.0; OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.6 and OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.85, respectively). However, women were more likely to have nausea and vomiting and uterine cramping (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.9 and OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.8, respectively).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Endometrial ablation techniques offer a less invasive surgical alternative to hysterectomy. The rapid development of a number of new methods of endometrial destruction has made systematic comparisons between methods and with the 'gold standard' first generation techniques difficult. Most of the newer techniques are technically easier than hysteroscopy-based methods to perform but technical difficulties with new equipment need to be ironed out. Overall, the existing evidence suggests that success rates and complication profiles of newer techniques of ablation compare favourably with hysteroscopic techniques.

Outcome of the first 220 cases of endometrial balloon ablation using Cavaterm™plus

The objective of this prospective study was to evaluate the effectiveness of day-case Cavaterm plus thermal balloon endometrial ablation in the treatment of therapy-resistant menorrhagia. The study included 220 patients with a mean age of 41 years, mean parity of 2.1 and mean duration of menorrhagia of 3.2 years. A 6-mm diameter Cavaterm plus catheter with a silicone balloon at its tip was used. The ablation time was 10 minutes at a temperature of 78 degrees C. No procedure-related operative or immediate postoperative complications were encountered. The mean follow-up period was 19 months (range 6-24 months). The amenorrhoea-hypomenorrhoea rates at the various follow-up periods ranged between 74% and 83%. At the end of follow-up, 83% of patients were satisfied with the procedure. We conclude that Cavaterm plus is a safe and effective treatment for menorrhagia and has good patient acceptability.

Abnormal uterine bleeding: a review of patient-based outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

To summarize and evaluate the patient-based outcome measures (PBOMs) that have been used to study women with abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

Original articles that used at least one PBOM and were conducted within a population of women with AUB.

PATIENT(S)

Women with AUB.

INTERVENTION(S)

The titles, abstracts, and studies were systematically reviewed for eligibility. The PBOMs used in eligible studies were summarized. Essential psychometric properties were identified, and a list of criteria for each property was generated.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

"Quality" of individual PBOMs as determined using the listed criteria for psychometric properties.

RESULT(S)

Nine hundred eighty-three studies referenced AUB and patient-reported outcomes. Of these, 80 studies met the eligibility criteria. Fifty different instruments were used to evaluate amount of bleeding, bleeding-related symptoms, or menstrual bleeding-specific quality of life. The quality of each of these instruments was evaluated on eight psychometric properties. The majority of instruments had no documentation of reliability, precision, or feasibility. There was no satisfactory evidence that any one instrument completely addressed all eight psychometric properties.

CONCLUSION(S)

Studies of women with AUB are increasingly using PBOMs. Many different PBOMs were used; however, no single instrument completely addressed eight important measurement properties.

Second-generation endometrial ablation – an overview

Various methods exist to destroy the endometrium as a treatment for menorrhagia. This chapter discusses the rationale, evidence, indications, and long-term safety and efficacy of the current techniques. It also discusses endometrial ablation in the context of its clinical utility in comparison with the existing alternative treatments.

Long-term outcome of hysteroscopic endometrial ablation without endometrial preparation

OBJECTIVE

To describe the three-step hysteroscopic endometrial ablation (EA) technique without endometrial preparation, and its long-term outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Four hundred and thirty-eight premenopausal women with menorrhagia or menometrorrhagia underwent three-step hysteroscopic EA, which consists of rollerball ablation of the fundus and cornual regions, a cutting loop endomyometrial resection of the rest of the cavity, and rollerball redessication of the whole pre-ablated uterine cavity. The main outcome measures were menstrual status, level of satisfaction with the procedure, and the need for repeat ablation or hysterectomy. Questionnaires were completed for 385 women (87.9%) with a mean follow-up of 48.2 months.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-four responders (47.8%) reported amenorrhea; 177 (46%) had light to normal flow. One patient (0.3%) underwent repeat ablation and 20 (5.2%) underwent hysterectomy: 15 (3.9%) because of endometrial ablation failure and 5 (1.3%) because of indications unrelated to the ablation (three cases of atypical endometrial hyperplasia and two cases of fibroids). Two hundred and ninety-two patients (75.8%) were very satisfied, and 78 (20.3%) satisfied with the results. No major complications occurred and three women (0.8%) became pregnant during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

EA is safe and effective means of treating of menorrhagia and menometrorrhagia in premenopausal women, and helps avoid hysterectomy in 95% of patients suffering from heavy bleeding, with or without uterine fibroids. Women should be informed that the procedure is not contraceptive and that pregnancy is possible after 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.

The Hydro ThermAblator

The Hydro ThermAblator system is a unique approach to endometrial ablation, employing constant direct visual control via hysteroscopy combined with a 'no-touch' gravity flow of heated saline that treats the entire endometrial surface regardless of its topography. The automated controller helps to ensure reproducible results without the necessity for high operator skill. The system employs a safety feature that monitors the fluid level constantly within a closed system, so that loss of fluid through unsuspected uterine perforation occurring during dilatation can be diagnosed even though it may not be visually apparent to the operator. Results as judged by patient satisfaction, amenorrhoea rates and/or return to normal menstrual flow are excellent.

Global endometrial ablation: a modern day solution to an age-old problem

Menorrhagia remains a significant health issue for women worldwide. Traditionally hysterectomy has been the treatment of choice when excessive menstrual bleeding remains unresolved by hormonal manipulation. In an attempt to provide a less invasive alternative to hysterectomy, traditional techniques such as rollerball endometrial ablation were developed 20 years ago. Although extremely effective, they possessed the potential of significant intra-operative risks and their success depended on high technical proficiency of the surgeon. As surgery and technology evolved, second generation endometrial ablation devices were developed which demonstrated improved safety and efficacy rates that paralleled traditional treatments. Since 1997, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved five such devices for use in the United States. Each possesses a unique technology profile with supporting level I evidence that allows for the treatment of a wide variety of uterine anatomy.

Health technology assessment of surgical therapies for benign gynaecological disease

This chapter summarises the evidence of the benefits and harm of surgical therapies for benign gynaecological disease. We have limited the discussion in this chapter to three gynaecological conditions - menorrhagia, endometriosis and benign ovarian tumours - with a further section on the different surgical approaches for performing a hysterectomy for menorrhagia due to dysfunctional uterine bleeding and pelvic masses such as fibroids and benign adnexal masses. The currently available evidence suggests that there is little to choose between the four first-generation endometrial destruction techniques - laser ablation, transcervical resection of endometrium, vaporisation ablation and rollerball ablation - in terms of clinical efficacy and patient satisfaction. There is a paucity of evidence with regards to the comparison of the different second-generation endometrial-destruction techniques but current evidence suggests that bipolar radiofrequency ablation is more effective than thermal balloon ablation for treating menorrhagia. Overall, the second-generation techniques are at least as effective as first-generation methods but are easier to perform and can be done under local rather than general anaesthesia in some circumstances. Hysteroscopic endometrial ablation is an alternative to hysterectomy and should be offered to women with menorrhagia because of its high satisfaction rates, shorter operation time, shorter hospital stay, earlier recovery and reduced postoperative complications; hysterectomy remains the surgical option of choice for women with intractable menorrhagia despite repeated endometrial ablations and for those who do not wish under any circumstances to continue to have menstrual bleeding. The combined use of laparoscopic laser ablation, adhesiolysis and uterine nerve ablation has been shown to have a beneficial effect on pelvic pain associated with mild to moderate endometriosis. Current evidence also supports the use of laparoscopic treatment of minimal and mild endometriosis to improve the on-going pregnancy and live birth rate in infertile patients. The current available evidence suggests that the laparoscopic approach is superior to laparotomy for the surgical management of benign ovarian cysts. It results in less postoperative pain and a shorter postoperative hospital stay; it also costs less. With regards to the surgical approach for performing a hysterectomy for menorrhagia and benign pelvic masses, vaginal hysterectomy should be performed over laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy when possible. Where it is not possible to perform the hysterectomy vaginally, then laparoscopic hysterectomy can be employed instead of abdominal hysterectomy to avoid a laparotomy scar. There appears to be no significant advantage in performing a subtotal hysterectomy instead of the total removal of the uterine corpus and cervix.

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.

Ambulatory hysteroscopy: evidence-based guide to diagnosis and therapy

Healthcare providers are facing increasing demands for improvement in quality of life for patients. Improvements in service provision for women are being ensured by the introduction of minimally invasive technologies into all spheres of gynaecologic practice. Ambulatory hysteroscopy (direct endoscopic visualization of the endometrial cavity) is an extremely exciting and rapidly advancing field of gynaecologic practice. It advanced dramatically during the 1990s, shifting the focus in healthcare away from inpatient diagnosis and treatment. Hysteroscopy is used extensively in the evaluation of common gynaecological problems that were previously evaluated with blind and inaccurate techniques (e.g. premenopausal menstrual disorders, infertility and postmenopausal bleeding). It allows direct visualization of the uterine cavity and the opportunity for targeted biopsy, safe removal of endometrial polyps, and treatment of submucous fibroids, septa and adhesions. Ambulatory hysteroscopy is safe, with a low incidence of serious complications; it has a small failure rate. There is a general consensus that hysteroscopy is the current gold standard for evaluating intrauterine pathology, including submucous myomas, polyps, hyperplasia and cancer. Hysteroscopy in the ambulatory setting appears to have an accuracy and patient acceptability equivalent to inpatient hysteroscopy under general anaesthetic. The primary goal of this chapter is to provide a high-quality, evidence-based text on ambulatory diagnostic and operative hysteroscopy. The chapter includes in-depth analysis of the indications for outpatient hysteroscopy, its contraindications, the accuracy of diagnostic hysteroscopy, relevant risk management issues and, training and teaching.

Managing drug-resistant essential menorrhagia without hysterectomy

Menorrhagia is a common disorder that requires plenty of resources. Rapid developments in medical technology have resulted in new management strategies, which are true alternatives to hysterectomy. In many countries the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and endometrial destruction techniques are available for menorrhagia. Clinicians must answer questions about cost, effectiveness and quality of medical care when choosing the treatment option. This review integrates the results from the latest studies and review articles about LNG-IUS and endometrial destruction techniques by addressing the key clinical issues in menorrhagia. Both LNG-IUS and endometrial ablation seem to be good and effective alternative options to hysterectomy. Although these treatments have relatively high failure rates, the majority of women are satisfied and the cost-effectiveness of these treatments are better than that of hysterectomy. Both treatments have their advantages and disadvantages. Thus far LNG-IUS seems to be more cost-effective than endometrial resection or hysterectomy at 5 years follow-up. However, second generation ablation techniques may offer better cost-effectiveness than the first generation techniques, but the evidence is insufficient.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of treatments for dysfunctional uterine bleeding in women who need contraception

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of oral contraceptives (OCs), the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) and surgical management in treating dysfunctional uterine bleeding (DUB) in women not desiring additional children.

METHOD

A Markov model was constructed from the perspective of the health services payers for a 5-year period. Treatment costs, DUB treatment success rates and contraception success rates were obtained through a literature review.

RESULTS

In women not responding to an initial trial of OCs, surgical management was more effective than the LNG-IUS (95.5% vs. 92%) but at higher cost (US$4853 vs. US$2796 per woman). Among responders to OCs, continuing treatment with the LNG-IUS instead of OCs was more effective (92% vs. 90.4%) and less expensive (US$2796 vs. US$4711). For women naïve to medical therapy, the LNG-IUS and OCs had similar effectiveness, but cost for the LNG-IUS was lower (US$2796 vs. US$4895). In all scenarios, surgery followed if medical therapy failed; rates of primary method failure were 62.5% with OCs and 34% with the LNG-IUS at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment strategies employing the LNG-IUS are the most cost-effective in managing DUB, regardless of whether a woman has previously tried OC therapy.

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.