1
|
Applications of Photodynamic Therapy in Endometrial Diseases. Bioengineering (Basel) 2022; 9:bioengineering9050226. [PMID: 35621504 PMCID: PMC9138084 DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering9050226] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2022] [Revised: 05/13/2022] [Accepted: 05/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a medical procedure useful for several benign conditions (such as wound healing and infections) and cancer. PDT is minimally invasive, presents few side effects, good scaring, and is able to minimal tissue destruction maintaining organ anatomy and function. Endoscopic access to the uterus puts PDT in the spotlight for endometrial disease treatment. This work systematically reviews the current evidence of PDT’s potential and usefulness in endometrial diseases. Thus, this narrative review focused on PDT applications for endometrial disease, including reports regarding in vitro, ex vivo, animal, and clinical studies. Cell lines and primary samples were used as in vitro models of cancer, adenomyosis and endometrioses, while most animal studies focused the PDT outcomes on endometrial ablation. A few clinical attempts are known using PDT for endometrial ablation and cancer lesions. This review emphasises PDT as a promising field of research. This therapeutic approach has the potential to become an effective conservative treatment method for endometrial benign and malignant lesions. Further investigations with improved photosensitisers are highly expected.
Collapse
|
2
|
Bofill Rodriguez M, Lethaby A, Grigore M, Brown J, Hickey M, Farquhar C. Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 1:CD001501. [PMID: 30667064 PMCID: PMC7057272 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd001501.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Anne Lethaby
- University of AucklandDepartment of Obstetrics and GynaecologyPark RdGraftonAucklandNew Zealand1142
| | - Mihaela Grigore
- Grigore T. Popa University of Medicine and PharmacyStr.Universitatii nr.16IasiRomania700115
| | | | - Martha Hickey
- The Royal Women's HospitalThe University of MelbourneLevel 7, Research PrecinctMelbourneVictoriaAustraliaParkville 3052
| | - Cindy Farquhar
- University of AucklandDepartment of Obstetrics and GynaecologyPark RdGraftonAucklandNew Zealand1142
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Van Vugt DA, Krzemien A, Roy BN, Fletcher WA, Foster W, Lundahl S, Marcus SL, Reid RL. Photodynamic Endometrial Ablation in the Nonhuman Primate. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2016. [DOI: 10.1177/107155760000700208] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Dean A. Van Vugt
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Physiology, and Pathology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; and DUSA Pharmaceuticals Inc., Valhalla, New York
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Robert L. Reid
- Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Physiology, and Pathology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; and DUSA Pharmaceuticals Inc., Valhalla, New York
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lethaby A, Penninx J, Hickey M, Garry R, Marjoribanks J. Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013:CD001501. [PMID: 23990373 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd001501.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Lethaby
- Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand, 1142
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lethaby A, Hickey M, Garry R, Penninx J. Endometrial resection / ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD001501. [PMID: 19821278 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd001501.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Lethaby
- Section of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Population Health,University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand, 1142
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
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 the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials (April 2004). We also searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2004), EMBASE (1980 to July 2004), Current Contents (1993 to week 38, 2001), Biological Abstracts (1980 to June 2001), PsycLIT (1967 to August 2001), CINAHL (1982 to July 2004) and the metaregister of controlled trials and ISRCTN register (December 2004). We also searched reference lists of articles and contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts in the field. 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 non-hysteroscopic techniques (second generation) with the gold standard hysteroscopic ablative techniques (first generation) overall, 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) 8.3, 95% CI 3.9 to 17.5) and equipment failure was more likely (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.3 to 13.8) 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 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.5; OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.7; OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.3 and OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.7, respectively). However, women were more likely to have nausea and vomiting and uterine cramping (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.4 and OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.9, respectively). Some differences were also found in amenorrhoea rates and satisfaction rates, but there did not appear to be a trend over time so these results may be due to chance. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Endometrial ablation techniques continue to play an important role in the management of HMB. The rapid development of a number of new methods of endometrial destruction has made systematic comparisons between methods and with the 'gold standard' of transcervical resection of the endometrium (TCRE) difficult. Most of the newer techniques are technically easier than hysteroscopy-based methods to perform. However, uterine perforation, which is the major complication of endometrial ablation, cannot be excluded without hysteroscopy. Overall, the existing evidence suggests that success rates and complication profiles of newer techniques of ablation compare favourably with TCRE, although technical difficulties with new equipment need to be ironed out.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Lethaby
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Gannon MJ, Brown SB. Photodynamic therapy and its applications in gynaecology. BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY 1999; 106:1246-54. [PMID: 10609717 DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08177.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- M J Gannon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Longford/Westmeath General Hospital, Mullingar, Ireland
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
|
9
|
Krzemien AA, Van Vugt DA, Pottier RH, Dickson EF, Reid RL. Evaluation of novel nonlaser light source for endometrial ablation using 5-aminolevulinic acid. Lasers Surg Med 1999; 25:315-22. [PMID: 10534748 DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1096-9101(1999)25:4<315::aid-lsm6>3.0.co;2-n] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE This research evaluated the effectiveness of a new nonlaser prototype short-arc lamp to achieve photodynamic ablation of endometrium in a rat. STUDY DESIGN/MATERIALS AND METHODS Thirty female Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into two groups. 5-Aminolevulinic acid (ALA), the precursor to the photosensitizer protoporphyrin IX, was injected into the left uterine horn and vehicle alone (Hyskon) was injected into the right horn of 23 rats (group 1). An additional seven rats received vehicle only into both uterine horns (group 2). Three hours later, a cylindrical diffusing optical fiber was inserted into the lumen of the uterine horns, and light treatment was delivered from either a laser or a nonlaser light source. Rats in group 1 received either 1 hour (n = 15) or 10 minutes (n = 8) of light treatment into both uterine horns. In rats in group 2, the left horn was exposed to 1 hour of light treatment. Uterine tissues were examined histologically 4 days after light treatment. RESULTS One hour of light exposure to the uterine horns injected with ALA produced extensive necrosis of the rat uterine wall. No difference in the magnitude of destruction was seen between the groups treated with the laser and nonlaser light sources. Ten minutes of light exposure resulted in endometrial ablation that was comparable in both the laser- and the prototype-treated groups, but the destruction of the deepest layers of the uterine wall was more consistent in the group treated with the nonlaser prototype. One hour of light treatment from either light source did not result in any histological changes in the uterine horns not exposed to ALA. CONCLUSION The extent of endometrial ablation in the rat uterine horn achieved with the nonlaser prototype was comparable to that achieved with the laser. Thus, the nonlaser prototype may provide a less expensive approach to photodynamic endometrial ablation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A A Krzemien
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6, Canada
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
|
11
|
Stabinsky SA, Einstein M, Breen JL. Modern treatments of menorrhagia attributable to dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1999; 54:61-72. [PMID: 9891301 DOI: 10.1097/00006254-199901000-00025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Menorrhagia (excessive uterine bleeding) affects some 20 percent of the women of reproductive age worldwide. The following review describes known and theorized etiologies of the disorder, followed by a discussion of treatment options that are currently in use as well as those on the horizon. There is much interest internationally in decreasing hysterectomy rates, particularly for those women with abnormal bleeding and anatomically normal uteri. It is these women who are the focus of this paper. Pharmacotherapy and surgery are the mainstay treatments for such patients with menorrhagia secondary to dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Most commonly, hormonal and nonhormonal medications are followed by dilatation and curettage, and ultimately, in many cases, hysterectomy. Endometrial ablation techniques have been evolving since the 1980s in response to the need for an efficacious, safer, and more cost-effective alternatives to hysterectomy. Hysteroscopic ablation achieves these goals but is difficult technically and requires significant additional training even for otherwise skilled and experienced gynecologists. The current decade has seen the development of many innovative approaches to performing endometrial ablation. These methods are intended to be much simpler to perform with less risk than electrosurgical or laser endometrial ablation. The final section of this article presents the published data to date on these new technologies, which should (in their refined state) revolutionize the treatment of menorrhagia secondary to dysfunctional uterine bleeding.
Collapse
|