Reduction of menstrual blood loss in women suffering from idiopathic menorrhagia with a novel antifibrinolytic drug (Kabi 2161)

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.

The Patient with Non-Pregnancy-Associated Vaginal Bleeding

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) unrelated to pregnancy affects 20% to 30% of women at some point in life and is a common emergency department (ED) and urgent care (UC) presentation. AUB is a complex condition with extensive terminology, broad differential diagnosis, and numerous treatment options, yet few published evidence-based guidelines. In the ED or UC setting most affected patients are often more frustrated than acutely ill. These factors can make for a challenging patient encounter in the EC/UC setting. This article reviews acute and chronic AUB in the nonpregnant patient and suggests a simplified approach for its evaluation and management.

Antifibrinolytics for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important physical and social problem for women. Oral treatment for HMB includes antifibrinolytic drugs, which are designed to reduce bleeding by inhibiting clot-dissolving enzymes in the endometrium.Historically, there has been some concern that using the antifibrinolytic tranexamic acid (TXA) for HMB may increase the risk of venous thromboembolic disease. This is an umbrella term for deep venous thrombosis (blood clots in the blood vessels in the legs) and pulmonary emboli (blood clots in the blood vessels in the lungs).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of antifibrinolytic medications as a treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and two trials registers in November 2017, together with reference checking and contact with study authors and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antifibrinolytic agents versus placebo, no treatment or other medical treatment in women of reproductive age with HMB. Twelve studies utilised TXA and one utilised a prodrug of TXA (Kabi).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were menstrual blood loss (MBL), improvement in HMB, and thromboembolic events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs (1312 participants analysed). The evidence was very low to moderate quality: the main limitations were risk of bias (associated with lack of blinding, and poor reporting of study methods), imprecision and inconsistency.Antifibrinolytics (TXA or Kabi) versus no treatment or placeboWhen compared with a placebo, antifibrinolytics were associated with reduced mean blood loss (MD -53.20 mL per cycle, 95% CI -62.70 to -43.70; I² = 8%; 4 RCTs, participants = 565; moderate-quality evidence) and higher rates of improvement (RR 3.34, 95% CI 1.84 to 6.09; 3 RCTS, participants = 271; moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if 11% of women improve without treatment, 43% to 63% of women taking antifibrinolytics will do so. There was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups in adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.18; 1 RCT, participants = 297; low-quality evidence). Only one thromboembolic event occurred in the two studies that reported this outcome.TXA versus progestogensThere was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups in mean blood loss measured using the Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart (PBAC) (MD -12.22 points per cycle, 95% CI -30.8 to 6.36; I² = 0%; 3 RCTs, participants = 312; very low quality evidence), but TXA was associated with a higher likelihood of improvement (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.80; I² = 32%; 5 RCTs, participants = 422; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if 46% of women improve with progestogens, 61% to 83% of women will do so with TXA.Adverse events were less common in the TXA group (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.94; I² = 28%; 4 RCTs, participants = 349; low-quality evidence). No thromboembolic events were reported in any group.TXA versus non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)TXA was associated with reduced mean blood loss (MD -73.00 mL per cycle, 95% CI -123.35 to -22.65; 1 RCT, participants = 49; low-quality evidence) and higher likelihood of improvement (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.74; 12 = 0%; 2 RCTs, participants = 161; low-quality evidence). This suggests that if 61% of women improve with NSAIDs, 71% to 100% of women will do so with TXA. Adverse events were uncommon and no comparative data were available. No thromboembolic events were reported.TXA versus ethamsylateTXA was associated with reduced mean blood loss (MD 100 mL per cycle, 95% CI -141.82 to -58.18; 1 RCT, participants = 53; low-quality evidence), but there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of improvement (RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.55; 1 RCT, participants = 53; very low quality evidence) or withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.19 to 3.15; 1 RCT, participants = 53; very low quality evidence).TXA versus herbal medicines (Safoof Habis and Punica granatum)TXA was associated with a reduced mean PBAC score after three months' treatment (MD -23.90 pts per cycle, 95% CI -31.92 to -15.88; I² = 0%; 2 RCTs, participants = 121; low-quality evidence). No data were available for rates of improvement. TXA was associated with a reduced mean PBAC score three months after the end of the treatment phase (MD -10.40 points per cycle, 95% CI -19.20 to -1.60; I² not applicable; 1 RCT, participants = 84; very low quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of adverse events (RR 2.25, 95% CI 0.74 to 6.80; 1 RCT, participants = 94; very low quality evidence). No thromboembolic events were reported.TXA versus levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LIUS)TXA was associated with a higher median PBAC score than TXA (median difference 125.5 points; 1 RCT, participants = 42; very low quality evidence) and a lower likelihood of improvement (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.77; 1 RCT, participants = 42; very low quality evidence). This suggests that if 85% of women improve with LIUS, 20% to 65% of women will do so with TXA. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of adverse events (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.80; 1 RCT, participants = 42; very low quality evidence). No thromboembolic events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antifibrinolytic treatment (such as TXA) appears effective for treating HMB compared to placebo, NSAIDs, oral luteal progestogens, ethamsylate, or herbal remedies, but may be less effective than LIUS. There were too few data for most comparisons to determine whether antifibrinolytics were associated with increased risk of adverse events, and most studies did not specifically include thromboembolism as an outcome.

Comparison of Therapeutic Efficacies of Norethisterone, Tranexamic Acid and Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System for the Treatment of Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: A Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to compare the therapeutic efficacies of norethisterone acid (NETA), tranexamic acid and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in treating idiopathic heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB).

METHODS

Women with heavy uterine bleeding were randomized to receive NETA, tranexamic acid or LNG-IUS for 6 months. The primary outcome was a decrease in menstrual bleeding as assessed by pictorial blood loss assessment charts and hematological parameters analyzed at the 1st, 3rd and 6th months. Health-related quality of life (QOL) variables were also recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were enrolled in each treatment group, but the results of only 62 were evaluated. NETA, tranexamic acid, and LNG-IUS reduced menstrual blood loss (MBL) by 53.1, 60.8, and 85.8%, respectively, at the 6th month. LNG-IUS was more effective than NETA and tranexamic acid in decreasing MBL. LNG-IUS was also more efficient than tranexamic acid in correcting anemia related to menorrhagia. Satisfaction rates were comparable among the NETA (70%), tranexamic acid (63%) and LNG-IUS (77%) groups. QOL in physical aspects increased significantly in the tranexamic acid and LNG-IUS groups.

CONCLUSION

The positive effect of LNG-IUS on QOL parameters, as well as its high efficacy, makes it a first-line option for HMB.

The medical management of abnormal uterine bleeding in reproductive-aged women

In the treatment of women with abnormal uterine bleeding, once a thorough history, physical examination, and indicated imaging studies are performed and all significant structural causes are excluded, medical management is the first-line approach. Determining the acuity of the bleeding, the patient's medical history, assessing risk factors, and establishing a diagnosis will individualize their medical regimen. In acute abnormal uterine bleeding with a normal uterus, parenteral estrogen, a multidose combined oral contraceptive regimen, a multidose progestin-only regimen, and tranexamic acid are all viable options, given the appropriate clinical scenario. Heavy menstrual bleeding can be treated with a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, combined oral contraceptives, continuous oral progestins, and tranexamic acid with high efficacy. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs may be utilized with hormonal methods and tranexamic acid to decrease menstrual bleeding. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists are indicated in patients with leiomyoma and abnormal uterine bleeding in preparation for surgical interventions. In women with inherited bleeding disorders all hormonal methods as well as tranexamic acid can be used to treat abnormal uterine bleeding. Women on anticoagulation therapy should consider using progestin-only methods as well as a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist to treat their heavy menstrual bleeding. Given these myriad options for medical treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding, many patients may avoid surgical intervention.

Discovery of the Fibrinolysis Inhibitor AZD6564, Acting via Interference of a Protein-Protein Interaction

A class of novel oral fibrinolysis inhibitors has been discovered, which are lysine mimetics containing an isoxazolone as a carboxylic acid isostere. As evidenced by X-ray crystallography the inhibitors bind to the lysine binding site in plasmin thus preventing plasmin from binding to fibrin, hence blocking the protein-protein interaction. Optimization of the series, focusing on potency in human buffer and plasma clotlysis assays, permeability, and GABAa selectivity, led to the discovery of AZD6564 (19) displaying an in vitro human plasma clot lysis IC50 of 0.44 μM, no detectable activity against GABAa, and with DMPK properties leading to a predicted dose of 340 mg twice a day oral dosing in humans.

Nonsurgical management of heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of nonsurgical abnormal uterine bleeding treatments for bleeding control, quality of life (QOL), pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to May 2012. We included randomized controlled trials of nonsurgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. Interventions included the levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), progestins, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antifibrinolytics. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, danazol, and placebo were allowed as comparators.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently screened 5,848 citations and extracted eligible trials. Studies were assessed for quality and strength of evidence.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. For reduction of menstrual bleeding in women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (71-95% reduction), combined OCPs (35-69% reduction), extended cycle oral progestins (87% reduction), tranexamic acid (26-54% reduction), and NSAIDs (10-52% reduction) were all effective treatments. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined OCPs, and antifibrinolytics were all superior to luteal-phase progestins (20% increase in bleeding to 67% reduction). The levonorgestrel intrauterine system was superior to combined OCPs and NSAIDs. Antifibrinolytics were superior to NSAIDs for menstrual bleeding reduction. Data were limited on other important outcomes such as QOL for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and for all outcomes for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

For the reduction in mean blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding presumed secondary to abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, we recommend the use of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system over OCPs, luteal-phase progestins, and NSAIDs. For other outcomes (QOL, pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events) and for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction, we were unable to make recommendations based on the limited available data.

Efficacy of tranexamic acid in the treatment of idiopathic and non-functional heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of tranexamic acid in the treatment of idiopathic and non-functional heavy menstrual bleeding.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

POPULATION

Women with a diagnosis of idiopathic and non-functional heavy menstrual bleeding treated with tranexamic acid.

METHODS

Electronic searches were conducted in literature databases up to February 2011 by two independent reviewers. We included all trials involving the efficacy of tranexamic acid for the treatment of heavy uterine bleeding. Pregnant, postmenopausal and cancer patients were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effect of tranexamic acid treatment on objective reduction of menstrual bleeding and improvement in patient quality of life.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies met our inclusion criteria. Available evidence indicates that tranexamic acid therapy in women with idiopathic menorrhagia resulted in 34-54% reduction in menstrual blood loss. Following tranexamic acid treatment, patient's quality-of-life parameters improved by 46-83%, compared with 15-45% for norethisterone treatment. When compared with placebo, tranexamic acid use significantly decreased the blood loss by 70% in women with menorrhagia secondary to an intrauterine device (p<0.001). Limited evidence indicated potential benefit in fibroid patients with menorrhagia. No thromboembolic event was reported in all studies analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence indicates that tranexamic acid treatment is effective and safe, and could potentially improve quality of life of patients presenting with idiopathic and non-functional heavy menstrual bleeding. Data on the therapeutic efficacy of tranexamic acid in patients with symptomatic fibroids are limited, and further studies are therefore needed.

A dose-response study of a novel, oral tranexamic formulation for heavy menstrual bleeding

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of 2 dosing regimens of a novel, oral tranexamic acid formulation (Lysteda; Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc, Parsippany, NJ) in women with cyclic heavy menstrual bleeding.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-group trial for 3 menstrual cycles (n = 304). Women with mean menstrual blood loss (MBL) of ≥ 80 mL/cycle were randomized to receive either 1.95 g/d or 3.9 g/d of tranexamic acid or placebo for up to 5 days of menstrual bleeding. Primary efficacy endpoints were mean MBL reduction from baseline, mean MBL reductions that were considered "meaningful" by subjects, and mean MBL reductions from baseline > 50 mL/cycle. Adverse events (AEs) were also assessed.

RESULTS

Only the 3.9 g/d group met all 3 primary efficacy endpoints. AEs did not significantly differ among the 3 groups. There were no serious study-related AEs.

CONCLUSION

The 3.9-g/d dose met all 3 primary efficacy endpoints, whereas the 1.95 g/d dose met 2 primary efficacy endpoints. Both doses were well tolerated.

Tranexamic acid treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of an oral formulation of tranexamic acid for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.

METHODS

Adult women with heavy menstrual bleeding (mean menstrual blood loss 80 mL or more per cycle) were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. After two pretreatment menstrual cycles, women were randomized to receive tranexamic acid 3.9 g/d or placebo for up to 5 days per menstrual cycle through six cycles. To meet the prespecified three-component primary efficacy end point, mean reduction in menstrual blood loss from baseline with tranexamic acid treatment needed to be 1) significantly greater than placebo, 2) greater than 50 mL, and 3) greater than a predetermined meaningful threshold (36 mL or higher). Health-related quality of life was measured using a validated patient-reported outcome instrument.

RESULTS

Women who received tranexamic acid (n=115) met all three primary efficacy end points: first, a significantly greater reduction in menstrual blood loss of -69.6 mL (40.4%) compared with -12.6 mL (8.2%) in the 72 women who received placebo (P<.001); reduction of menstrual blood loss exceeding a prespecified 50 mL; and last, reduction of menstrual blood loss considered meaningful to women. Compared with women receiving placebo, women treated with tranexamic acid experienced significant improvements in limitations in social or leisure and physical activities, work inside and outside the home, and self-perceived menstrual blood loss (P<.01). The majority of adverse events were mild to moderate in severity, and the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events was comparable with placebo.

CONCLUSION

In this study, a new oral tranexamic acid treatment was well tolerated and significantly improved both menstrual blood loss and health-related quality of life in women with heavy menstrual bleeding.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00386308.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System: A First-Line Medical Treatment for Heavy Menstrual Bleeding

Chronic heavy menstrual bleeding is a common gynecologic condition that causes significant health problems and negatively impacts a woman's quality of life. Surgical treatments should be reserved for women who have pelvic pathology and for those who fail medical therapy. The recent US FDA approval of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system as an indicated treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in women who want to use intrauterine devices for birth control highlights the potential that this top tier contraceptive method offers as a first-line therapy for treatment of this problem in women of any reproductive age, without sacrificing their future fertility.

Tranexamic Acid-associated Necrosis and Intralesional Thrombosis of Uterine Leiomyomas

INTRODUCTION

Women with menorrhagia have increased levels of plasminogen activators in the endometrium. Tranexamic acid (cyklokapron), an antifibrinolytic agent, is commonly prescribed worldwide to women with menorrhagia, including those with fibroids. Necrosis in uterine leiomyomas may be associated with pregnancy, and progestogen or oral contraceptive use but its association with tranexamic acid has not been investigated. Four hundred ninety patients with uterine leiomyomas in 2004 and 2005 were reviewed. Their ages ranged from 22 to 86 (mean 47.2). One hundred forty-seven (30%) were treated with tranexamic acid.

RESULTS

Infarct-type necrosis was observed in the leiomyomas of 38 patients, 22 of whom had tranexamic acid (15%) whereas the remaining 16 had no drug exposure (4.7%) (odds ratio=3.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.83-6.07; P=0.0003). Two patients who took the drug less than 2 weeks before surgery had early infarcts with appearance resembled coagulative type necrosis. Eleven of the 22 cases of drug-induced necrotic leiomyoma (50%) also showed intralesional thrombus formation, and 4 showed organization of the thrombi.

CONCLUSIONS

Infarct-type necrosis and thrombosis of leiomyoma was more commonly observed in patients treated with tranexamic acid. Although the drug is effective for menorrhagia, clinicians should be aware of the possible complications associated with leiomyoma necrosis such as pain and fever. Distinguishing between types of necrosis may not always be straightforward particularly in early infarcts when the reparative connective tissue reaction between the viable and necrotic cells is not well-developed, resulting in an appearance similar to coagulative necrosis. When the overall gross and microscopic features of a leiomyoma with coagulative necrosis favor a benign lesion, the drug history should be reviewed so that this type of early and healing infarct-type necrosis is considered as the underlying cause of the apparent coagulative necrosis. This may otherwise result in a diagnosis of smooth muscle tumor of uncertain malignant potential, leading to prolonged follow-up and unnecessary further surgical intervention.

Menorrhagia associated with laboratory abnormalities of hemostasis: epidemiological, diagnostic and therapeutic aspects

Historically, the pathogenesis of menorrhagia has focused on anatomic and hormonal etiologies. However, in the past decade, numerous epidemiological studies have confirmed an association of von Willebrand factor (VWF) deficiency and menorrhagia with an incidence of VWF deficiency of 13% (95% CI, 11%, 16%). Such patients have a reduced quality of life and incur a high rate of seemingly unnecessary gynecological interventions. In addition, it appears that platelet function abnormalities are c. 3- to 4-fold more common than VWF deficiency in association with menorrhagia. The management of menorrhagia with an underlying disorder of hemostasis involves consideration of the patient's age, childbearing status and preference in terms of several options: hemostatic (oral tranexamic acid, intranasal desmopressin), hormonal (oral contraceptive, levonorgestrel intrauterine system) and surgical (endometrial ablation, hysterectomy). Pending ongoing comparative trials in bleeding disorder-related menorrhagia of intranasal desmopressin (DDAVP), tranexamic acid and further study of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, specific recommendations cannot be made at present regarding whether one intervention is superior to the other. It should also be noted that the dose and schedule and combination of intranasal DDAVP and tranexamic acid have not been well established and warrant further study. It is imperative to establish algorithms of effective menorrhagia interventions in order to justify widespread hemostasis screening of the menorrhagia patient.

Randomized trial of medical treatment versus hysterectomy for abnormal uterine bleeding: resource use in the Medicine or Surgery (Ms) trial

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to compare resource use outcomes for participants in the Medicine or Surgery (Ms) randomized trial.

STUDY DESIGN

In a randomized controlled trial, we compared resources used during a 24-month follow-up period by women with abnormal uterine bleeding who were randomly assigned to either expanded medical treatment or hysterectomy.

RESULTS

Women randomly assigned to hysterectomy used significantly more resources (medicine = $4479, hysterectomy = $6777; P = .03), with almost all the difference caused by the hysterectomy procedure. Fifty-three percent of women randomly assigned to medicine had a hysterectomy during the follow-up period; women who were able to continue on medical therapy had mean total resource use of $2595 compared with $6128 for medicine patients who eventually had surgery.

CONCLUSION

For women with abnormal uterine bleeding refractory to cyclic medroxyprogesterone acetate, compared with expanded medical treatment, hysterectomy increases resource use significantly and results in better clinical and 6-month quality-of-life outcomes.

Management of excessive menstrual bleeding in women with hemostatic disorders

Because there are many important considerations for managing excessive menstrual bleeding in women who have systemic disorders of hemostasis, a multidisciplinary approach is the best model for care. Specific attention to effective treatments is highlighted, but few studies have been performed in this population.

von Willebrand disease and other disorders of hemostasis in the patient with menorrhagia

Separately, von Willebrand disease and menorrhagia are two relatively common conditions; in combination they occur at a prevalence of approximately 11-16%. Such patients exhibit a reduced quality of life and can incur a relatively high rate of gynecologic interventions; for example dilatation and curettage, endometrial ablation and hysterectomy. Initial evaluation involves a focused history for the following bleeding symptoms: menorrhagia since menarche, easy bruising of greater than 5 cm 1-2 times/month, frequent gum bleeding when flossing or brushing teeth or epistaxis 1-2 times/month. In addition, for those who have already undergone invasive interventions with the subsequent risk for hemorrhage, inquiry should be made regarding excessive bleeding with childbirth, dental tooth extraction and/or surgery. Step-wise testing includes a complete blood cell count and an assessment of the prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time, iron profile, serum creatinine and thyroid-stimulating hormone level, followed by Factor VIII level, von Willebrand factor antigen and ristocetin cofactor, followed by consideration of platelet aggregation studies. Additional hemostatic studies may include obtaining a Factor XI level and euglobulin clot lysis time. Intuitively, failure to diagnose an underlying hemostatic disorder may lead to continued menorrhagia and diminished quality of life, as well as unnecessary surgical interventions that may in turn be fraught with an increased risk of bleeding. The management of von Willebrand disease-related menorrhagia involves consideration of the patient's age, childbearing status and preference. In the adolescent, surgical intervention is not an option, whereas an older patient beyond her childbearing years may choose a hysterectomy as a definitive treatment in lieu of continued medical therapy with intranasal/subcutaneous 1-deamino-8-D-arginine vasopressin (DDAVP), oral antifibrinolytic agents or oral contraceptive. The sexually active patient may initially choose a trial of oral contraceptive or the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, Mirena((R)). Pending ongoing comparative trials in von Willebrand disease-related menorrhagia of intranasal DDAVP, tranexamic acid and the levonorgestrel intrauterine device, specific recommendations cannot be made at present regarding the superiority of one intervention compared with another. It should also be noted that the dose and schedule of intranasal DDAVP, tranexamic acid and epsilon-amino caproic acid have not been well established and warrant further study in combination and at various doses and schedules.

Benefits and risks of pharmacological agents used for the treatment of menorrhagia

Menorrhagia affects the lives of many women. The assessment of menstrual flow is highly subjective and gauging the severity of the condition by objective assessment of menstrual blood loss is impractical. In treating menorrhagia, the primary aim should be to improve quality of life. Women are willing to undergo quite invasive treatment in order to achieve this. Drug therapy is the initial treatment of choice and the only option for those who wish to preserve their reproductive function. Despite the availability of a number of drugs, there is a general lack of an evidence-based approach, marked variation in practice and continuing uncertainty regarding the most appropriate therapy. Adverse effects and problems with compliance also undermine the success of medical treatment. This article reviews the available literature to compare the efficacy and tolerability of different medical treatments for menorrhagia. Tranexamic acid and mefenamic acid are among the most effective first-line drugs used to treat menorrhagia. Despite being used extensively in the past, oral luteal phase norethisterone is probably one of the least effective agents. Women requiring contraception have a choice of the combined oral contraceptive pill, levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or long-acting progestogens. Danazol, gestrinone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues are all effective in terms of reducing menstrual blood loss but adverse effects and costs limit their long-term use. They have a role as second-line drugs for a short period of time in women awaiting surgery. While current evidence suggests that the LNG-IUS is an effective treatment, further evaluation, including long-term follow up, is awaited. Meanwhile, the quest continues for the ideal form of medical treatment for menorrhagia--one that is effective, affordable and acceptable.

Modern management of menorrhagia

Menorrhagia, defined clinically as menstrual blood loss in excess of 80 ml per cycle, is a common gynaecological complaint that presents both to primary and secondary care. The aim of this review of the literature is to discuss current opinion in the investigation and management of menorrhagia. As menorrhagia is a subjective condition that is difficult and impractical to assess objectively, this review incorporates patient-centred outcomes such as patient satisfaction and continuation with treatment together with more traditional outcomes such as percentage reduction in menstrual loss. As there are many treatment options available, with no one option being superior in all respects, patient choice and treatment preferences should be taken into account when deciding upon management.

Menorrhagia: an update

Menorrhagia is defined as a 'complaint of heavy cyclical menstrual bleeding occurring over several consecutive cycles'. Objectively it is a total menstrual blood loss equal to or greater than 80 ml per menstruation. It is estimated that approximately 30% of women complain of menorrhagia. Excessive bleeding is the main presenting complaint in women referred to gynecologists and it accounts for two-thirds of all hysterectomies, and most of endoscopic endometrial destructive surgery. Thus, menorrhagia is an important healthcare problem. Its etiology, investigation, medical and surgical management are described. In approximately 50% of cases of menorrhagia no pathology is found at hysterectomy. Abnormal levels of prostaglandins or the fibrinolytic system in the endometrium have been implicated. Effective medical treatments suitable for long-term use include intrauterine progestogens, antifibrinolytic agents (tranexamic acid) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (mefenamic acid). Over the past decade there has been increasing use of endometrial destructive techniques as an alternative to hysterectomy. Their further refinement and the advent of fibroid embolization has increased the options available to women.

DDAVP nasal spray for treatment of menorrhagia in women with inherited bleeding disorders: a randomized placebo-controlled crossover study

To assess DDAVP (1-deamino-8-d-arginine vasopressin; desmopressin) nasal spray in the management of menorrhagia in patients with inherited bleeding disorders, 39 women (aged 18-50 years) with menorrhagia were recruited and were randomized to start 2 months' therapy with placebo or DDAVP (300 micro g) spray in a double-blind crossover study. Twenty-eight and 24 completed first and second period of treatment, respectively. Menstrual loss was assessed using the pictorial blood assessment chart (PBAC) during each treatment period. The main outcome measure was comparison of PBAC scores following DDAVP and placebo treatments. The safety of DDAVP spray was also assessed by monitoring side-effects. Overall, PBAC scores were significantly lower in the second treatment period than the first (P = 0.01). After adjusting for this differences, mean PBAC scores were slightly lower (mean difference 8; 95% confidence interval of - 15.5 to 31.6) in women receiving DDAVP than when receiving placebo, although this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.51). In conclusion, although there was an indication that menstrual bleeding was less heavy when women received DDAVP than when receiving placebo, the small sample size meant that this difference was not significant.

Medical management of abnormal uterine bleeding

Abnormal uterine bleeding occurs secondary to a wide variety of functional and structural abnormalities. Although there is clearly a place for surgery, medical therapy has enormous potential for most women, especially those with dysfunctional uterine bleeding. To provide women with appropriate options for therapy, the clinician must be prepared to distinguish abnormal bleeding that is associated with ovulation from that which is anovulatory and to use appropriate ancillary tests to identify structural and endocrinologic anomalies or lifestyle factors that may explain the bleeding. In undertaking such an investigation, it is important for the clinician to be able to distinguish lesions that may be asymptomatic and unrelated to the bleeding from those that truly are the source of the problem. With this information, a rationally determined set of medical and, if appropriate, surgical therapeutic options may be presented to the woman. Among these medical treatment options are a number of treatment options that have not seen widespread use in North America but are inexpensive, effective, and well tolerated. It is clear that medical therapy is not for everyone. Women deserve the opportunity to relieve their symptoms with nonsurgical options.

Antifibrinolytics for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is an important cause of ill health in women. Medical therapy, with the avoidance of possibly unnecessary surgery, is an attractive treatment option. A wide variety of medications are available to reduce heavy menstrual bleeding but there is considerable variation in practice and uncertainty about the most appropriate therapy. Plasminogen activators are a group of enzymes that cause fibrinolysis (the dissolution of clots). An increase in the levels of plasminogen activators has been found in the endometrium of women with heavy menstrual bleeding compared to those with normal menstrual loss. Plasminogen activator inhibitors (antifibrinolytic agents) have therefore been promoted as a treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding. There has been a reluctance to prescribe tranexamic acid due to possible side effects of the drugs such as an increased risk of thrombogenic disease (deep venous thrombosis). Long term studies in Sweden, however, have shown that the rate of incidence of thrombosis in women treated with tranexamic acid is comparable with the spontaneous frequency of thrombosis in women.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of antifibrinolytics in achieving a reduction in heavy menstrual bleeding.

SEARCH STRATEGY

All studies which might describe randomised controlled trials of antifibrinolytic therapy for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding were obtained by electronic searches of the MEDLINE 1966-1997, EMBASE 1980-1997 and the Cochrane Library. Companies producing antifibrinolytics and experts within the field were contacted for reference lists and information on unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in women of reproductive age treated with antifibrinolytic agents versus placebo, no treatment or any other medical (non-surgical) therapy for regular heavy menstrual bleeding within either the primary, family planning or specialist clinic settings. Women with post menopausal bleeding, intermenstrual bleeding, iatrogenic or pathological causes of heavy menstrual bleeding were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fifteen eligible trials were assessed by three reviewers and eight of these did not meet with the inclusion criteria. Of the seven remaining trials, four of these could be included within the meta-analysis. The remaining three trials had a crossover design and despite contacting the authors and appropriate companies, we were unable to extract the results in a format suitable to include these within the meta-analysis. However the results are included within the text of the review for discussion.

MAIN RESULTS

Antifibrinolytic therapy compared to placebo showed a significant reduction in mean blood loss (WMD -94.0 [-151.4, -36.5]) and significant change in mean reduction of blood loss (WMD -110.2 [-146. 5, -73.8]). This objective improvement was not mirrored by a patient perceived improvement in monthly menstrual blood loss (RR 2.5 [0.9, 7.3]) in the one study which recorded this outcome ( approximately approximately Edlund 1995 approximately approximately ). Antifibrinolytic agents were compared to only three other medical (non-surgical) therapies: mefenamic acid, norethisterone administered in the luteal phase and ethamsylate. In all instances, there was a significant reduction in mean blood loss (WMD -73.0 [-123.4, -22.6], WMD -111.0 [-178.5, -43.5] and (WMD -100 [-143.9, -56.1] respectively) and a strong, although non-significant trend in favour of tranexamic acid in the participants' perception of an improvement in menstrual blood loss. There were no significant differences in the frequency of reported gastrointestinal side effects with tranexamic acid when compared to either NSAIDs (RR 0.9 [0.4, 2.1], oral luteal phase progestagens (RR 0.4 [0.1, 1.2]) or ethamsylate (RR 0.88 [0.3, 2.9]) when these treatments were used for heavy menstrual bleeding. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

On the value of menorrhagia as a predictor for coagulation disorders

The value of menorrhagia as a predictor for mild bleeding disorders has been very little studied and the results are divergent. In the present study on 30 women with objectively verified menorrhagia, we found a significantly increased prevalence of von Willebrand's disease (20%). By keeping a strict sampling and laboratory routine, and by restricting sampling to cycle days 5-7, we also obtained a very low interindividual variation of von Willebrand factor and coagulation factor VIII. We conclude that menorrhagia is a valuable predictor for coagulation and platelet disorders, and that time of sampling is of importance. This should be considered in the investigation of menorrhagia, and can be a guideline in looking for mild bleeding disorders.

A new method for measuring menstrual blood loss and its use in screening women before endometrial ablation

OBJECTIVE

1. To develop and validate a method for measuring menstrual blood loss in a routine setting, and 2. To assess the value of measuring menstrual blood loss before endometrial ablation.

DESIGN

A prospective, observational study.

SETTING

Four Yorkshire hospitals: The General Infirmary at Leeds, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, St. Luke's Hospital, Bradford and The Friarage Hospital, Northallerton.

PARTICIPANTS

Three hundred and seventy-two women who had been offered endometrial ablation for menorrhagia.

MEASUREMENT

Sanitary material was washed with a nonionic detergent in a known volume of water. The haemoglobin in a sample of solution was measured by mixing with sodium carbonate for spectrophotometric analysis.

INTERVENTIONS

The menstrual blood loss result was revealed to each women. Electrosurgical endometrial ablation was performed for those who decided to have surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of women with normal menstrual blood loss (< or = 80 mL) who avoided surgery. Comparison of endometrial ablation outcome in women with and without genuine menorrhagia.

RESULTS

Thirty-six women (10%) with normal menstrual blood loss who declined surgery continued to avoid surgery after a mean of 27 months. Two hundred and ninety-two women were followed up for one year after endometrial ablation. Those with genuine menorrhagia (n = 122) were less likely to be dissatisfied (9% vs 18%) (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.1-4.7) or to require hysterectomy (4% vs 7%) (OR 1.8, 95% CI 0.6-5.2) than women with normal menstrual blood loss (n = 170).

CONCLUSIONS

The objective diagnosis of menorrhagia can be undertaken in a routine setting and may provide some women, who have a normal menstrual blood loss, sufficient reassurance to refrain from surgery. Women with genuine menorrhagia have a better outcome after endometrial ablation than those with normal menstrual blood loss.