Managing menorrhagia

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.

Factors associated with receiving surgical treatment for menorrhagia in England and Wales: findings from a cohort study of the National Heavy Menstrual Bleeding Audit

OBJECTIVE

To examine the factors associated with receiving surgery for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) in England and Wales.

DESIGN

National cohort study.

SETTING

National Health Service hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Women with HMB aged 18-60 who had a new referral to secondary care.

METHODS

Patient-reported data linked to administrative hospital data. Risk ratios (RR) estimated using multivariable Poisson regression.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Surgery within 1 year of first outpatient clinic visit.

RESULTS

14 545 women were included. At their first clinic visit, mean age was 42 years, mean symptom severity score was 62 (scale ranging from 0 (least) to 100 (most severe)), 73.9% of women reported having symptoms for >1 year and 30.4% reported no prior treatment in primary care. One year later, 42.6% had received surgery. Of these, 57.8% had endometrial ablation and 37.2% hysterectomy. Women with more severe symptoms were more likely to have received surgery (most vs least severe quintile, 33.1% vs 56.0%; RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.5 to 1.7). Surgery was more likely among those who reported prior primary care treatment compared with those who did not (48.0% vs 31.1%; RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.4 to 1.6). Surgery was less likely among Asian and more likely among black women, compared with white women. Surgery was not associated with socioeconomic deprivation.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of surgery for HMB depends on symptom severity and prior treatment in primary care. Referral pathways should be locally audited to ensure women with HMB receive care that addresses their individual needs and preferences, especially for those who do not receive treatment in primary care.

A randomised controlled trial of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia: the ECLIPSE trial

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) is a common problem, yet evidence to inform decisions about initial medical treatment is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) (Mirena®, Bayer) compared with usual medical treatment, with exploration of women's perspectives on treatment.

DESIGN

A pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial with an economic evaluation and a longitudinal qualitative study.

SETTING

Women who presented in primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 571 women with HMB. A purposeful sample of 27 women who were randomised or ineligible owing to treatment preference participated in semistructured face-to-face interviews around 2 and 12 months after commencing treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

LNG-IUS or usual medical treatment (tranexamic acid, mefenamic acid, combined oestrogen-progestogen or progesterone alone). Women could subsequently swap or cease their allocated treatment.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the patient-reported score on the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS) assessed over a 2-year period and then again at 5 years. Secondary outcomes included general quality of life (QoL), sexual activity, surgical intervention and safety. Data were analysed using iterative constant comparison. A state transition model-based cost-utility analysis was undertaken alongside the randomised trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived from the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and the Short Form questionnaire-6 Dimensions (SF-6D). The intention-to-treat analyses were reported as cost per QALY gained. Uncertainty was explored by conducting both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The MMAS total scores improved significantly in both groups at all time points, but were significantly greater for the LNG-IUS than for usual treatment [mean difference over 2 years was 13.4 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 9.9 to 16.9 points; p < 0.001]. However, this difference between groups was reduced and no longer significant by 5 years (mean difference in scores 3.9 points, 95% CI -0.6 to 8.3 points; p = 0.09). By 5 years, only 47% of women had a LNG-IUS in place and 15% were still taking usual medical treatment. Five-year surgery rates were low, at 20%, and were similar, irrespective of initial treatments. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events between groups. Using the EQ-5D, at 2 years, the relative cost-effectiveness of the LNG-IUS compared with usual medical treatment was £1600 per QALY, which by 5 years was reduced to £114 per QALY. Using the SF-6D, usual medical treatment dominates the LNG-IUS. The qualitative findings show that women's experiences and expectations of medical treatments for HMB vary considerably and change over time. Women had high expectations of a prompt effect from medical treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The LNG-IUS, compared with usual medical therapies, resulted in greater improvement over 2 years in women's assessments of the effect of HMB on their daily routine, including work, social and family life, and psychological and physical well-being. At 5 years, the differences were no longer significant. A similar low proportion of women required surgical intervention in both groups. The LNG-IUS is cost-effective in both the short and medium term, using the method generally recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Using the alternative measures to value QoL will have a considerable impact on cost-effectiveness decisions. It will be important to explore the clinical and health-care trajectories of the ECLIPSE (clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in primary care against standard treatment for menorrhagia) trial participants to 10 years, by which time half of the cohort will have reached menopause.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN86566246.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 88. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A randomised controlled trial of Outpatient versus inpatient Polyp Treatment (OPT) for abnormal uterine bleeding

BACKGROUND

Uterine polyps cause abnormal bleeding in women and conventional practice is to remove them in hospital under general anaesthetic. Advances in technology make it possible to perform polypectomy in an outpatient setting, yet evidence of effectiveness is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To test the hypothesis that in women with abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) associated with benign uterine polyp(s), outpatient polyp treatment achieved as good, or no more than 25% worse, alleviation of bleeding symptoms at 6 months compared with standard inpatient treatment. The hypothesis that response to uterine polyp treatment differed according to the pattern of AUB, menopausal status and longer-term follow-up was tested. The cost-effectiveness and acceptability of outpatient polypectomy was examined.

DESIGN

A multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial, incorporating a cost-effectiveness analysis and supplemented by a parallel patient preference study. Patient acceptability was evaluated by interview in a qualitative study.

SETTING

Outpatient hysteroscopy clinics and inpatient gynaecology departments within UK NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Women with AUB - defined as heavy menstrual bleeding (formerly known as menorrhagia) (HMB), intermenstrual bleeding or postmenopausal bleeding - and hysteroscopically diagnosed uterine polyps.

INTERVENTIONS

We randomly assigned 507 women, using a minimisation algorithm, to outpatient polypectomy compared with conventional inpatient polypectomy as a day case in hospital under general anaesthesia.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was successful treatment at 6 months, determined by the woman's assessment of her bleeding. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, procedure feasibility, acceptability and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

At 6 months, 73% (166/228) of women who underwent outpatient polypectomy were successfully treated compared with 80% (168/211) following inpatient polypectomy [relative risk (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.02]. The lower end of the CIs showed that outpatient polypectomy was at most 18% worse, in relative terms, than inpatient treatment, within the 25% margin of non-inferiority set at the outset of the study. By 1 and 2 years the corresponding proportions were similar producing RRs close to unity. There was no evidence that the treatment effect differed according to any of the predefined subgroups when treatments by variable interaction parameters were examined. Failure to completely remove polyps was higher (19% vs. 7%; RR 2.5, 95% CI 1.5 to 4.1) with outpatient polypectomy. Procedure acceptability was reduced with outpatient compared with inpatient polyp treatment (83% vs. 92%; RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.97). There were no significant differences in quality of life. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios at 6 and 12 months for inpatient treatment were £1,099,167 and £668,800 per additional QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

When treating women with AUB associated with uterine polyps, outpatient polypectomy was non-inferior to inpatient polypectomy at 6 and 12 months, and relatively cost-effective. However, patients need to be aware that failure to remove a polyp is more likely with outpatient polypectomy and procedure acceptability lower.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 65868569.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 61. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A systematic review evaluating health-related quality of life, work impairment, and health-care costs and utilization in abnormal uterine bleeding

OBJECTIVES

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) impacts women's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and puts a heavy economic burden on society. To date, this burden has not been systematically studied. We conducted a systematic review of the medical literature to evaluate the impact of AUB on HRQoL and to quantify the economic burden of AUB from a societal perspective.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and Cochrane databases, and article bibliographies for the period up to July 2005. Teams of two reviewers independently abstracted data from studies that reported outcomes of interest: prevalence, HRQoL, work impairment, and health-care utilization and costs associated with AUB.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1009 English-language articles. Ninety-eight studies (including randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and reviews) that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria underwent a full-text review. The prevalence of AUB among women of reproductive age ranged from 10% to 30%. The HRQoL scores from the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36) suggested that women with AUB have HRQoL below the 25th percentile of that for the general female population within a similar age range. The conservatively estimated annual direct and indirect economic costs of AUB were approximately $1 billion and $12 billion, respectively. These figures do not account for intangible costs and productivity loss due to presenteeism.

CONCLUSIONS

The burden of AUB needs further and more thorough investigation. Additional research should prospectively evaluate the impact of AUB and the value of treatment provided to help guide future health resource allocation and clinical decision-making.

An update on second-generation devices for endometrial ablation

Menorrhagia is a very common problem. Hysterectomy has been the traditional surgical treatment of choice guaranteeing amenorrhoea. It is 100% effective but is associated with surgical complications, and is more costly in terms of economic impact and recovery time. Minimally invasive procedures to ablate the endometrium reduce complications and recovery time. The newer second-generation endometrial ablation devices negate the need for surgery under direct hysteroscopic vision, thus ensuring that the treatments are not operator dependent. However, they heavily rely on the device themselves to ensure safety and efficacy. There are a variety of these devices currently available on the market. The authors will review these devices and provide the evidence for their suitability in various settings.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system for treating menstrual disorders: A patient satisfaction questionnaire

AIMS

To establish the continuation and satisfaction rates and the reasons for removal of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in Palmerston North Hospital (PNH), New Zealand.

SAMPLE AND SETTING

All women (120) who had a LNG-IUS inserted at PNH between June 1998 and June 2002 were included in the study.

METHODS

A survey questionnaire regarding bleeding patterns, side-effects and satisfaction rates relating to the device as well as reasons for premature removal, current treatment for dysfunctional uterine bleeding (DUB) and contraception was sent to all 120 women. Seventy-eight of the 85 women who received the questionnaire (91%) responded to it. Thirty-five women were lost to follow-up and the overall response rate was 65%.

RESULTS

The LNG-IUS was prematurely removed from nine women and expulsion occurred in one case. The overall continuation rate was 87%. No women had LNG-IUS removed as a result of hormonal side-effects except for bleeding abnormalities. The overall satisfaction rate was 76%.

CONCLUSION

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system is a well-accepted and efficacious therapy for heavy menstrual bleeding. These satisfaction and premature removal rates compare favourably with international figures. The response rate to the questionnaire was reasonably high given the highly mobile nature of the studied population.

Quality of life should be considered the primary outcome for measuring success of endometrial ablation

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical and quality of life outcomes by validated instruments after endometrial ablation by four methods, and determine the primary outcome that most reflects procedure success.

DESIGN

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

SETTING

Minimal-access gynecologic surgery unit in northeast England.

PATIENTS

One hundred thirty-nine women.

INTERVENTION

Endometrial ablation by one of four methods: Cavaterm, endometrial laser interstitial thermotherapy (ELITT), endometrial laser ablation (ELA), or NovaSure impedance-controlled system.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Clinical outcomes were assessed according to menstrual outcome. Whereas amenorrhea rates were significantly different among the four techniques (chi2 = 9.42, p = 0.02), combined amenorrhea and hypomenorrhea rates were not significantly different (67%, 69%, 69%, 62%, chi2 = 0.38, NS) for Cavaterm, ELITT, ELA, and NovaSure, respectively. Quality of life, measured preoperatively by the EQ-5D index and EQ-5D vas, SF-12 physical and mental component scores, and sexual activity questionnaire pleasure, habit, and discomfort scores, were substantially improved 12 months after treatment. No significant differences were seen in quality of life scores between women after endometrial ablation and the general population.

CONCLUSION

Quality of life for women with menorrhagia is improved to a normal level by treatment with either first- or second-generation endometrial ablation.

A double-blind randomized trial comparing the Cavaterm and the NovaSure endometrial ablation systems for the treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding

OBJECTIVE

To compare two second-generation endometrial ablation systems in women with dysfunctional uterine bleeding (DUB) who want conservative surgical treatment.

DESIGN

A double-blind, randomized trial.

SETTING

A minimal access gynecological surgery unit in northeast England.

PATIENT(S)

Fifty-seven women diagnosed with DUB were recruited, with 55 undergoing surgery and completing 12-month follow-up.

INTERVENTION(S)

Thirty-seven women underwent a NovaSure endometrial ablation, and 18 had a Cavaterm endometrial ablation. Clinical and quality of life data were collected 6 and 12 months after treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Amenorrhea, menstrual change, quality of life, sexual activity, patient satisfaction, and procedure acceptability.

RESULT(S)

Amenorrhea, hypomenorrhea, eumenorrhea, and menorrhagia rates for the Cavaterm and Novasure groups at 12 months were 2/18 (11%) vs. 16/37 (43%); 11/18 (61%) vs. 10/37 (27%); 5/18 (27%) vs. 6/37 (16%); and 0/18 vs. 5/37 (13%), respectively. At 12 months, 83% and 92% of women were either satisfied or very satisfied in the Cavaterm or Novasure groups, respectively. There were no major complications in either group.

CONCLUSION(S)

Both the Cavaterm and the Novasure endometrial ablation systems are effective in reducing menstrual loss in women with DUB and achieve high rates of patient satisfaction. The Novasure system achieved a statistically significantly higher rate of amenorrhea in this study.

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.

Correlates of women's preferences for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding

This cross-sectional survey investigated factors associated with treatment preferences of women with menorrhagia. Women (n = 474) aged 35-54 years referred to gynaecology out-patient clinics for menorrhagia were mailed a self-administered questionnaire before their first clinic visit. The main outcome measure was treatment preference. Hysterectomy and conservative treatment (combined with no treatment) were favoured equally often. In a multivariate analysis, completed family size (P = 0.003), menstrual pain (P = 0.02), irregular periods (P = 0.03), and higher age (P = 0.04) predicted hysterectomy preference, as did lower education level (P = 0.001), gynaecologist consultations (P = 0.002), and unemployment (P = 0.03). The psychological factors assessed were not associated with treatment preference. In conclusion, rational considerations regarding stage of reproductive life and severity of symptoms were linked to women's treatment preferences. However, education, employment status and use of specialists' services guided women's preferences even more powerfully than menstrual symptoms and burden caused by them. Doctors should pay more attention to motivating women for a trial of conservative treatment since only half of the women reported previous treatment for their menstrual problem.

The effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in menorrhagia: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUS), licensed at present for contraceptive use, may reduce menstrual blood loss with few side effects. If effective, surgery could be avoided with consequent resource savings.

METHODS

A systematic review addressing the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the LNG-IUS for menorrhagia was undertaken.

RESULTS

Five controlled trials and five case series were found which measured menstrual blood loss. Nine studies recorded statistically significant average menstrual blood loss reductions with LNG-IUS (range 74%-97%). Another showed reduction in menstrual disturbance score. The LNG-IUS was more effective than tranexamic acid, but slightly less effective than endometrial resection at reducing menstrual blood loss. In one study, 64% of women cancelled surgery at six months, compared with 14% of control group women. In another, 82% were taken off surgical waiting lists at one year. No cost effectiveness studies were found.

DISCUSSION

Small studies of moderate quality indicate the LNG-IUS is an effective treatment for menorrhagia. Costs may be less than for tranexamic acid in primary and secondary care. Although its use may reduce surgical waiting lists, cost effectiveness assessment requires longer follow up.

CONCLUSION

Effectiveness and cost effectiveness relative to other treatments and the effect on surgical waiting lists can only be established in larger trials measuring patient-centred outcomes in women with menorrhagia.