Characteristics of patients undergoing hysterectomy for failed endometrial ablation

Current and Future Surgical and Interventional Management Options for Adenomyosis

Historically, hysterectomy has been the recommended treatment for patients with adenomyosis. However, in the past two decades, various uterine-sparing treatment methods have emerged. These range from excisional techniques such as adenomyomectomy or wedge resection to uterine artery embolization, radiofrequency thermal ablation, hysteroscopic excision, endometrial ablation, and high-intensity focused ultrasound. While largely investigative for the treatment of adenomyosis, these procedures have demonstrated improvement in symptoms including abnormal uterine bleeding, dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain, and overall quality of life. However, long-term data including fertility and obstetric outcomes are needed. Future research is needed to better understand the impact of these uterine-preserving techniques to expand our armamentarium for the treatment of adenomyosis.

Prognostic Factors for the Failure of Endometrial Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of prognostic factors predicting failure of second-generation endometrial ablation.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from 1988 until February 2019. The search was conducted without language restrictions using the following search terms: "endometrial ablation," "prognosis," "predict," "long term," "late onset," "outcome."

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

The literature search provided a total of 990 studies. All types of studies reporting about prognostic factors of second-generation endometrial ablation failure were included.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

After screening for eligibility, 56 studies were included in this review, of which 21 were included in the meta-analysis. In these 56 studies, 157,830 women were included. We evaluated 10 prognostic factors: age, myomas, history of tubal ligation, body mass index, parity, preexisting dysmenorrhea, caesarean delivery, bleeding pattern, uterus position, and uterus length. Meta-analysis was performed for the primary outcome (surgical reintervention) to estimate summary treatment effects. Younger age (aged 35 years or younger, odds ratio [OR] 1.68, 95% CI 1.19-2.36; aged 40 years or younger, OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.30-1.93; aged 45 years or younger OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.28-2.07), prior tubal ligation (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.23-1.73), and preexisting dysmenorrhea (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.41-3.19) were associated with an increased risk of surgical reintervention. Studies investigating the prognostic factors myomas and obesity showed conflicting results.

CONCLUSION

Younger age, prior tubal ligation and preexisting dysmenorrhea were found to be associated with failure of endometrial ablation. Obesity and the presence of large submucous myomas may be associated with failure, as well, though more research is necessary to estimate the influence of these factors. It is important to take the results of this review into account when counselling women with heavy menstrual bleeding.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42019126247.

Pain is an Independent Risk Factor for Failed Global Endometrial Ablation

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine whether pain, as part of an indication for global endometrial ablation, is an independent risk factor for failure.

DESIGN

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

SETTING

Academic-affiliated community hospital.

PATIENTS

Women undergoing global endometrial ablation with radiofrequency ablation (RFA), hydrothermablation (HTA), or uterine balloon ablation (UBA) between January 2003 and December 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

Procedure failure was defined as subsequent hysterectomy after the index ablation.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

A total of 5818 women who underwent an endometrial ablation were identified, including 3706 with RFA (63.7%), 1786 with HTA (30.7%), and 326 with UBA (5.6%). Of the 5818 ablations, 437 (7.5%) involved pain (i.e., pelvic pain, dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, lower abdominal pain, endometriosis, or adenomyosis) before ablation, along with abnormal uterine bleeding. Pain as part of the preoperative diagnoses before endometrial ablation was a significant risk factor for subsequent hysterectomy compared with all other diagnoses (19.2% vs 13.5%; p = .001). Consistent with previous studies, women who underwent ablation at an older age were less likely to fail, which held true even when one of the indications for ablation was related to pain (odds ratio, 0.96/year; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-0.97). When the pathology reports of women who underwent a hysterectomy were examined, women in the pain group had lower rates of adenomyosis than women without pain (38.1% vs 50.1%; p = .04). However, there was a trend toward a higher rate of endometriosis on pathology reports (14.3% vs 8.7%; p = .09) and even higher rates of visualized endometriosis identified by operative reports in women who had pain before their ablation (42.9% vs 15.8%; p < .001). Patients who had pain before their ablation were less likely to have myomas/polyps (p = .01).

CONCLUSION

Pelvic pain before global endometrial ablation is an independent risk factor for failure.

Incidence and predictors of failed second-generation endometrial ablation

Background

The need for any treatment following an endometrial ablation is frequently cited as “failed therapy,” with the two most common secondary interventions being repeat ablation and hysterectomy. Since second-generation devices have become standard of care, no large cohort study has assessed treatment outcomes with regard to only these newer devices. We sought to determine the incidence and predictors of failed second-generation endometrial ablation, defined as the need for surgical re-intervention.

We performed a retrospective cohort study at a single academic-affiliated community hospital. Subjects included women undergoing second-generation endometrial ablation for benign indications between October 2003 and March 2016. Second-generation devices utilized during the study period included the radiofrequency ablation device (RFA), hydrothermal ablation device (HTA), and the uterine balloon ablation system (UBA).

Results

Five thousand nine hundred thirty-six women underwent endometrial ablation at a single institution (3757 RFA (63.3%), 1848 HTA (31.1%), and 331 UBA (5.6%)). The primary outcome assessed was surgical re-intervention, defined as hysterectomy or repeat endometrial ablation. Of the total 927 (15.6%) women who required re-intervention, 822 (13.9%) underwent hysterectomy and 105 (1.8%) underwent repeat endometrial ablation. Women who underwent re-intervention were younger (41.6 versus 42.9 years, p < .001), were more often African-American (21.8% versus 16.2%, p < .001), and were more likely to have had a primary radiofrequency ablation procedure (hazard ratio 1.37; 95%CI 1.01 to 1.86). Older age was associated with decreased risk for treatment failure with women older than 45 years of age having the lowest risk for failure (p < .001). Age between 35 and 40 years conferred the highest risk of treatment failure (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.32–1.92). Indications for re-intervention following ablation included menorrhagia (81.8%), abnormal uterine bleeding (27.8%), polyps/fibroids (18.7%), and pain (9.5%).

Conclusion

Surgical re-intervention was required in 15.6% of women who underwent second-generation endometrial ablation. Age, ethnicity, and radiofrequency ablation were significant risk factors for failed endometrial ablation, and menorrhagia was the leading indication for re-intervention.

Late-onset endometrial ablation failure

Endometrial ablation, first reported in the 19th century, has gained wide acceptance in the gynecologic community as an important tool for the management of abnormal uterine bleeding when medical management has been unsuccessful or contraindicated. The introduction of global endometrial ablation (GEA) devices beginning in 1997 has provided unsurpassed safety addressing many of the concerns associated with their resectoscopic predecessors. As of this writing the GEA market has surpassed a half-million devices in the United States per annum and has an expected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) projected to be 5.5% from 2016 to 2024.

While the short term safety and efficacy of these devices has been reported in numerous clinical trials we only recently are becoming aware of the high incidence of late-onset endometrial ablation failures (LOEAFs) associated with these procedures. Currently, about a quarter of women who undergo a GEA procedure will eventually require a hysterectomy while an unknown number have less than satisfactory results. In order to reduce these suboptimal outcomes physicians must better understand the etiology and risk factors that predispose a patient toward the development of LOEAF as well as current knowledge of patient and procedure selection for EA as well as treatment options for these delayed complications.

•

Over 500,000 endometrial ablations (EAs) are performed in the U. S. each year.

•

Late-onset endometrial ablation failures (LOEAFs) are the most common complication of EA.

•

25% of women who undergo EA will require hysterectomy within 5 years.

•

Reducing the incidence of LOEAFs requires improved patient selection for EA.

•

Ultrasound-guided reoperative hysteroscopic surgery (UGRHS) reduces the need hysterectomy following LOEAF.

The role of pathologic evaluation of endometrial ablation resections in predicting ablation failure and adenomyosis in hysterectomy

Endometrial ablation is commonly performed to manage heavy menstrual bleeding. However, failure in symptom control eventually requiring hysterectomy is frequent. Adenomyosis is common in such failure cases. Ablations using a resectoscope will produce an Endo-Myometrial Resection (EMR) specimen. The value of histopathologic examination of EMRs in predicting treatment failure and adenomyosis has not been addressed. We retrieved histologic material from subjects with failed ablation (persistent symptoms requiring hysterectomy) and subjects with ablation followed by clinical improvement and no hysterectomy (control group). Material was evaluated for features of an abnormal endometrial distribution suggestive of adenomyosis: myometrial fragments with endometrium on opposite edges, myometrium with endometrium in ≥3 edges and areas of endometrium completely surrounded by myometrium (endometrial islands). Hysterectomy specimens from the study group were evaluated for the presence of adenomyosis and its distribution (superficial/deep). Both study and control groups consisted of 18 patients each. The number of fragments with endometrium on opposite sides was significantly higher in the study group: 2.11 vs 0.94 in the control group (p=0.005). Conversely, maximum aggregate dimension (2.3cm vs 2.79cm), number of fragments with endometrium on three sides (4.5 vs 2.78) and number of fragments with endometrial islands (4.5 vs 4.11) did not significantly differ between groups. Adenomyosis was seen in 72.2% hysterectomies from the study group; 27.8% involved deep myometrium. None of the EMR features were statistically associated with adenomyosis. Certain endomyometrial distribution patterns in EMR specimens correlate with future ablation failure and need for definitive surgery. This may be explained by residual endometrial tissue not resected due to a markedly irregular endomyometrial interface. Adenomyosis is frequent in cases of ablation failure. However, a significant association between EMR patterns studied and adenomyosis was not observed.

Economic and clinical benefits of radiofrequency ablation versus hysterectomy in patients suffering from menorrhagia: a retrospective analysis with German health claims data

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinical and economic benefits of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) compared to hysterectomy when treating patients suffering from menorrhagia.

METHODS

Based on German health claims data, a retrospective, longitudinal, observational analysis was performed. Patients having continuously statutory health insurance coverage during the study and being coded for menorrhagia and a relevant treatment option were included in the analysis. The control group was created using propensity score matching.

RESULTS

We discovered that using RFA generates cost savings of €1844 during the quarter of performance. As direct costs during a 2-year follow-up show similar levels in both groups, these initial savings can be preserved. This is partly because even if more patients in the RFA group were re-coded for menorrhagia after initial therapy, just a small proportion of these patients required another surgical intervention.

CONCLUSION

RFA should more often be considered a relevant treatment option both from an economic and a medical point of view.