Five-year follow up of a randomised controlled trial comparing NovaSure and ThermaChoice endometrial ablation

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

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

DATA SOURCES

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

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

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

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Risk of Hysterectomy After Endometrial Ablation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of hysterectomy after nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation in patients with heavy menstrual bleeding.

DATA SOURCES

The EMBASE, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane databases were searched for eligible articles from inception until June 13, 2022. We used combinations of search terms for endometrial ablation and hysterectomy.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Articles included in the review described the incidence of hysterectomy at a specific point in time after ablation with a minimum follow-up duration of 12 months.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

The literature search yielded a total of 3,022 hits. A total of 53 studies met our inclusion and exclusion criteria, including six retrospective studies, 24 randomized controlled trials, and 23 prospective studies. A total of 48,071 patients underwent endometrial ablation between 1992 and 2017. Follow-up duration varied between 12 and 120 months. Analyses per follow-up moment showed 4.3% hysterectomy rate at 12 months of follow-up (n=29 studies), 11.1% at 18 months (n=1 study), 8.0% at 24 months (n=11 studies), 10.2% at 36 months (n=12 studies), 7.6% at 48 months (n=2 studies), and 12.4% at 60 months (n=6 studies). Two studies reported a mean hysterectomy rate at 10 years after ablation of 21.3%. Minimal clinically relevant differences in hysterectomy rates were observed among the different study designs. Furthermore, we found no significant differences in hysterectomy rate among the different nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation devices.

CONCLUSION

The risk of hysterectomy after endometrial ablation seems to increase from 4.3% after 1 year to 12.4% after 5 years. Clinicians can use the results of this review to counsel patients about the 12% risk of hysterectomy 5 years after endometrial ablation.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42020156281.

Re-intervention and patient satisfaction rates following office radiofrequency endometrial ablation: a comparative retrospective study of 408 cases

This retrospective study assessed the efficacy and long-term satisfaction of radiofrequency endometrial ablation outside the context of clinical trials in 408 women, and compared the outcome between office-setting (211, 52%) and day-case procedures under general anaesthetics (197, 48%). The Kaplan Meir time-to-event analysis showed that the cumulative number of women undergoing surgical re-intervention was 32 with a probability of 9.4% (95% CI: 6.3 - 12.5%) at 2-years, and 45 with a probability of 14.5% (95% CI: 10.3 - 18.2%) at 5-years. There was no statistically significant difference in the re-intervention rate between office and day-case groups (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.68 - 3.1, p = .3). The satisfaction rate, measured by Visual Analogue Scale, was not statistically different (p = .5) between office (109; 80.7%) and day-case (96; 82.8%) groups. This study showed lower surgical re-intervention rate than previously reported in observational studies, and high rates of long-term women satisfaction. The outcomes were similar in office and day-case settings.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Previous studies have shown the safety and effectiveness of radiofrequency endometrial ablation for treating heavy periods. However, studies investigating it, outside clinical trials, either included a small sample size, a short-term follow-up, poor reporting so that it is impossible to judge whether some women underwent re-intervention in another centre, failed to discriminate in analysis between second-generation techniques, or assessed only short-term satisfaction.What do the results of this study add? This is the largest series reported from a single centre and the first study reporting long-term satisfaction in women, outside clinical trials. Surgical re-intervention was used as the primary outcome measure which is an objective measure rather than the change in the monthly flow which is rather subjective. More importantly, the study records the similarity, in the outcome and women's satisfaction rate, between office and day-case procedures under general anaesthetics.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Endometrial ablation service is widely implemented in office-setting in the UK. We hope the result of this study encourages implementation on a larger scale in office across centres in the world with its multiple advantages both to women and service alike.

Radiofrequency endometrial ablation for treating heavy menstrual bleeding in women with chronic renal failure

OBJECTIVE

The study objective was to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency endometrial ablation in treating heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) in women with chronic renal failure (CRF).

METHOD

Fifty-eight patients with CRF undergoing radiofrequency endometrial ablation in our hospital between January 2013 and July 2017 and for whom complete follow-up data were available were included. Outcome measures included amenorrhea, treatment failure and operative complications.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 41.4 ± 7.7 years, the mean preoperative hemoglobin level was 69.6 ± 19.3 g/dL, the mean preoperative serum creatinine level was 879.1 ± 415.4 µmol/L, and the mean urea level was 18.2 ± 7.1 mmol/L. The mean treatment time for radiofrequency endometrial ablation was 61.7 ± 18.8 s. The median volume of estimated blood loss during the procedure was 10 mL (a range of 2-50 mL). On average, the study subjects were monitored for 24.4 months (a range of 6-60 months). The average amenorrhea rate was 89.7%. Only 2 (3.4%) patients required additional gynecologic surgery after endometrial ablation. Intra- and postoperative complications were not observed.

CONCLUSION

Radiofrequency endometrial ablation was demonstrated to be safe and effective for the treatment of HMB in women with CRF.

Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Endometrial ablation

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

Meta-analysis of bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation versus thermal balloon endometrial ablation for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

Heavy menstrual bleeding is a common problem that can severely affect quality of life.

OBJECTIVES

To compare bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation and thermal balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding in terms of efficacy and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

SEARCH STRATEGY

Online registries were systematically searched using relevant terms without language restriction from inception to November 24, 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized control trials or cohort studies of women with heavy menstrual bleeding comparing the efficacy of two treatments were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RRs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies involving 901 patients were included. Amenorrhea rate at 12 months was significantly higher after bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation than after thermal balloon ablation (RR 2.73, 95% CI 2.00-3.73). However, no difference at 12 months was noted for dysmenorrhea (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.68-1.58) or treatment failure (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.38-1.60). The only significant difference for HRQoL outcomes was for change in SAQ pleasure score (12 months: WMD -3.51, 95% CI -5.42 to -1.60).

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation and thermal balloon ablation reduce menstrual loss and improve quality of life. However, bipolar radiofrequency endometrial ablation is more effective in terms of amenorrhea rate and SAQ pleasure.

Endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding

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

Ambulatory management of heavy menstrual bleeding

Heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) has significant adverse effects on the quality of life of many women, placing an economic burden on both health services and society at large. Thus, it is essential that all women with HMB have easy access to the proper diagnostic and therapeutic work-up in an outpatient fashion, avoiding the more time-consuming inpatient management. This new outpatient approach for HMB is one of the latest development of gynecological practice and can offer both diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. This manuscript aims to show the current possibilities of the modern management of HMB, which can be safely and effectively accomplished in the outpatient setting: global and directed endometrial biopsy, levonorgestrel intrauterine system insertion as well as minimally invasive surgical procedures (encompassing a variety of operative hysteroscopic procedures and second-generation endometrial ablation) are described below.

Cost-Effectiveness of Global Endometrial Ablation vs. Hysterectomy for Treatment of Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: US Commercial and Medicaid Payer Perspectives

Cost-effectiveness modeling studies of global endometrial ablation (GEA) for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) from a US perspective are lacking. The objective of this study was to model the cost-effectiveness of GEA vs. hysterectomy for treatment of AUB in the United States from both commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives. The study team developed a 1-, 3-, and 5-year semi-Markov decision-analytic model to simulate 2 hypothetical patient cohorts of women with AUB-1 treated with GEA and the other with hysterectomy. Clinical and economic data (including treatment patterns, health care resource utilization, direct costs, and productivity costs) came from analyses of commercial and Medicaid claims databases. Analysis results show that cost savings with simultaneous reduction in treatment complications and fewer days lost from work are achieved with GEA versus hysterectomy over almost all time horizons and under both the commercial payer and Medicaid perspectives. Cost-effectiveness metrics also favor GEA over hysterectomy from both the commercial payer and Medicaid payer perspectives-evidence strongly supporting the clinical-economic value about GEA versus hysterectomy. Results will interest clinicians, health care payers, and self-insured employers striving for cost-effective AUB treatments.

[Analysis from the French DRG-based information system (PMSI) of conservative surgical treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding in 2008-2010]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the conservative surgical treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding from the Medicalized Information System Program (PMSI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The diagnosis codes were selected from 10th version of the international classification disease. A transversal and longitudinal descriptive analysis was performed from hospital stays, patient's characteristics, medical procedures between 2008-2010.

RESULTS

Nineteen thousand six hundred and seventy-nine patients were admitted in hospital (public or private) for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding. Endometrial ablation increased by 16,7%, 10.2% for first generation technique (G1) and 63.5% for second generation techniques (G2). G2 were used in 15% of indications. The median age was respectively 45.2±6.4 years old versus 45.8±4.9 years old for G2. The median length of hospital stay was 1.6 ±1with 69% of patients in ambulatory care. The likelihood to have a hysterectomy in the 3 years follow-up was higher after G1 than G2 treatments (P=0.0034) for the patients above 40 years old. In longitudinal study, defined only by endometrial hyperplasia, 11,532 patients were included and only 8.2% had been treated by G2.

CONCLUSION

In spite of the international guidelines since 2008, 85% of patients treated with first generation surgical technique. The failure rate defined by a re-ablation or a hysterectomy is higher after G1. This result must be discussed in relationship with cost effective aspects.

Cost effectiveness of endometrial ablation with the NovaSure(®) system versus other global ablation modalities and hysterectomy for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding: US commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives

OBJECTIVES

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) interferes with physical, emotional, and social well-being, impacting the quality of life of more than 10 million women in the USA. Hysterectomy, the most common surgical treatment of AUB, has significant morbidity, low mortality, long recovery, and high associated health care costs. Global endometrial ablation (GEA) provides a surgical alternative with reduced morbidity, cost, and recovery time. The NovaSure(®) system utilizes unique radiofrequency impedance-based GEA technology. This study evaluated cost effectiveness of AUB treatment with NovaSure ablation versus other GEA modalities and versus hysterectomy from the US commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives.

METHODS

A health state transition (semi-Markov) model was developed using epidemiologic, clinical, and economic data from commercial and Medicaid claims database analyses, supplemented by published literature. Three hypothetical cohorts of women receiving AUB interventions were simulated over 1-, 3-, and 5-year horizons to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes for NovaSure, other GEA modalities, and hysterectomy.

RESULTS

Model analyses show lower costs for NovaSure-treated patients than for those treated with other GEA modalities or hysterectomy over all time frames under commercial payer and Medicaid perspectives. By Year 3, cost savings versus other GEA were $930 (commercial) and $3,000 (Medicaid); cost savings versus hysterectomy were $6,500 (commercial) and $8,900 (Medicaid). Coinciding with a 43%-71% reduction in need for re-ablation, there were 69%-88% fewer intervention/reintervention complications for NovaSure-treated patients versus other GEA modalities, and 82%-91% fewer versus hysterectomy. Furthermore, NovaSure-treated patients had fewer days of work absence and short-term disability. Cost-effectiveness metrics showed NovaSure treatment as economically dominant over other GEA modalities in all circumstances. With few exceptions, similar results were shown for NovaSure treatment versus hysterectomy.

CONCLUSION

Model results demonstrate strong financial favorability for NovaSure ablation versus other GEA modalities and hysterectomy from commercial and Medicaid payer perspectives. Results will interest clinicians, health care payers, and self-insured employers striving for cost-effective AUB treatments.

Concomitant hysteroscopic endometrial ablation and Essure procedure: feasibility, efficacy and satisfaction

OBJECTIVE

Hysteroscopic endometrial destruction procedures for abnormal uterine bleeding are an alternative to hysterectomy. Such procedures are not contraceptive and are performed on fertile patients, requiring long-term contraception. This is the first study evaluating long-term results of a combined procedure associating endometrial destruction and concomitant hysteroscopic tubal sterilization by Essure(®) micro-inserts. Our goal is to evaluate efficacy of endometrial destruction as well as hysteroscopic sterilization and satisfaction after a combined procedure in the case of abnormal uterine bleeding in non-menopausal patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective study (Canadian task force II-2) that includes 131 patients operated with combined endometrial destruction and hysteroscopic tubal sterilization between 2002 and 2011 at our university hospital. The patients were contacted to answer a questionnaire. Statistical analysis was performed with SAS© version 9.2. (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients out of 131 could be reached. The mean follow-up was of 37.8 months (min=8, max=87, SD=6.2). Thirty-eight patients (29%) were lost to follow-up. Essure(®) micro-inserts introduction success rate (evaluated on 131 patients) was 95.8%, and their position was appropriate in 81.1% of the 106 patients with position control. Efficacy of the procedure on the haemorrhagic symptoms (evaluated on 93 patients) was 80.6%. Twelve patients (12.9%) underwent a hysterectomy, 7 of which (58.3%) were a direct consequence of treatment failure. No pregnancies were reported. Satisfaction rate was of 90.3%.

CONCLUSION

Inadequate position rates of the micro-inserts after 3 months seem somewhat above literature findings, though no pregnancy has been reported. However, recurrent bleeding symptoms and hysterectomy rates are consistent with those observed after an endometrial destruction procedure alone. Limitations are the limited number of patients, the bias inherent to retrospective studies (lost of follow-up, selection bias). The concomitant endometrial destruction and tubal sterilization by micro-inserts is a safe and efficient procedure.

Microwave endometrial ablation versus thermal balloon endometrial ablation (MEATBall): 5-year follow up of a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term outcomes following microwave endometrial ablation (MEA™) and thermal balloon ablation (TBall).

DESIGN

Follow up of a prospective, double-blind randomised controlled trial at 5 years.

SETTING

A teaching hospital in the UK.

POPULATION

A total of 320 women eligible for and requesting endometrial ablation.

METHODS

Eligible women were randomised in a 1:1 ratio to undergo MEA or Tball. Postal questionnaires were sent to participants at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively to determine satisfaction with outcome, menstrual status, bleeding scores and quality of life measurement. Subsequent surgery was ascertained from the women and the hospital operative database.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was overall satisfaction with treatment. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of menstrual loss, change in quality of life scores and subsequent surgery.

RESULTS

Of the women originally randomised 217/314 (69.1%) returned questionnaires. Nonresponders were assumed to be treatment failures for data analysis. The primary outcome of satisfaction was similar in both groups (58% for MEA™ versus 53% for TBall, difference 5%; 95% CI -6 to 16%). Amenorrhoea rates were high following both techniques (51% versus 45%, difference 6%; 95% CI -5 to 17%). There was no significant difference in the hysterectomy rates between the two arms (9% versus 7%, difference 2%; 95% CI -5 to 9%).

CONCLUSIONS

At 5 years post-treatment there were no significant clinical differences in patient satisfaction, menstrual status, quality of life scores or hysterectomy rates between MEA™ and Thermachoice 3, thermal balloon ablation.

Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To examine the use of inpatient hysterectomy and explore changes in the use of various routes of hysterectomy and patterns of referral.

METHODS

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify all women aged 18 years or older who underwent inpatient hysterectomy between 1998 and 2010. Weighted estimates of national trends were calculated and the number of procedures performed estimated. Trends in hospital volume and across hospital characteristics were examined.

RESULTS

After weighting, we identified a total 7,438,452 women who underwent inpatient hysterectomy between 1998 and 2010. The number of hysterectomies performed annually rose from 543,812 in 1998 to a peak of 681,234 in 2002; it then declined consistently annually and reached 433,621 cases in 2010. Overall, 247,973 (36.4%) fewer hysterectomies were performed in 2010 compared with 2002. From 2002 to 2010 the number of hysterectomies performed for each of the following indications declined: leiomyoma (-47.6%), abnormal bleeding (-28.9%), benign ovarian mass (-63.1%), endometriosis (-65.3%), and pelvic organ prolapse (-39.4%). The median hospital case volume decreased from 83 procedures per year in 2002 to 50 cases per year in 2010 (P<.001).

CONCLUSION

The number of inpatient hysterectomies performed in the United States has declined substantially over the past decade. The median number of hysterectomies per hospital has declined likewise by more than 40%.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

[Evaluation of endometrectomy by radiofrequency for premenopausal women: a retrospective study]

OBJECTIVE

In present study, we are assessing the efficiency of endometrial ablation by radiofrequency (Novasure(®)) for the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 90 patients underwent an endometrial ablation by radiofrequency for uterine bleeding between 2009 and 2012. For the postoperative follow-up, symptoms amelioration and eventual adverse-events were evaluated by a self-administered questionnaire given to all patients after the surgery.

RESULT

Sixty-five patients (74%) responded to the questionnaire with an average of 17.5 months. Among them, endometrial bleeding decreased in 92% of the cases (IC 95%; 86-99). The amenorrhea rate was 55% (IC 95%; 43-67) and 36% of the patients presented a diminution of menstrual bleeding after treatment. Thirty-two patients (36%) presented dysmenorrhea before the radiofrequency and 78% of them experienced an amelioration of the symptoms after treatment (IC 95%; 64-93). In 19 patients (21%), the cause of uterine bleeding was adenomyosis, among them, bleeding decreased in 84% of the cases (IC 95%; 71-98) and dysmenorrhea in 70%. (IC 95%; 41-97). Finally, 84% of the patients were satisfied with the result of the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that endometrial radiofrequency is effective for the treatment of menometrorrhagia, dysmenorrhea and also adenomyosis.

Rates of subsequent surgery following endometrial ablation among English women with menorrhagia: population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of further surgery amongst women who had an initial endometrial ablation (EA) for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB).

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study using a national administrative database.

SETTING

Population-based study of hospital care in the English National Health Service.

POPULATION

A cohort of 114,910 women who had EA for HMB between January 2000 and December 2011.

METHODS

Multiple Cox regressions were performed to identify the risks of a further procedure, adjusted for age, social deprivation, year and type of initial EA, and presence of fibroids/polyps.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Time to repeat EA or hysterectomy after initial surgery.

RESULTS

Of 114,910 women undergoing EA, 16.7% had at least one subsequent procedure within 5 years. Higher rates of subsequent surgery were associated with younger age at initial EA, with women aged under 35 years having an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.83 (95% CI 2.67-2.99), compared with women aged over 45 years. Women who had radiofrequency ablation were less likely to have subsequent surgery as compared with first-generation techniques (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.63-0.76). The rate of a subsequent hysterectomy within 5 years was 13.5%. Younger women (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.69) and those who had balloon, microwave, or radiofrequency ablation were less likely to have a second EA procedure, rather than a hysterectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

One in six women have further surgery after EA for HMB, which is a higher rate than reported in clinical trials. This risk of further surgery decreases with age.

Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding

OBJECTIVE

Previously, we have reported that, at both 12months and 5 years after treatment, bipolar endometrial ablation is superior to balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. In this article, we evaluate the results at 10 years after these interventions.

DESIGN

Ten-year follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

A teaching hospital in the Netherlands.

POPULATION

Premenopausal women suffering from heavy menstrual bleeding.

METHOD

A follow-up questionnaire was sent to women 10 years after randomisation for bipolar ablation and balloon ablation (2: 1 ratio).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Amenorrhoea rates, re-intervention and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

At 10 years of follow-up, the response rate was 69/83 (83%) in the bipolar group and 35/43 (81%) in the balloon group. Amenorrhoea rates were 50/69 (73%) in the bipolar group and 23/35 (66%) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.83-1.5)]. Further treatment following initial ablation was reported in 21 cases, 14 in the bipolar group and nine in the balloon group [relative risk, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.63-1.3)]. Eight of these women required further treatment after 5 years, including two hysterectomies. Patient satisfaction in the bipolar group was 81% (56/69) compared with 77% (27/35) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.82-1.2)].

CONCLUSION

Ten years after treatment, the superiority of bipolar ablation over balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding was no longer evident.

Thermal balloon endometrial ablation in dysfunctional uterine bleeding

Introduction:

Dysfunctional uterine bleeding (DUB) affects a large number of women in the reproductive and perimenopausal age group. It significantly impairs the quality of life in otherwise healthy women. There are many different techniques for the conservative management of DUB. Medical management, LNG-IUD, hysteroscopic resection and various global ablation techniques.

Materials and Methods:

We did a retrospective analysis of 156 women with dysfunctional uterine bleeding who had completed childbearing and who underwent uterine balloon ablation therapy using the Thermachoice device. Majority of the women (72%) were done using short general anesthesia while in the others sedation or local anesthesia was used.

Results:

49% women had amenorrhea while 41 % had oligomenorhoea or eumenorrhoea. 90% were satisfied with the procedure. There were no major complications during this study.

Conclusions:

Thermal balloon endometrial ablation is a simple, safe and effective technique for the permanent treatment of DUB in well selected cases.

Safety and Effectiveness of NovaSure® Endometrial Ablation After Placement of Essure® Micro-Inserts

Objective: In-office NovaSure^® after Essure^® is a clinical paradigm for which physicians are seeking information. A PubMed search (July 2011) revealed no peer-reviewed articles describing this treatment sequence. To address the paucity of data on this topic, patients who had undergone Essure followed by NovaSure in a private practice office between July 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009 were evaluated. The objective was to evaluate safety and feasibility of in-office NovaSure after Essure, and to determine if the effectiveness of either procedure was altered by this treatment sequence. Design: This was a retrospective cohort study of 117 women (ages 24-52). Methods: Patients underwent Essure followed by NovaSure in two in-office sessions, separated by a median of 14 days. All patients had menorrhagia and desired permanent sterilization. A postprocedure patient questionnaire was administered to assess satisfaction and perceived effectiveness. Results: Among patients who underwent Essure followed by NovaSure, 83/117 (71%) returned for a 3-month hysterosalpingogram (HSG). Satisfactory placement and tubal occlusion were noted in 79/83 (95%) of these patients. Amenorrhea or spotting was observed in 72/97 (74%) of patients, 22/97 (23%) reported a satisfactory decrease in menstrual flow, and 3/97 (3%) reported ablation failure. Essure followed by NovaSure did not decrease the effectiveness of either procedure, and no adverse events were attributed to the combination of the two procedures. Patients reported high levels of satisfaction with both procedures. Conclusions: In women seeking permanent birth control and menorrhagia reduction, in-office Essure followed by NovaSure appeared to be safe, effective, and associated with high patient satisfaction. (J GYNECOL SURG 28:1).

Comparing satisfaction rates of Microwave and Bipolar Impedance controlled endometrial ablation

PURPOSE

To compare the satisfaction rates of Microwave and Bipolar Impedance controlled endometrial ablations.

METHODS

Anonymized questionnaires were sent to patients who had undergone endometrial ablations in a two and a half year period, which ended 6 months prior to the start of the study. The same questionnaires printed in pink and white sheets of paper were sent to patients who had undergone Bipolar Impedance controlled and Microwave endometrial ablations, respectively. Returned questionnaires were then analysed.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in satisfaction rates of Microwave or Bipolar Impedance controlled endometrial ablations, where control of pain or menstrual bleeding was concerned. Similarly there was no difference in hysterectomy rates and the percentage of women in each group recommending the procedure to others as well as those reporting a significant improvement in quality of life after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Microwave endometrial ablation and Bipolar Impedance controlled endometrial ablation are both equally successful at controlling heavy menstrual bleeding with satisfaction rates around 80% for both procedures.

Alternatives to hysterectomy: focus on global endometrial ablation, uterine fibroid embolization, and magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound

The aim of this study was to inform the clinician of alternatives to hysterectomy through a critical evaluation of three treatment options: global endometrial ablation, uterine fibroid embolization, and magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound. Studies published in English-language, peer-reviewed journals were systematically searched using Cochrane and Medline. Keywords used included "alternatives to hysterectomy," "endometrial ablation," "uterine fibroid embolization," "uterine artery embolization," and "focused ultrasound." Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were reviewed and analyzed for themes and similarities. All three alternative methods of treatment reviewed are currently approved for use in the United States and abroad. In fact, five different global endometrial ablation devices are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of menorrhagia. Patient satisfaction scores after endometrial ablation are high (90%-95%), but amenorrhea rates are much lower (15%-60%). Data from randomized trials demonstrate that uterine fibroid embolization results in a shorter hospital stay and quicker return to work as compared with abdominal hysterectomy for leiomyomas, but after embolization, up to 20% of women need a second procedure. Ex-ablative therapy of leiomyomas with focused ultrasound is the newest of the three methods. It has a special set of patient selection criteria and is only available at less than 20 medical centers in the United States. Leiomyoma symptom relief after focused ultrasound therapy at 1 year post-procedure is high (85%-95%). There are many effective alternatives to hysterectomy in women with menorrhagia and/or symptomatic leiomyomas. However, because these procedures are performed by individuals from different subspecialists, primarily gynecologists and interventional radiologists, clinicians must consider using a multidisciplinary approach to find the best procedure for a given patient. There are no randomized trials comparing uterine fibroid embolization to vaginal hysterectomy, laparoscopic hysterectomy, or laparoscopic myomectomy.

Endometrial ablation with the NovaSure system in Iran

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the rate of response to treatment with the NovaSure endometrial ablation device among Iranian women with menorrhagia.

METHODS

Twenty 35-50-year-old women with menorrhagia who were referred to Arash Hospital, Tehran, Iran, in 2008 were enrolled. They underwent endometrial ablation via the NovaSure system and were followed-up for 2 years.

RESULTS

The incidence of amenorrhea was 30.0% at the end of the 2-year follow-up period. Hypomenorrhea was reported by 40.0% of women. The mean number of days of bleeding per month decreased significantly, from 30.0 ± 6.4 days before treatment to 3.1 ± 2.6 days after 2 years (P < 0.001). The severity of bleeding decreased significantly within 2 years after treatment (P < 0.001). In total, 85.0% of women were satisfied and 90.0% had responded to treatment-as defined by amenorrhea, hypomenorrhea, or return to normal menstruation.

CONCLUSION

The NovaSure system is effective and should be considered by gynecologists for the treatment of menorrhagia.

Success rate, quality of life, and descriptive analysis after generalized endometrial ablation in an obese population

OBJECTIVE

To describe the success rate of and the quality of life after global endometrial ablation in an obese population.

METHODS

A follow-up survey was mailed to 72 women who had undergone global endometrial ablation. The survey included a menorrhagia-specific NovaSure endometrial ablation questionnaire. The mean follow-up time was 2.5years.

RESULTS

Forty-four women (61%) responded, with a mean body mass index (BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) of 30.5. Overall, patients reported a decrease in missed social activities, in inability to perform activities of daily living, in missed work days, in bleeding tendencies, and in pain. The amenorrhea rate was 37%, and the success rate (those not requiring any further therapeutic treatment) was 86%. Patient satisfaction was 93%.

CONCLUSION

Global endometrial ablation improved quality of life for obese women with menorrhagia and had a high rate of satisfaction, even for patients not achieving amenorrhea. Patients with a BMI of more than 34 showed a trend toward failure and a higher rate of hysterectomy.

Modified thermal balloon endometrial ablation in low resource settings: a cost-effective method using Foley's catheter

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of a modified Foley's catheter endometrial ablation in the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding in low resource settings.

METHODS

Four hundred and thirty premenopausal women with abnormal uterine bleeding were subjected to thermal balloon endometrial ablation using modified Foley's catheter. The primary outcome measure was patient satisfaction regarding menstrual blood loss. Secondary measures included improvement in quality of life scores and failure rates.

RESULTS

Three hundred and three patients were available for evaluation at 3-year follow up. 270/303 (89.1%) reported their satisfaction as indicated by reduction in days of menstrual flow per cycle (4.2 vs. 8.8 days, p < 0.0001). There was a significant improvement in quality of life scores (p < 0.0001). The rate of failure varies according to the interval of follow up from 15.6% at 6 months to 10.9% at 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Modified Foley's catheter endometrial ablation is a cost effective alternative to other thermal endometrial ablation techniques in the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding in low resource settings.

Endometrial resection / ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Prediction of treatment outcomes after global endometrial ablation

OBJECTIVE

To report rates of amenorrhea and treatment failure after global endometrial ablation and to estimate the association between patient factors and these outcomes by developing and validating prediction models.

METHODS

From January 1998 through December 2005, 816 women underwent global endometrial ablation with either a thermal balloon ablation or radio frequency ablation device; 455 were included in a population-derived cohort (for model development), and 361 were included in a referral-derived cohort (for model validation). Amenorrhea was defined as cessation of bleeding from immediately after ablation through at least 12 months after the procedure. Treatment failure was defined as hysterectomy or reablation for patients with bleeding or pain. Logistic and Cox proportional hazard regression models were used in model development and validation of potential predictors of outcomes.

RESULTS

The amenorrhea rate was 23% (95% confidence interval [CI] 19-28%) and the 5-year cumulative failure rate was 16% (95% CI 10-20%). Predictors of amenorrhea were age 45 years or older (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.6, 95% CI 1.6-4.3); uterine length less than 9 cm (aOR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-3.1); endometrial thickness less than 4 mm (aOR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.3); and use of radio-frequency ablation instead of thermal balloon ablation (aOR 2.8, 95% CI 1.7-4.9). Predictors of treatment failure included age younger than 45 years (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.6, 95% CI 1.3-5.1); parity of 5 or greater (aHR 6.0, 95% CI 2.5-14.8); prior tubal ligation (aHR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.0); and history of dysmenorrhea (aHR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6-8.5). After global endometrial ablation, 23 women (5.1%, 95% CI 3.2-7.5%) had pelvic pain, three (0.7%, 95% CI 0.1-1.9%) were pregnant, and none (95% CI 0-0.8%) had endometrial cancer.

CONCLUSION

Population-derived rates and predictors of treatment outcomes after global endometrial ablation may help physicians offer optimal preprocedural patient counseling.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.