Levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) versus endometrial ablation (Novasure) in women with heavy menstrual bleeding: a multicentre randomised controlled trial
Authors:
- Malou C HermanMHMalou C Herman
- Marian J van Den BrinkMBMarian J van Den Brink
- Peggy M GeominiPGPeggy M Geomini
- Hannah S van MeursHMHannah S van Meurs
- Judith A HuirneJHJudith A Huirne
- Heleen P EisingHEHeleen P Eising
- Anne TimmermansATAnne Timmermans
- Johanna Ma PijnenborgJPJohanna Ma Pijnenborg
- Ellen R KlinkertEKEllen R Klinkert
- Sjors F CoppusSCSjors F Coppus
- Theodoor E NieboerTNTheodoor E Nieboer
- Ruby CatshoekRCRuby Catshoek
Open Access
- 8 August 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Women's Health
- Vol. 13 (1) , 1-5
Abstract
Heavy menstrual bleeding is an important health problem. Two frequently used therapies are the levonorgestrel intra-uterine system (LNG-IUS) and endometrial ablation. The LNG-IUS can be applied easily by the general practitioner, which saves costs, but has considerable failure rates. As an alternative, endometrial ablation is also very effective, but this treatment has to be performed by a gynaecologist. Due to lack of direct comparison of LNG-IUS with endometrial ablation, there is no evidence based preferred advice for the use of one of these treatment possibilities. A multicenter randomised controlled trial, organised in a network infrastructure in the Netherlands in which general practitioners and gynaecologists collaborate. Women ≥ 34 years with heavy menstrual bleeding, a Pictorial Blood Assessment Chart (PBAC) score exceeding 150 points and no future child wish can participate in the trial. After informed consent, women will be randomised to a strategy starting with a levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system or a strategy starting with endometrial ablation. The primary outcome is the PBAC score at 24 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes are patient satisfaction, complications, number of re-interventions, menstrual bleeding pattern, quality of life, sexual function, sick leave and costs. As predictors of effect of intervention we also meaure level of coagulation factors. This study, considering both effectiveness and cost effectiveness of LNG-IUS versus endometrial ablation may well improve care for women with heavy menstrual bleeding. Dutch trial register, number NTR2984Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Five-Year Follow-Up After Comparing Bipolar Endometrial Ablation With Hydrothermablation for MenorrhagiaObstetrics & Gynecology, 2011
- Outcomes following hysterectomy or endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics in ScotlandBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2011
- Bipolar Radiofrequency Compared With Thermal Balloon Endometrial Ablation in the Office: A Randomized Controlled TrialObstetrics & Gynecology, 2011
- Hysterectomy, endometrial ablation, and levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) for treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding: cost effectiveness analysisBMJ, 2011
- Randomised comparative trial of thermal balloon ablation and levonorgestrel intrauterine system in patients with idiopathic menorrhagiaAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2007
- Surgery versus medical therapy for heavy menstrual bleeding2006
- A randomised trial comparing the levonorgestrel intrauterine system and thermal balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleedingBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2006
- Progesterone or progestogen-releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding2005
- Randomised controlled trial of bipolar radio‐frequency endometrial ablation and balloon endometrial ablationBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2004
- Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device versus hysteroscopic endometrial resection in the treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleedingObstetrics & Gynecology, 1997