Effect of Endometrial Ablation by Thermal Balloon vs. Hysteroscopy Ablation on Amenorrhea Rates in Patients with Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Shahid Akbarabadi, Clinical Research Development Unit (ShACRDU), School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran

2 School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Endometriosis Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Imam Khomeini Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background: Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) that is any irregularity in menstrual cycles causes women to refer to clinics. This study aimed to compare the efficacy, safety, and complications of endometrial ablation by the thermal balloon (Cavaterm) method with the hysteroscopy loop resection method in the treatment of AUB.
Materials and Methods: The present study is an open-label, randomized clinical trial that was performed in the two hospitals, Shahid Akbarabadi and Hazrat Rasoul Akram, of Tehran, Iran, from December 2019 to October 2020. Patients were randomly allocated to the two groups of interventions by a simple randomization method. The proportion of amenorrhea (as primary outcome) and consequent hysterectomy and patient satisfaction (as secondary outcomes) was assessed using the Chi-square test and independent t test.
Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in the baseline characteristics. The percentage of intervention failure was statistically higher in the hysteroscopy group (24%) in comparison with the Cavaterm group [8.2%, P=0.03, relative risk (RR)=1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.13-2.36]. Mean ± standard deviation of satisfaction based on the Likert score in the Cavaterm group and hysteroscopy group were 4.3 ± 1.21 and 3.7 ± 1.56, respectively, that showed a significant difference (P=0.04). Assessing the procedural complications, the rate of spotting, bloody discharge, and malodor discharge was significantly higher in the Cavaterm group. In contrast, postoperative dysmenorrhea is more common in the hysteroscopy group.
Conclusion: Cavaterm ablation is accompanied by a higher success rate of amenorrhea and patients’ satisfaction than hysteroscopy ablation (registration number: IRCT20220210053986N1).

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Practice bulletin no. 136: management of abnormal uterine bleeding associated with ovulatory dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 122(1): 176-185.
  2. Marnach ML, Laughlin-Tommaso SK. Evaluation and management of abnormal uterine bleeding. Mayo Clin Proc. 2019; 94(2): 326-335.
  3. Wortman M. Endometrial ablation: past, present, and future part I. Surg Technol Int. 2018; 32: 129-138.
  4. Azzam MEEA, Mohamed MEM, Farid LA, Mahmoud AAA, Hussein RA, Rashid A. The use of levonorgestrel-releasing system (metraplant-e) in the treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding. Egypt J Hosp Med. 2018; 72(3): 4078-4084.
  5. Abbott J, Hawe J, Hunter D, Garry R. A double-blind randomized trial comparing the Cavaterm and the NovaSure endometrial ablation systems for the treatment of dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Fertil Steril. 2003; 80(1): 203-208.
  6. Smith PP, Malick S, Clark TJ. Bipolar radiofrequency compared with thermal balloon ablation in the office: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 124(2 Pt 1): 219-225.
  7. Bouzari Z, Yazdani S, Azimi S, Delavar MA. Thermal balloon endometrial ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. Med Arch. 2014; 68(6): 411-413.
  8. Kleijn JH, Engels R, Bourdrez P, Mol BW, Bongers MY. Five-year follow up of a randomised controlled trial comparing NovaSure and ThermaChoice endometrial ablation. BJOG. 2008; 115(2): 193-198.
  9. Karimi-Zarchi M, Fathi M, Tabatabaie A, Shamsi F, Allahqoli L, Zanbagh L, et al. Long-term outcome of endometrial ablation therapy with cavaterm thermal balloon in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2020; 21(1): 1-9.
  10. Penezic L, Riley K, Harkins G. Long-term patient satisfaction with thermal balloon ablation for abnormal uterine bleeding. JSLS. 2014; 18(3): e2014. 00325.
  11. Hokenstad AN, El-Nashar SA, Khan Z, Hopkins MR, Famuyide AO. Endometrial ablation in women with abnormal uterine bleeding related to ovulatory dysfunction: a cohort study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015; 22(7): 1225-1230.
  12. Brun JL, Raynal J, Burlet G, Galand B, Quéreux C, Bernard P. Cavaterm thermal balloon endometrial ablation versus hysteroscopic endometrial resection to treat menorrhagia: the french, multicenter, randomized study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006; 13(5): 424-430.
  13. Bongers MY, Bourdrez P, Mol BW, Heintz AP, Brölmann HA. Randomised controlled trial of bipolar radio-frequency endometrial ablation and balloon endometrial ablation. BJOG. 2004; 111(10): 1095-1102.
  14. Ajao MO, El-Nashar SA, Khan Z, Hopkins MR, Creedon DJ, Famuyide AO. Nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation in high-risk surgical patients: a cohort study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013; 20(4): 487-491.
  15. Famuyide A. Endometrial ablation. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018; 25(2): 299-307.
  16. Lethaby A, Penninx J, Hickey M, Garry R, Marjoribanks J. Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (8): CD001501.
International Journal of Fertility and Sterility
Volume 17, Issue 2
April 2023
Pages 133-139

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics