Department of Obstetrics, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA 90027, USA.
Menopause. 2011 Apr;18(4):445-52. doi: 10.1097/gme.0b013e31820786f1.
Surgical Treatments Outcomes Project for Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding is an agency for the Healthcare Research and Quality project built around a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing hysterectomy and endometrial ablation (EA) for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding unrelated to structural causes. For inclusion, women self-defined their complaint, and the endometrial cavity was evaluated to exclude structural lesions. The primary outcomes were bleeding and major problem "solved" at 24 months, with length of institutional stay, surgical complications, quality of life, and reoperation included as secondary outcomes. Also measured was the baseline economic impact of heavy menstrual bleeding. The randomized controlled trial enrolled 237 women. Institutional stay was longer, and perioperative adverse events were more common and severe for those randomized to hysterectomy. At 24 months, 94.4% and 84.9% of women randomized to hysterectomy and EA, respectively, considered their major problem to be solved; at 48 months, the numbers were similar at 98.0% and 85.1%. Postprocedure quality-of-life measures (SF-36, EuroQOL) improved similarly in both groups, but reoperation was more common for women undergoing EA (34, or 30.9%, at 60 mo), with most (32 of 34) selecting hysterectomy.At baseline, women reported missed work as well as activity and leisure limitations. Excess monetary costs were $306 per patient-year (95% CI, $30-$1,872). Excess work and home management loss costs were $2,152 (95% CI, $1,862-$2,479). It was estimated that successful treatment, regardless of the type of intervention, could result in a gain of 1.8 quality-adjusted life years. Future studies will examine and compare the impact of the study interventions on economic outcomes.
子宫功能失调性出血手术治疗结局项目是医疗保健研究和质量项目的一个机构,该项目围绕一项多中心随机临床试验展开,该试验比较了子宫切除术和子宫内膜消融术(EA)治疗与结构原因无关的重度月经过多。入组标准为女性自我定义其症状,评估子宫内膜腔以排除结构病变。主要结局是 24 个月时的出血和主要问题“解决”,次要结局包括住院时间、手术并发症、生活质量和再次手术。还测量了重度月经过多的基线经济影响。这项随机对照试验共纳入 237 名女性。随机分到子宫切除术组的患者住院时间更长,围手术期不良事件更常见且更严重。24 个月时,分别有 94.4%和 84.9%随机分到子宫切除术和 EA 组的女性认为其主要问题已解决;48 个月时,这两个数字分别为 98.0%和 85.1%。两组患者术后生活质量(SF-36、EuroQOL)测量均有类似改善,但 EA 组再次手术更为常见(60 个月时为 34 例,占 30.9%),其中大多数(32 例)选择了子宫切除术。基线时,女性报告因疾病而缺勤工作以及活动和休闲受限。额外的货币成本为每位患者每年 306 美元(95%CI,30-1872 美元)。额外的工作和家庭管理损失成本为 2152 美元(95%CI,1862-2479 美元)。据估计,无论干预类型如何,成功治疗都可能使质量调整生命年增加 1.8 年。未来的研究将检查和比较研究干预措施对经济结果的影响。