Women and Infants Hospital, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas; University Medical Group, Greenville Hospital Systems, Greenville, South Carolina; the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas; Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico; and Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Mar;121(3):632-643. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182839e0e.
To compare the effectiveness of nonsurgical abnormal uterine bleeding treatments for bleeding control, quality of life (QOL), pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events.
MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception to May 2012. We included randomized controlled trials of nonsurgical treatments for abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction. Interventions included the levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined oral contraceptive pills (OCPs), progestins, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and antifibrinolytics. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, danazol, and placebo were allowed as comparators.
Two reviewers independently screened 5,848 citations and extracted eligible trials. Studies were assessed for quality and strength of evidence.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Twenty-six articles met inclusion criteria. For reduction of menstrual bleeding in women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (71-95% reduction), combined OCPs (35-69% reduction), extended cycle oral progestins (87% reduction), tranexamic acid (26-54% reduction), and NSAIDs (10-52% reduction) were all effective treatments. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system, combined OCPs, and antifibrinolytics were all superior to luteal-phase progestins (20% increase in bleeding to 67% reduction). The levonorgestrel intrauterine system was superior to combined OCPs and NSAIDs. Antifibrinolytics were superior to NSAIDs for menstrual bleeding reduction. Data were limited on other important outcomes such as QOL for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction and for all outcomes for women with abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction.
For the reduction in mean blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding presumed secondary to abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to endometrial dysfunction, we recommend the use of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system over OCPs, luteal-phase progestins, and NSAIDs. For other outcomes (QOL, pain, sexual health, patient satisfaction, additional treatments needed, and adverse events) and for treatment of abnormal uterine bleeding presumed secondary to ovulatory dysfunction, we were unable to make recommendations based on the limited available data.
比较非手术性异常子宫出血治疗方法在控制出血、生活质量(QOL)、疼痛、性健康、患者满意度、所需额外治疗和不良反应方面的疗效。
从建库到 2012 年 5 月,检索 MEDLINE、Cochrane 数据库和 Clinicaltrials.gov。我们纳入了推测由子宫内膜功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血和推测由排卵功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血的非手术治疗的随机对照试验。干预措施包括左炔诺孕酮宫内节育系统、复方口服避孕药(OCP)、孕激素、非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)和抗纤维蛋白溶解药。促性腺激素释放激素激动剂、达那唑和安慰剂可作为对照。
两名评审员独立筛选了 5848 条引文并提取了合格的试验。评估了研究的质量和证据强度。
列表、综合和结果:26 篇文章符合纳入标准。对于推测由子宫内膜功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血患者减少月经出血,左炔诺孕酮宫内节育系统(减少 71-95%)、复方 OCP(减少 35-69%)、延长周期口服孕激素(减少 87%)、氨甲环酸(减少 26-54%)和 NSAIDs(减少 10-52%)均为有效治疗方法。左炔诺孕酮宫内节育系统、复方 OCP 和抗纤维蛋白溶解药均优于黄体期孕激素(出血增加 20%,减少 67%)。左炔诺孕酮宫内节育系统优于复方 OCP 和 NSAIDs。抗纤维蛋白溶解药优于 NSAIDs 减少月经出血。对于推测由子宫内膜功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血患者的生活质量等其他重要结局以及推测由排卵功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血患者的所有结局,数据均有限。
对于推测由子宫内膜功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血导致的月经过多患者,我们建议使用左炔诺孕酮宫内节育系统而非 OCP、黄体期孕激素和 NSAIDs。对于其他结局(QOL、疼痛、性健康、患者满意度、所需额外治疗和不良反应)和推测由排卵功能障碍引起的异常子宫出血的治疗,我们无法根据有限的现有数据提出建议。