Birmingham Women's Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Aug;124(2 Pt 1):219-225. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000395.
To estimate the effectiveness of office-based bipolar radiofrequency ablation compared with thermal balloon ablation of the endometrium for the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding at 5-year follow-up.
A single blind randomized controlled trial was conducted in an office hysteroscopy clinic in a university teaching hospital. A total of 81 women were randomly allocated to either bipolar radiofrequency ablation or thermal balloon ablation in an office setting avoiding use of general anesthesia or conscious sedation. The primary outcome for the trial was amenorrhea at 6 months follow-up. In this planned secondary analysis, the main outcome measures were amenorrhea rates, patient satisfaction, health-related quality of life, and incidence of further uterine surgery at 5-year follow-up.
At 5-year follow-up, 59 (73%) women responded to postal questionnaires. Amenorrhea was reported in 60% of thermal balloon ablation and 62% of bipolar radiofrequency ablation (odds ratio [OR] 1.09 [0.38-3.11]) and satisfaction with treatment outcome in 96% of thermal balloon ablation and 96% of bipolar radiofrequency ablation (OR 0.92 [0.05-25.59]). Further surgical intervention was needed in three of 29 (10%) women treated with bipolar radiofrequency ablation compared with four of 30 (13%) of women treated with thermal balloon ablation (P=.7). There was no significant difference in either condition-specific or generic health-related quality-of-life measures.
There was no difference in the effectiveness of bipolar radiofrequency ablation and thermal balloon ablation performed in an office setting at 5-year follow-up.
ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01124357.
I.
在 5 年随访时,评估门诊使用双极射频消融与热球子宫内膜消融治疗月经过多的效果。
在一所大学教学医院的门诊宫腔镜诊室进行了一项单盲随机对照试验。共有 81 名女性随机分配到门诊的双极射频消融或热球消融组,避免使用全身麻醉或镇静。试验的主要结局是 6 个月随访时闭经。在此计划的二次分析中,主要结局指标是闭经率、患者满意度、健康相关生活质量和 5 年随访时进一步子宫手术的发生率。
在 5 年随访时,59 名(73%)女性回复了邮寄问卷。热球消融组 60%和双极射频消融组 62%报告闭经(比值比[OR]1.09[0.38-3.11]),热球消融组 96%和双极射频消融组 96%对治疗结果满意(OR 0.92[0.05-25.59])。与热球消融组 30 名女性中的 4 名(13%)相比,双极射频消融组 29 名女性中有 3 名(10%)需要进一步手术干预(P=.7)。在特定于疾病和通用的健康相关生活质量测量方面,没有显著差异。
在 5 年随访时,门诊使用双极射频消融与热球消融治疗的效果没有差异。
ClinicalTrials.gov,www.clinicaltrials.gov,NCT01124357。
I。