A 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system vs bipolar radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation in women with heavy menstrual bleeding: long-term follow-up of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The symptom of heavy menstrual bleeding has a substantial impact on professional, physical, and social functioning. In 2021, results from a randomized controlled trial comparing a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation as treatments for women with heavy menstrual bleeding were published. Both treatment strategies were equally effective in treating heavy menstrual bleeding during 2-year follow-up. However, long-term results are also relevant for both patients and healthcare providers. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess long-term differences in reintervention risk and menstrual blood loss in women with the symptom of heavy menstrual bleeding treated according to a strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a long-term follow-up study of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (MIRA trial), in which women were allocated to either a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (n=132) or radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation (n=138). Women from the original trial were contacted to fill out 6 questionnaires. The primary outcome was the reintervention rate after allocated treatment. Secondary outcomes included surgical reintervention rate, menstrual bleeding measured by the Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart, (disease-specific) quality of life, sexual function, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: From the 270 women who were randomized in the original trial, 196 (52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group: n=94; radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation group: n=102) participated in this long-term follow-up study. Mean follow-up duration was 7.4 years (range, 6-9 years). The cumulative reintervention rate (including both medical and surgical reinterventions) was 40.0% (34/85) in the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group and 28.7% (27/94) in the radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation group (relative risk, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-2.10). The cumulative rate of surgical reinterventions only was significantly higher among patients with a treatment strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system compared with radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation (35.3% [30/85] vs 19.1% [18/94]; relative risk, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-3.10). However, the hysterectomy rate was similar (11.8% [10/94] in the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group and 18.1% [17/102] in the radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation group; relative risk, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-1.34). Most reinterventions occurred during the first 24 months of follow-up. A total of 171 Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart scores showed a median bleeding score of 0.0. No clinically relevant differences were found regarding quality of life, sexual function, and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: The overall risk of reintervention after long-term follow-up was not different between women treated according to a treatment strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and those treated using a strategy starting with radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation. However, women allocated to a treatment strategy starting with a 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system had a higher risk of surgical reintervention, which was driven by an increase in subsequent endometrial ablation. Both treatment strategies were effective in lowering menstrual blood loss over the long term. The results of this long-term follow-up study can support physicians in optimizing the counseling of women with heavy menstrual bleeding, thus promoting informed decision-making regarding choice of treatment.

Patient preferences for disposable and reusable vaginal specula and their willingness to compromise in the era of climate change: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient satisfaction on gynaecological examination with metal, plastic and biobased plastic vaginal specula, and to investigate whether patients are willing to compromise on comfort for a more sustainable healthcare system. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study: population-based survey. SETTING: Gynaecological outpatient clinics in five Dutch hospitals. POPULATION: Patients during general gynaecology consultation hours. METHODS: A survey containing two questions about patient demographics, four about comfort and five about sustainability and healthcare was distributed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comfort score (scale 1-10). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (1) temperature, size and ease of insertion, (2) willingness to compromise for a more sustainable healthcare system. RESULTS: In all, 196 patients completed the survey. Biobased plastic vaginal specula scored significantly higher on comfort than the metal ones (mean 8.03 ± 1.65 versus 7.26 ± 1.51 respectively; P < 0.001). The biobased plastic vaginal speculum is significantly the most comfortable on temperature, whereas the metal speculum is the least comfortable (P < 0.007). Most patients are willing to compromise on comfort or are open to the reuse of disposables to contribute to a more sustainable healthcare. The majority of patients (77%) urge healthcare organisations to combat climate change. CONCLUSIONS: There is a small but statistically significant difference in favour of a biobased plastic speculum regarding comfort score, although it might be questioned whether this is clinically relevant. Furthermore, patients are willing to compromise on comfort for a more sustainable healthcare, which should be a contributing factor in speculum selection.

Central Sensitisation Syndrome: A Frequent Finding in Women with Pelvic Floor Symptoms Without Evident Urogenital Prolapse.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Women with central sensitisation syndrome (CSS) experience poorer subjective post-operative outcomes even after successful pelvic floor reconstruction. This study tests the hypothesis that women with pelvic floor symptoms (PFS) without relevant pelvic organ prolapse (POP), are more likely to have CSS. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to women who participated in the POP-UP study in 2017. The POP-UP study evaluated POP in 247 women 16 years after laparoscopic or vaginal hysterectomy. POP-Q data and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) results were used and supplemented with CSS-specific questionnaires. A Central Sensitisation Inventory (CSI) score above 40 implicates CSS. Women were divided into groups based on POP beyond the hymen in relation to the PFDI-20 score. Outcomes of women with PFS and without POP (called 'group 1') were compared with the rest of the cohort (groups 2-4; women without PFS and/or with POP). RESULTS: A total of 136 women were included in the analysis. A CSI score above 40 was present in 16 out of 42 women of group 1 (37%) versus 11 out of 93 women of groups 2-4 (12%), p < 0.0001. Passive coping was more prevalent in group 1 (p = 0.039), and more deviations in somatisation, depression, anxiety and distress were found in group 1 (p values of < 0.0001, 0.018, 0.003 and 0.002 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that CSS might be more prevalent in women with PFS without relevant POP. More awareness of CSS and valid individual counselling may overcome unnecessary surgery for POP and help in setting realistic expectations.

Regional practice variation in hysterectomy and the implementation of less invasive surgical procedures: A register-based study in the Netherlands.

INTRODUCTION: Many women experience bleeding disorders that may have an anatomical or unexplained origin. Although hysterectomy is the most definitive and common treatment, it is highly invasive and resource-intensive. Less invasive therapies are therefore advised before hysterectomy for women with fibroids or bleeding disorders. This study has two aims related to treating bleeding disorders and uterine fibroids in the Netherlands: (1) to evaluate the regional variations in prevalence and surgical approaches; and (2) to assess the associations between regional rates of hysterectomies and less invasive surgical techniques to analyze whether hysterectomy can be replaced in routine practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We completed a register-based study of claims data for bleeding disorders and fibroids in women between 2016 and 2020 using data from Statistics Netherlands for case-mix adjustment. Crude and case-mix adjusted regional hysterectomy rates were examined overall and by surgical approach. Coefficients of variation were used to measure regional variation and regression analyses were used to evaluate the association between hysterectomy and less invasive procedure rates across regions. RESULTS: Overall, 14 186 and 8821 hysterectomies were performed for bleeding disorders and fibroids, respectively. Laparoscopic approaches predominated (bleeding disorders 65%, fibroids 49%), followed by vaginal (bleeding disorders 24%, fibroids 5%) and abdominal (bleeding disorders 11%, fibroids 46%) approaches. Substantial regional differences were noted in both hysterectomy rates and the surgical approaches. For bleeding disorders, regional hysterectomy rates were positively associated with endometrial ablation rates (ß = 0.11; P = 0.21) and therapeutic hysteroscopy rates (ß = 0.14; P = 0.31). For fibroids, regional hysterectomy rates were positively associated with therapeutic hysteroscopy rates (ß = 0.10; P = 0.34) and negatively associated with both embolization rates (ß = -0.08; P = 0.08) and myomectomy rates (ß = -0.03; P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Regional variation exists in the rates of hysterectomy and minimally invasive techniques. The absence of a significant substitution effect provides no clear evidence that minimally invasive techniques have replaced hysterectomy in clinical practice. However, although the result was not significant, embolization could be an exception based on its stronger negative association.

Procedural sedation and analgesia versus general anesthesia for hysteroscopic myomectomy (PROSECCO trial): A multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hysteroscopic resection is the first-choice treatment for symptomatic type 0 and 1 fibroids. Traditionally, this was performed under general anesthesia. Over the last decade, surgical procedures are increasingly being performed in an outpatient setting under procedural sedation and analgesia. However, studies evaluating safety and effectiveness of hysteroscopic myomectomy under procedural sedation are lacking. This study aims to investigate whether hysteroscopic myomectomy under procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol is noninferior to hysteroscopic myomectomy under general anesthesia. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a multicenter, randomized controlled noninferiority trial conducted in 14 university and teaching hospitals in the Netherlands between 2016 and 2021. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, maximum number of 3 type 0 or 1 fibroids, maximum fibroid diameter 3.5 cm, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 1 or 2, and having sufficient knowledge of the Dutch or English language. Women with clotting disorders or with severe anemia (Hb < 5.0 mmol/L) were excluded. Women were randomized using block randomization with variable block sizes of 2, 4, and 6, between hysteroscopic myomectomy under procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) with propofol or under general anesthesia (GA). Primary outcome was the percentage of complete resections, assessed on transvaginal ultrasonography 6 weeks postoperatively by a sonographer blinded for the treatment arm and surgical outcome. Secondary outcomes were the surgeon's judgment of completeness of procedure, menstrual blood loss, uterine fibroid related and general quality of life, pain, recovery, hospitalization, complications, and surgical reinterventions. Follow-up period was 1 year. The risk difference between both treatment arms was estimated, and a Farrington-Manning test was used to determine the p-value for noninferiority (noninferiority margin 7.5% of incomplete resections). Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle, including a per-protocol analysis for the primary outcome. A total of 209 women participated in the study and underwent hysteroscopic myomectomy with PSA (n = 106) or GA (n = 103). Mean age was 45.1 [SD 6.4] years in the PSA group versus 45.0 [7.7] years in the GA group. For 98/106 women in the PSA group and 89/103 women in the GA group, data were available for analysis of the primary outcome. Hysteroscopic resection was complete in 86/98 women (87.8%) in the PSA group and 79/89 women (88.8%) in the GA group (risk difference -1.01%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.36 to 8.34; noninferiority, P = 0.09). No serious anesthesiologic complications occurred, and conversion from PSA to GA was not required. During the follow-up period, 15 serious adverse events occurred (overnight admissions). All were unrelated to the intervention studied. Main limitations were the choice of primary outcome and the fact that our study proved to be underpowered. CONCLUSIONS: Noninferiority of PSA for completeness of resection was not shown, though there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes and quality of life. In this study, hysteroscopic myomectomy for type 0 and 1 fibroids with PSA compared to GA was safe and led to shorter hospitalization. These results can be used for counseling patients by gynecologists and anesthesiologists. Based on these findings, we suggest that hysteroscopic myomectomies can be performed under PSA in an outpatient setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered prospectively in the Dutch Trial Register (NTR 5357; registration date: 11 August 2015; Date of initial participant enrollment: 18 February 2016).

The ISTH-BAT score and outcomes after endometrial ablation in women with heavy menstrual bleeding.

BACKGROUND: The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis bleeding assessment tool (ISTH-BAT), is used during the diagnostic workup of bleeding disorders. Data on ISTH-BAT scores in women with heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) undergoing endometrial ablation (EA) could be essential in optimizing HMB counselling. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the postsurgical incidence of amenorrhea, dysmenorrhea, quality of life, re-intervention after EA, and ISTH-BAT score. METHODS: This study included women who have undergone EA because of HMB. During a follow-up of 2 to 5 years, ISTH-BAT, pictorial blood assessment chart (PBAC), and Short Form-36 survey (SF-36) were administered. At 10 years of follow-up surgical re-interventions were evaluated. RESULTS: Seventy-one women were included of whom 77% (n = 55) had an ISTH-BAT score < 6, versus 23% (n = 16) ISTH-BAT score ≥6 (mean age 46.3 versus 42.3, p = 0.004). In the ISTH-BAT ≥6 group versus < 6 group, amenorrhea occurred in 63% (10/16) versus 82% (45/55) (p = 0.111), dysmenorrhea in 38% (6/16) versus 18% (10/55) (p = 0.111), and surgical re-intervention in 19% (3/16) versus 25% (14/55) (p = 0.582). SF-36 item (Bodily) pain was lower in the ISTH-BAT ≥6 group versus < 6 (median score 58.7 vs. 80.0, p = 0.104). CONCLUSIONS: An ISTH-BAT score ≥6 may be related to a lower amenorrhea incidence and higher dysmenorrhea rate after EA.

The effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (LUSLS) is a technique to correct apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) by shortening the uterosacral ligaments with sutures. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review with meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of LUSLS as treatment for apical POP. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed and Cochrane search using 'pelvic organ prolapse', 'laparoscopy' and 'uterosacral', including synonyms. SELECTION CRITERIA: All articles in English presenting outcome of an original series of women with LUSLS as treatment of apical POP. Case reports were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study enrollment was performed by two reviewers. Our primary outcome measures were objective and subjective effectiveness of the procedure. Secondary outcome measures regarded complications and recurrence. Bias was assessed with the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. MAIN RESULTS: Of 138 hits, 13 studies were included with 933 LUSLS patients. The average follow-up was 22 months. All were nonrandomised cohort studies. The pooled anatomic success rate is 90% for all LUSLS procedures (95% confidence interval [CI] 83.3-95.5). LUSLS with hysterectomy resulted in an anatomic success rate of 96.6% (95% CI 87.5-100) and LUSLS with uterus preservation 83.4% (95% CI 67.7-94.6). The pooled subjective cure rate was 90.5% (95% CI 81.9-96.5). The rate of major complications was 1%. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic uterosacral ligament suspension (with or without uterus preservation) seems to be an effective and safe treatment for women with apical POP, but long-term prospective trials and randomised controlled trials are necessary to confirm these findings.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus vaginal sacrospinous fixation for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomised controlled trial and prospective cohort (SALTO-2 trial).

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) or vaginal sacrospinous fixation (VSF) is the most optimal surgical treatment in patients with POP-Q stage ≥2 vaginal vault prolapse (VVP). DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) and prospective cohort study alongside. SETTING: Seven non-university teaching hospitals and two university hospitals in the Netherlands. POPULATION: Patients with symptomatic post-hysterectomy vaginal vault prolapse, requiring surgical treatment. METHODS: Randomisation in a 1:1 ratio to LSC or VSF. Evaluation of prolapse was done using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q). All participants were asked to fill in various Dutch validated questionnaires 12 months postoperatively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life. Secondary outcomes included composite outcome of success and anatomical failure. Furthermore, we examined peri-operative data, complications and sexual function. RESULTS: A total of 179 women, 64 women randomised and 115 women, participated in a prospective cohort. Disease-specific quality of life did not differ after 12 months between the LSC and VSF group in the RCT and the cohort (RCT: P = 0.887; cohort: P = 0.704). The composite outcomes of success for the apical compartment, in the RCT and cohort, were 89.3% and 90.3% in the LSC group and 86.2% and 87.8% in the VSF group, respectively (RCT: P = 0.810; cohort: P = 0.905). There were no differences in number of reinterventions and complications between both groups (reinterventions RCT: P = 0.934; cohort: P = 0.120; complications RCT: P = 0.395; cohort: P = 0.129). CONCLUSIONS: LSC and VSF are both effective treatments for vaginal vault prolapse, after a follow-up period of 12 months.

Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy as treatment for uterine descent: comparison of long-term outcomes.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a frequent occurring health issue, especially concerning elderly women. The objective of this study is to examine the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy (LSH) and vaginal sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSHP) for treatment of uterine prolapse. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent a LSH or SSHP. Validated questionnaires and an outpatient examination visit were used to investigate the effects of both surgical treatments. The primary outcome was the composite outcome of success for the apical compartment, defined as no recurrence of uterine prolapse (POP-Q measurement C ≤ 0), no subjective recurrence of POP, and/or not requiring therapy for recurrent prolapse. Secondary outcomes were peri- and postoperative data, anatomical failure, prolapse beyond hymen, subjective outcomes, and disease-specific quality of life. RESULTS: We included 105 patients, 53 in the LSH group and 52 in the SSHP group. The overall response rate of the questionnaires was 83% (n = 87) after a mean follow-up time of 4.5 years (54.2 months; 95% CI 44.8-64.2 months) in the LSH group and 2.5 years (30.1 months; 95% CI 29.3-31.5 months) in the SSHP group. There were no clinically relevant differences between the study groups in composite outcome of success (p = 0.073), anatomical failure of the apical compartment (p = 0.711), vaginal bulge symptoms for which patients consulted professionals (p = 0.126), and patient satisfaction (p = 0.741). The operative time was longer in the LSH group (117 min; interquartile range (IQR) 110-123) compared to the SSHP group (67 minutes; IQR 60-73) (p < 0.001). The duration of hospital stay was also longer in the LSH group (4 days) than in the SSHP group (3 days) (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: LSH and SSHP seem to be equally effective after long-term follow-up in treating uterine prolapse in terms of objective and subjective recurrence.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy for vaginal vault prolapse: long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective of this study was to evaluate long-term outcomes of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) versus abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) for vaginal vault prolapse (VVP). METHODS: Long-term follow-up of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (SALTO trial). A total of 74 women were randomly assigned to LSC (n=37) or ASC (n=37). Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life, measured with validated questionnaires. Secondary outcomes included anatomical outcome, composite outcome of success, complications, and retreatment. RESULTS: We analyzed 22 patients in the LSC group and 19 patients in the ASC group for long-term follow-up, with a median follow-up of 109 months (9.1 years). Disease-specific quality of life did not differ after long-term follow-up with median scores of 0.0 (LSC: IQR 0-17; ASC: IQR 0-0) on the "genital prolapse" domain of the Urogenital Distress Inventory in both groups (p = 0.175). Anatomical outcomes were the same for both groups on all points of the POP-Q. The composite outcome of success for the apical compartment is 78.6% (n = 11) in the LSC group and 84.6% (n = 11) in the ASC group (p = 0.686). Mesh exposures occurred in 2 patients (12.5%) in the LSC group and 1 patient (7.7%) in the ASC group. There were 5 surgical reinterventions in both groups (LSC: 22.7%; ASC: 26.3%, p = 0.729). CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up no substantial differences in quality of life, anatomical results, complications, or reinterventions between LSC and ASC were observed. Therefore, the laparoscopic approach is preferable, considering the short-term advantages. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR6330, 18 January 2017, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5964.

The effects of Saline Infusion Sonography on the histological quality of endometrial sampling in women with postmenopausal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to analyze the histopathological features of endometrial samples obtained by aspiration when performed before or after the saline contrast sonohysterography in women with postmenopausal bleeding and a thickened endometrium. Hypothetically, the saline infusion could disrupt the tissue and therefore affect the quality of the sample. Furthermore, we want to determine which histological features have impact on the quality of the endometrial sample. METHODS: We performed a randomized controlled trial (ESPRESSO trial) in which we analyzed the aspiration samples in two groups. Women were allocated either to saline contrast sonohysterography and subsequent endometrial sampling (SCSH-Sampling group) or to the opposite order (Sampling-SCSH group). Dedicated gyneco-pathologists retrospectively assessed the specimens and recorded the type (blood, mucus, epithelium, intact glands, stroma and tissue context) and quantity (on a scale of 0-3) of material that was found in the specimens. RESULTS: This analysis consisted of 197 samples, with 101 women in the SCSH-Sampling group and 96 women in the Sampling-SCSH group. No significant differences were found in the histological features between the two groups. All significant histological features differed significantly in the sufficient samples compared to the insufficient samples: higher amounts of blood, more endometrial epithelium, presence of intact endometrial glands, better stroma and tissue context. Oppositely, a significantly higher amount of mucus was found in the insufficient samples. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the histological features of the endometrial sample were not affected by the saline contrast sonohysterography, when performed prior to the tissue sampling. Trial registration ESPRESSO TRIAL, NTR5690, registered 16 February 2016, https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NTR5690 .

Long-term pelvic floor symptoms and urogenital prolapse after hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe the natural course of pelvic floor symptoms and pelvic floor anatomy for women long-term after hysterectomy. METHODS: Women who underwent hysterectomy between 1996-2004 carried out the PFDI-20 questionnaire and POP-Q examination. We collected data on the presence and type of pelvic floor symptoms and its relation to the degree of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) per compartment (≥ stage 2). RESULTS: We obtained data from 247 women on average sixteen years after hysterectomy, with no prolapse (n = 94), anterior prolapse (n = 76), posterior prolapse (n = 38), both anterior- and posterior prolapse (n = 20), and a prolapse involving the vaginal vault (n = 19). Of all 153 women with ≥ stage 2 prolapse, 80 (52%) experienced moderate and/or severe symptoms of the PFDI-20. Most frequently reported symptoms by women with POP were uncontrollable flatus, urinary frequency and urge incontinence. Bulging was associated with a prolapse beyond the hymen. 39% Of women without prolapse experienced bothersome pelvic floor symptoms as well. Most often these were stress incontinence, straining to pass stool and incomplete bowel emptying. Women with a history of hysterectomy for prolapse have more pelvic floor symptoms than women who underwent hysterectomy for other indications, regardless of the current presence of POP (57% versus 40%, p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: In a group of post-hysterectomy women who did not actively seek help, 47% experienced problematic pelvic floor symptoms, independent of the presence or absence of an anatomic POP. Creating more knowledge and awareness of the impact of hysterectomy on the pelvic floor can help women in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in the Dutch Trial Registry; Trial NL5967 (NTR6333, 2017-02-01) and approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee of the Máxima Medical Center (NL60096.015.16, 2017-02-24).

Recurrence and survival after laparoscopy versus laparotomy without lymphadenectomy in early-stage endometrial cancer: Long-term outcomes of a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hysterectomy is accepted worldwide as the standard treatment option for early-stage endometrial cancer. However, there are limited data on long-term survival, particularly when no lymphadenectomy is performed. We compared the survival outcomes of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and total abdominal hysterectomy (TAH), both without lymphadenectomy, for early-stage endometrial cancer up to 5 years postoperatively. METHODS: Follow-up of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial comparing TLH and TAH, without routine lymphadenectomy, for women with stage I endometrial cancer. Enrolment was between 2007 and 2009 by 2:1 randomisation to TLH or TAH. Outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and primary site of recurrence. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were adjusted for age, stage, grade, and radiotherapy with adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) reported. To test for significance, non-inferiority margins were defined. RESULTS: In total, 279 women underwent a surgical procedure, of whom 263 (94%) had follow-up data. For the TLH (n = 175) and TAH (n = 88) groups, DFS (90.3% vs 84.1%; aHR[recurrence], 0.69; 95%CI, 0.31-1.52), OS (89.2% vs 82.8%; aHR[death], 0.60; 95%CI, 0.30-1.19), and DSS (95.0% vs 89.8%; aHR[death], 0.62; 95%CI, 0.23-1.70) were reported at 5 years. At a 10% significance level, and with a non-inferiority margin of 0.20, the null hypothesis of inferiority was rejected for all three outcomes. There were no port-site or wound metastases, and local recurrence rates were comparable. CONCLUSION: Disease recurrence and 5-year survival rates were comparable between the TLH and TAH groups and comparable to studies with lymphadenectomy, supporting the widespread use of TLH without lymphadenectomy as the primary treatment for early-stage, low-grade endometrial cancer.

Endometrial cancer after endometrial ablation: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether a previously performed endometrial ablation is associated with the development and diagnosis of endometrial cancer. METHODS: First, a systematic review was performed of the articles reporting the incidence of endometrial cancer in patients treated with endometrial ablation. Second, a systematic review was performed to identify all individual cases of endometrial cancer after ablation to evaluate presenting symptoms, diagnostic work-up, potential risk factors, and the type and stage of the endometrial cancer. A systematic search was performed, using Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases, from inception through February 24, 2022. RESULTS: Based on 11 included studies, the incidence of endometrial cancer in a population of 29 102 patients with a prior endometrial ablation ranged from 0.0% to 1.6%.A total of 38 cases of endometrial cancer after ablation were identified. In 71% of cases (17 of 24 cases), vaginal bleeding was the first presenting symptom. With transvaginal ultrasound it was possible to identify and measure the endometrial thickness in eight cases. Endometrium sampling was successful in 16 of 18 described cases (89%). In 18 of 20 cases (90%) pathologic examination showed early-stage endometrioid adenocarcinoma (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage I). CONCLUSION: Previous endometrial ablation is not associated with the development of endometrial cancer. Diagnostic work-up is not impeded by previous endometrial ablation. In addition, endometrial cancers after endometrial ablation are not detected at an advanced stage.

Endometrial ablation plus levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system versus endometrial ablation alone in women with heavy menstrual bleeding: study protocol of a multicentre randomised controlled trial; MIRA2 trial.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that between 12 to 25% of women who undergo an endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) are dissatisfied after two years because of recurrent menstrual bleeding and/or cyclical pelvic pain, with around 15% of these women ultimately having a hysterectomy. The insertion of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) immediately after endometrial ablation may inactivate residual untreated endometrium and/or inhibit the regeneration of endometrial tissue. Furthermore, the LNG-IUS may prevent agglutination of the uterine walls preventing intrauterine adhesion formation associated with endometrial ablation. In these ways, insertion of an LNG-IUS immediately after endometrial ablation might prevent subsequent hysterectomies because of persisting uterine bleeding and cyclical pelvic pain or pain that arises de novo. Hence, we evaluate if the combination of endometrial ablation and an LNG-IUS is superior to endometrial ablation alone in terms of reducing subsequent rates of hysterectomy at two years following the initial ablative procedure. METHODS/DESIGN: We perform a multicentre randomised controlled trial in 35 hospitals in the Netherlands. Women with heavy menstrual bleeding, who opt for treatment with endometrial ablation and without contraindication for an LNG-IUS are eligible. After informed consent, participants are randomly allocated to either endometrial ablation plus LNG-IUS or endometrial ablation alone. The primary outcome is the hysterectomy rate at 24 months following endometrial ablation. Secondary outcomes include women's satisfaction, reinterventions, complications, side effects, menstrual bleeding patterns, quality of life, societal costs. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will help clinicians inform women with HMB who opt for treatment with endometrial ablation about whether concomitant use of the LNG-IUS is beneficial for reducing the need for hysterectomy due to ongoing bleeding and/or pain symptoms. Trial registration Dutch Trial registration: NL7817. Registered 20 June 2019, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7817 .

Predictive factors of return to work after hysterectomy: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Although hysterectomy is one of the most frequently performed gynaecological surgeries, there is a dearth of evidence on perioperative care. The aim of the current study was to identify sociodemographic, surgical-related and work-related predictors of recovery following different approaches of hysterectomy. METHODS: Eligible patients for this retrospective cohort study were women who underwent vaginal, abdominal or laparoscopic hysterectomy for both benign and malignant gynaecological disease in 2014 in Máxima Medical Centre in the Netherlands. The main outcome measure was full return to work (RTW). Data were collected using a patient survey. Potential prognostic factors for time to RTW were examined in univariate Cox regression analyses. The strongest prognostic factors were combined in a multivariable model. RESULTS: In total 83 women were included. Median time to full return to work was 8 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] 6-12). The multivariable analysis showed that higher age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.053, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.012-1.095) and same day removal of indwelling catheter (HR 0.122, 95% CI 0.028-0.539) were predictors of shorter duration until full RTW after hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided insight in the predictors of recovery after hysterectomy. By identifying patient specific factors, pre-operative counselling can be individualized, changes can be made in perioperative care and effective interventions can be designed to target those factors.

Transferrin Saturation/Hepcidin Ratio Discriminates TMPRSS6-Related Iron Refractory Iron Deficiency Anemia from Patients with Multi-Causal Iron Deficiency Anemia.

Pathogenic TMPRSS6 variants impairing matriptase-2 function result in inappropriately high hepcidin levels relative to body iron status, leading to iron refractory iron deficiency anemia (IRIDA). As diagnosing IRIDA can be challenging due to its genotypical and phenotypical heterogeneity, we assessed the transferrin saturation (TSAT)/hepcidin ratio to distinguish IRIDA from multi-causal iron deficiency anemia (IDA). We included 20 IRIDA patients from a registry for rare inherited iron disorders and then enrolled 39 controls with IDA due to other causes. Plasma hepcidin-25 levels were measured by standardized isotope dilution mass spectrometry. IDA controls had not received iron therapy in the last 3 months and C-reactive protein levels were <10.0 mg/L. IRIDA patients had significantly lower TSAT/hepcidin ratios compared to IDA controls, median 0.6%/nM (interquartile range, IQR, 0.4-1.1%/nM) and 16.7%/nM (IQR, 12.0-24.0%/nM), respectively. The area under the curve for the TSAT/hepcidin ratio was 1.000 with 100% sensitivity and specificity (95% confidence intervals 84-100% and 91-100%, respectively) at an optimal cut-off point of 5.6%/nM. The TSAT/hepcidin ratio shows excellent performance in discriminating IRIDA from TMPRSS6-unrelated IDA early in the diagnostic work-up of IDA provided that recent iron therapy and moderate-to-severe inflammation are absent. These observations warrant further exploration in a broader IDA population.

What is the fertility-enhancing effect of tubal flushing? A hypothesis article.

Hysterosalpingographies (HSGs) have formed an essential part of the fertility workup for more than a century. More recently, tubal flushing, especially with oil-based contrast, has been shown to significantly improve the natural conception rates. Critically, the mechanism of this fertility-enhancing effect during tubal flushing is still unclear. This article postulates hypotheses, based on published and own research, on the potential mechanisms and root cause of tubal flushing fertility enhancement. Possible explanations for the increased fertility rates, especially with oil-based contrast, are divided into the biochemical and interfacial effects derived from the contrast properties. The biochemical effects may include the immunological response of the endometrium or peritoneum, the impact on the endometrial opioid receptors or the iodine content. The interfacial effects may include improvement of interfacial factors due to the lubricant effect or dislodgement of mucus debris within the Fallopian tubes. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Tubal flushing during hysterosalpingographies (HSGs) increases natural conception rates, and using oil-based over water-based contrast increases that effect even further. However, the underlying mechanism of the observed fertility-enhancing effect is still poorly understood.What do the results of this study add? This article postulates different hypotheses on the potential mechanisms and root cause of the fertility enhancement from tubal flushing.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? We suggest additional research on the different hypotheses, intending to determine which subfertile women will benefit most from tubal flushing using oil-based contrast and at which stage of their subfertility. Furthermore, we suggest research on administering tubal flushing with oil-based contrast, besides in HSG.

Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Heavy menstrual bleeding affects the physical functioning and social well-being of many women. The levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and endometrial ablation are 2 frequently applied treatments in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system with endometrial ablation in women with heavy menstrual bleeding. STUDY DESIGN: This multicenter, randomized controlled, noninferiority trial was performed in 26 hospitals and in a network of general practices in the Netherlands. Women with heavy menstrual bleeding, aged 34 years and older, without a pregnancy wish or intracavitary pathology were randomly allocated to treatment with either the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) or endometrial ablation, performed with a bipolar radiofrequency device (NovaSure). The primary outcome was blood loss at 24 months, measured with a Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart score. Secondary outcomes included reintervention rates, patient satisfaction, quality of life, and sexual function. RESULTS: We registered 645 women as eligible, of whom 270 women provided informed consent. Of these, 132 women were allocated to the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (baseline Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart score, 616) and 138 women to endometrial ablation (baseline Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart score, 630). At 24 months, mean Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart scores were 64.8 in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group and 14.2 in the endometrial ablation group (difference, 50.5 points; 95% confidence interval, 4.3-96.7; noninferiority, P=.87 [25 Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart point margin]). Compared with 14 women (10%) in the endometrial ablation group, 34 women (27%) underwent a surgical reintervention in the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system group (relative risk, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-4.68). There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction and quality of life between the groups. CONCLUSION: Both the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system and endometrial ablation strategies lead to a large decrease in menstrual blood loss in women with heavy menstrual bleeding, with comparable quality of life scores after treatment. Nevertheless, there was a significant difference in menstrual blood loss in favor of endometrial ablation, and we could not demonstrate noninferiority of starting with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Women who start with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system, a reversible and less invasive treatment, are at an increased risk of needing additional treatment compared with women who start with endometrial ablation. The results of this study will enable physicians to provide women with heavy menstrual bleeding with the evidence to make a well-informed decision between the 2 treatments.

Pelvic organ prolapse after laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with vaginal hysterectomy: the POP-UP study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to review the long-term prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) after laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH) compared with vaginal hysterectomy (VH). METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted amongst women who underwent an LH or a VH for benign indications during the period 1996-2004: the POP-UP study. The prevalence of POP was inventoried by a questionnaire involving the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and a pelvic floor examination (POP-Q). Women were divided into groups based on route and indication of hysterectomy: LH, VH-1 (for nonprolapse), and VH-2 (prolapse). RESULTS: Four hundred and six of the 706 eligible patients (58%) returned the questionnaire and 247 underwent POP-Q examination. Sixty-eight patients (17%) received treatment for prolapse; 8% LH, 10% VH-1, and 29% VH-2 (Chi-squared test, p < 0.001). The prevalence of vaginal vault prolapse (apical surgery or ≥ stage 2 at POP-Q) was 4.4% for LH and 5.8% for VH-1 (p = 0.707); and 23% for VH-2 (VH-2 versus others, p < 0.0001). The prevalence of prolapse ≥ stage 2 in any compartment was 62% (n = 153) in total and in 42% of the LH group, 51% of the VH-1 group, and 84% of the VH-2 group (Chi-squared test, p < 0.001). A symptomatic POP (anatomical POP ≥ stage 2 with bulging) was present in 11% of the population. CONCLUSIONS: No difference was found in the prevalence of POP between LH and VH for nonprolapse indications. However, POP after VH for prolapse occurs more frequently than after hysterectomy for other indications.