Evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation combined with different drugs in the treatment of adenomyosis.

OBJECTIVES: To observe the therapeutic efficacy of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) combined with different pharmacological treatments for adenomyosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 126 patients with adenomyosis who underwent HIFU combined with pharmacological treatment were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were treated with either dienogest (DNG) (Group A, N = 38) or GnRH-a (Group B, N = 88) for three months after HIFU, and received levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUS) at the end of the third month. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pictorial Blood Loss Assessment Chart (PBAC) scores were used for evaluating symptom improvement. RESULTS: After propensity score matching (1:2), 38 patients were included in Group A and 76 in Group B. All patients showed significant improvement in VAS and PBAC scores after HIFU, but the PBAC score of Group A was significantly higher than that of patients in Group B at 18 months [11.50 (1.00, 29.50) vs. 0.00 (0.00, 16.50), p < 0.01] and 24 months [4.00 (0.25, 27.75) vs. 0.00 (0.00, 12.75), p = 0.04] after HIFU. Furthermore, patients in Group B had a greater uterine volume reduction at 24 months after HIFU than that of patients in Group A [51.00 (27.00, 62.00) vs. 30.00 (17.00, 42.75, p = 0.02)]. However, the adverse effects in Group A were lower than those in Group B [7 (15.79) vs. 35 (46.05), p < 0.01]. No significant difference was observed in the recurrence rate between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: HIFU combined with DNG and LNG-IUS is a safe and effective treatment for patients with adenomyosis.

Preventing recurrence of endometriosis-related pain by means of long-acting progestogen therapy: the PRE-EMPT RCT.

Background: Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women, many of whom have surgery for persistent pain. Recurrence of symptoms following an operation is common. Although hormonal treatment can reduce this risk, there is uncertainty about the best option. Objectives: To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of long-acting progestogen therapy compared with the combined oral contraceptive pill in preventing recurrence of endometriosis-related pain and quality of life. Design: A multicentre, open, randomised trial with parallel economic evaluation. The final design was informed by a pilot study, qualitative exploration of women's lived experience of endometriosis and a pretrial economic model. Setting: Thirty-four United Kingdom hospitals. Participants: Women of reproductive age undergoing conservative surgery for endometriosis. Interventions: Long-acting progestogen reversible contraceptive (either 150 mg depot medroxyprogesterone acetate or 52 mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system) or combined oral contraceptive pill (30 µg ethinylestradiol, 150 µg levonorgestrel). Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the pain domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile-30 questionnaire at 36 months post randomisation. The economic evaluation estimated the cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained. Results: Four hundred and five women were randomised to receive either long-acting reversible contraceptive (N = 205) or combined oral contraceptive pill (N = 200). Pain scores improved in both groups (24 and 23 points on average) compared with preoperative values but there was no difference between the two (adjusted mean difference: -0.8, 95% confidence interval -5.7 to 4.2; p = 0.76). The long-acting reversible contraceptive group underwent fewer surgical procedures or second-line treatments compared with the combined oral contraceptive group (73 vs. 97; hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.00). The mean adjusted quality-adjusted life-year difference between two arms was 0.043 (95% confidence interval -0.069 to 0.152) in favour of the combined oral contraceptive pill, although this cost an additional £533 (95% confidence interval 52 to 983) per woman. Limitations: Limitations include the absence of a no-treatment group and the fact that many women changed treatments over the 3 years of follow-up. Use of telephone follow-up to collect primary outcome data in those who failed to return questionnaires resulted in missing data for secondary outcomes. The COVID pandemic may have affected rates of further surgical treatment. Conclusions: At 36 months, women allocated to either intervention had comparable levels of pain, with both groups showing around a 40% improvement from presurgical levels. Although the combined oral contraceptive was cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the difference between the two was marginal and lower rates of repeat surgery might make long-acting reversible contraceptives preferable to some women. Future work: Future research needs to focus on evaluating newer hormonal preparations, a more holistic approach to symptom suppression and identification of biomarkers to diagnose endometriosis and its recurrence. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN97865475. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN97865475. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 11/114/01) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 55. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. The NIHR recognises that people have diverse gender identities, and in this report, the word 'woman' is used to describe patients or individuals whose sex assigned at birth was female, whether they identify as female, male or non-binary.

Endometriosis is a condition where cells similar to ones that line the womb are found elsewhere in the body. Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women, many of whom have surgery for persistent pain. Unfortunately, symptoms often return and some women will need repeat operations. Hormonal contraceptives can prevent the return of endometriosis-related pain: either long-acting reversible contraceptives (injections or a coil, fitted inside the womb) or the combined oral contraceptive pill (often called 'the pill'). We do not know which is the best option. The aim of this trial was to find out which of these two hormone treatments was more effective in terms of symptom relief, avoidance of further surgery and costs. Four hundred and five women with endometriosis, who were not intending to get pregnant, participated in a clinical trial. Half of the participants took long-acting reversible contraceptives, and the other half took the pill for 3 years following endometriosis surgery. The choice of treatment was made at random by a computer to ensure a fair comparison, although those allocated to the long-acting contraceptive could choose between injections or the coil. Participants completed questionnaires about their symptoms and life quality at intervals up to 3 years. Both treatments were equally good at reducing pain but more women using the pill had repeat operations. The pill was a little more costly overall but associated with a slightly higher quality of life. Both treatments are equally effective in reducing pain up to 3 years after surgery for endometriosis. The differences in costs are small and the choice of treatment should be based on personal preference.

GnRH-a-based fertility-sparing treatment of atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) and early endometrial carcinoma (EC) patients: a multicenter, open-label, randomized designed clinical trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Around 4% of women receive an endometrial cancer diagnosis before turning 40, mainly those without prior childbirth experience and a strong desire to preserve their ability to conceive. Consequently, for young patients diagnosed with atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) or early endometrial carcinoma (EC), a fertility-preserving approach employing high-dose oral progesterone has been adopted. However, previous research has shown a notable relapse rate. Furthermore, the extended use of substantial oral progesterone doses may hinder ovarian function and raise the risk of weight gain, liver issues, blood clotting, and breast cancer. We previously assessed the clinical effectiveness and pregnancy outcomes of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) based re-treatment for women with EC and AEH who did not respond to oral progestin therapy but achieved favorable treatment results and reproductive outcomes. METHODS: This study will be an open-label, two-armed, randomized, investigator-initiated multicenter trial evaluating the combination of GnRH-a with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system or the combination of GnRH-a with an aromatase inhibitor (comprising a subcutaneous GnRH-a injection every 4 weeks and daily oral letrozole 2.5 mg). A total of 226 participants will be randomly allocated to one of the two treatment groups in a 1:1 ratio. The primary objective is to determine the effectiveness of GnRH-a-based re-treatment in achieving a complete response (CR) at 24 weeks for patients with AEH or EC. Secondary objectives include assessing the pregnancy rate 12 weeks after treatment, as well as post-treatment pregnancy outcomes and the rate of recurrence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Peking Union Medical College Hospital and from boards at five other institutions. The trial will adhere to the principles outlined in the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki and follow Good Clinical Practice standards. The trial results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective evidence supporting conservative treatment for EC and AEH is limited. There is a need for new approaches that can achieve higher CR rates with fewer side effects. This trial will assess the effectiveness of GnRH-a-based fertility-sparing treatment in obese women and recurrent patients, offering a promising alternative for patients with EC and AEH. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200067099. Registered on December 27, 2022.

Levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus dienogest effect on quality of life of women with deep endometriosis: a randomized open-label clinical trial.

Women with deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) can benefit from the use of progestins. Our aim is to explore if levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) non inferior to dienogest (DNG) in improving deep endometriosis women's quality of life (QoL). This randomized open-label clinical trial included forty women with DIE assessed using clinical history and physical examination, transvaginal ultrasonography and magnetic resonance of the pelvis without any previous surgical treatment, with two treatments arms. The two groups underwent a 3-month washout of hormonal treatments, and then received either DNG or LNG-IUS for 6 months. QoL was assessed prior to and 6 months after the intervention, using the SF36 and the EHP30. DNG and LNG-IUS showed an increase on all domains of the SF36 (p < .001). There was no difference between treatments on the improvement observed (p > .05 for all domains). DNG and LNG-IUS, also, showed improvement on all domains of EHP30 (p < .001), except "relationship with children" and "feelings about pregnancy." However, there was no statistical difference between treatments for all sections scores (p > .05). The treatment of deep endometriosis symptoms using either DNG or LNG-IUS in women with no prior surgical treatment is associated with improvement in QoL.Trial Registration Number: This trial is registered on "The Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBECID: RBR-8fjx2jp)," that is part of Primary Registries in the WHO Registry Network, under the title: "Dienogest versus Levonorgestrel IUS on deep endometriosis patient´s QoL without surgery" on June 14, 2021; https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-8fjx2jp.

A multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing megestrol acetate to levonorgestrel-intrauterine system in fertility sparing treatment of atypical endometrial hyperplasia.

PURPOSE: The objective of the trial was to compare the regression rate of atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) in patients treated with megestrol acetate (MA) vs. levonorgestrel-intrauterine device (LNG-IUS). We also aimed to assess the fertility and pregnancy outcomes in these patients. METHODS: The study was a phase II multi-centre randomised controlled trial on the use of MA compared to LNG-IUS in the treatment of AEH conducted from January 2020 to January 2024 in Singapore. Women who were diagnosed with AEH and between 21 and 40 years old were included. The patients were randomised to receive either MA (160 mg orally daily) or LNG-IUS. The primary outcomes assessed were the regression rates at 3 months, 6 months and 9 months of treatment. The secondary outcomes assessed were the side effects, patient acceptability and fertility outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients completed the trial. The overall regression rate was 88.9% by 9 months. There was no statistically significant difference in the 9-month complete regression rate between MA vs. LNG-IUS. There was also no significant difference in side effects and weight change between both arms. Nineteen patients were actively pursuing fertility after complete regression. There were 8 pregnancies achieved, with resultant 4 live births and 4 miscarriages. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms a high regression rate of AH with medical treatment. LNG-IUS is a non-inferior treatment compared to megestrol acetate. Successful pregnancy outcomes can be achieved after regression of AEH. Long-term studies of sufficient sample-size are needed to assess for fertility and pregnancy outcomes, risk of recurrence and long-term risk of malignancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study was registered with the Health Science Authority (HSA) (License No.: CTA1900087) on September 5, 2019: https://eservice.hsa.gov.sg/prism/ct_r/enquiry.do?action=loadSpecificDetail . The trial was registered retrospectively on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT05492487) on April 7, 2022: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05492487 .

Comparison of the effectiveness of levonorgestrel intrauterine system and dienogest in the management of adenomyosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adenomyosis is a gynaecological lesion that impairs female fertility and contributes to reduced quality of life. There are several surgical and medical options for the management of this lesion; however, women who wish to conceive opt for medical therapies such as the levonorgestrel intrauterine device (LNG-IUS) and dienogest, which have various outcomes. To date, there is no consensus regarding which is more effective. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of LNG-IUS and dienogest for the management of adenomyosis, and explore the risk of occurrence of known side effects for both treatments. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the effectiveness of LNG-IUS and dienogest for the management of adenomyosis. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PICO guidelines and EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science databases. Only clinical trials were collected and analysed. RESULTS: Of the 792 studies that were initially identified, six were eligible for inclusion in this study. The studies included a total of 707 women; of these, 270 were treated with LNG-IUS, 354 were treated with dienogest, and 83 were controls. All the studies were from Asia (Bangladesh n = 1, China n = 2, India n = 1, Japan n = 1, South Korea n = 1). Dienogest was found to reduce pelvic pain significantly, evidenced by a lower visual analogue scale score, compared with LNG-IUS. Also, dienogest led to a significant reduction in uterine volume compared with LNG-IUS. However, subjects in the LNG-IUS group had significantly higher levels of haemoglobin than those in the dienogest group. Nonetheless, the occurrence of side effects such as weight gain, breast tenderness/distension, headache, insomnia/sleep disorder, depression/mood disorder, skin disorder/acne, and coital discomfort/reduced libido were comparable in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Dienogest may be more effective than LNG-IUS for the management of adenomyosis, as it shows a superior effect in the reduction of pelvic pain and uterine volume. As only six studies were included in the present meta-analysis due to the paucity of data in the literature, it is recommended that well-designed randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of dienogest with LNG-IUS should be conducted.

Comparative effects of different treatments based on the levonorgestrel intrauterine system in endometrial carcinoma and endometrial hyperplasia patients: a network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) has been widely used in patients with endometrial carcinoma (EC), endometrial hyperplasia without atypical (EH), and atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH). The purpose of our Network meta-analysis (NMA) is to evaluate the efficacy of the treatments based on the LNG-IUS in patients with EC and EH with or without atypical. METHODS: We examined PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 22 April 2024 to determine studies reporting treatment outcomes in EC and EH patients receiving LNG-IUS therapy, LNG-IUS + metformin (MET), oral progestins (OP), etc. We used EndNote 9 to select studies, Jadad scale and NOS scale to assess quality, stata(16.0) and R (4.3.1) to analysis the data. RESULTS: Overall, 28 studies involving 3752 patients were included in our NMA. As for EH patients, LNG-IUS (RR 1.21; 95% CrI [1.11, 1.34]) and LNG-IUS + MET (RR 323.57; 95% CrI [1.61, 214,223,188.1])] significantly increased CR rate in comparison with OP. Based on SUCRA, LNG-IUS + OP was the best treatment to improve CR(SUCRA = 67.2%) in patients with EC, whereas LNG-IUS + MET was superior in increasing CR (SUCRA = 99.8%) than any other treatments for EH patients. Besides, the ranking based on SUCRA illustrated that LNG-IUS alone was the best choice to raise CR rates (SUCRA = 76.7%) for AEH patients. In head-to-head meta-analysis, OP has a higher progression rate (RR 4, 95% CI 1.89-8.46, p = 0.062; I2 = 71.3%), a higher nausea rate (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.24-3.01, p = 0.187; I2 = 40.4%) than LNG-IUS in patients with EH. In contrast, LNG-IUS had a irregular vaginal bleeding rates (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.90, p = 0.034; I2 = 77.7%) than OP in EH patients. In addition, as for AEH patients, OP has a higher persistence rate (RR 4.31, 95% CI 1.43-13.00, p = 0.93; I2 = 0.0%) than LNG-IUS. CONCLUSION: According to the NMA, LNG-IUS related studies are feasible for conservative therapy in patients with EC and EH with or without atypical. Therefore, concerning the curative effect, we recommend LNG-IUS-based treatments as the best conservative therapy for EC and EH patients. However, future studies require large sample sizes and more outcomes to further evaluate the differences of treatment selections based on LNG-IUS.

The personal experience of female obstetricians and gynaecologists with contraceptive use influences the guidance and prescription of contraceptive methods: a web-survey.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of the personal experience of female obstetricians and gynaecologists (Obst/Gyns) who utilise contraceptive methods on the provision of these methods. METHODS: An anonymous online web-based survey was carried out with female Obst/Gyns. The instrument contained questions about their current and previous contraceptive methods use, factors that influenced the choice and satisfaction with the ongoing method, as well as the occurrence of adverse events. They were also asked whether the experience of any adverse events influenced their decision in prescribing any particular contraceptive method. RESULTS: 476/9000 (5.3%) female Obst/Gyns answered the survey. The most common contraceptive in use was the 52-mg levonorgestrel-intrauterine device (52-mg LNG-IUD) (34%), followed by non-Long-Acting Reversible Contraception hormonal methods (21.2%). More than half of the respondents (57.6%) reported having some adverse effects and 18.7% reported that the personal experience of an adverse effect with the use of a contraceptive method influenced the prescription of that method. CONCLUSION: Half of female Obst/Gyns encountered adverse events linked to contraceptive usage. Additionally, almost one-fifth believe that their own encounter with adverse effects from a contraceptive method impacts their decision to prescribe the same method.

Almost one-fifth of the female obstetrics and gynaecologists that answered the online survey reported that the personal experience of an adverse effect with the use of a contraceptive method influenced the prescription of that method.

Chinese guidelines on the management of endometrial hyperplasia.

• Endometrial hyperplasia can be classified as either hyperplasia without atypia or atypical hyperplasia. • Abnormal uterine bleeding is the most common symptom of endometrial hyperplasia. Transvaginal ultrasound is recommended for initial imaging to evaluate endometrial hyperplasia (evidence level 2+), while transrectal ultrasound is recommended for virgo patients (evidence level 3). • Endometrial biopsy should be used to confirm diagnosis in patients where endometrial lesions are suspected. Effective histological approaches to make definite diagnoses include diagnostic curettage (evidence level 2++), hysteroscopic-guided biopsy (evidence level 2+) and endometrial aspiration biopsy (evidence level 2-). • Progesterone is the preferred medication for the treatment of endometrial hyperplasia without atypia. Compared to oral progestins, placement of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) has been associated with higher regression rates, lower recurrence rates and fewer adverse events which can be the initial treatment method. (Meta evidence level 1-, RCT evidence level 2+). Ultrasound and endometrial biopsies should be performed every 6 months during treatment to evaluate its effect and treatment should continue until no pathological changes are observed in two consecutive endometrial biopsies. Hysterectomy is not the preferred choice of treatment for patients with endometrial hyperplasia without atypia. • Minimally invasive hysterectomy is indicated for patients with endometrial atypical hyperplasia (evidence level 1+), bilateral fallopian tubes should also be removed (evidence level 2+). In cases where surgery cannot be tolerated, fertility is desired or the patient is younger than 45 years old, medical therapy is recommended (evidence level 3). LNG-IUS is the preferred medical therapy method (evidence level 2+). Endometrial pathologic evaluation should be performed every 3 months during conservative treatments, with adjustments made to dosages or approaches based on observed response to medication. Treatment should continue until no pathological changes are detected in two consecutive endometrial biopsies (evidence level 2++). There is no indication of sentinel lymph nodes biopsy and/or lymphadenectomy for hyperplasia with or without atypia. • Total hysterectomy is recommended to treat patients with recurrent endometrial atypical hyperplasia (evidence level 3); however, medical conservative therapy may be considered for patients hoping to become pregnant in the future. • Patients with fully regressed disease who would like to become pregnant should be advised to seek assistance through assisted reproductive technologies (evidence level 3). • Long-term follow-up is suggested for patients after endometrial hyperplasia treatment (evidence level 2+). Patient education is imperative for improving medication adherence, increasing regression rates and lowering recurrence rates (evidence level 3).

Long acting progestogens versus combined oral contraceptive pill for preventing recurrence of endometriosis related pain: the PRE-EMPT pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of long acting progestogens compared with the combined oral contraceptive pill in preventing recurrence of endometriosis related pain. DESIGN: The PRE-EMPT (preventing recurrence of endometriosis) pragmatic, parallel group, open label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 34 UK hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 405 women of reproductive age undergoing conservative surgery for endometriosis. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised in a 1:1 ratio using a secure internet facility to a long acting progestogen (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate or levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system) or the combined oral contraceptive pill. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was pain measured three years after randomisation using the pain domain of the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP-30) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes (evaluated at six months, one, two, and three years) included the four core and six modular domains of the EHP-30, and treatment failure (further therapeutic surgery or second line medical treatment). RESULTS: 405 women were randomised to receive a long acting progestogen (n=205) or combined oral contraceptive pill (n=200). At three years, there was no difference in pain scores between the groups (adjusted mean difference -0.8, 95% confidence interval -5.7 to 4.2, P=0.76), which had improved by around 40% in both groups compared with preoperative values (an average of 24 and 23 points for long acting progestogen and combined oral contraceptive pill groups, respectively). Most of the other domains of the EHP-30 also showed improvement at all time points compared with preoperative scores, without evidence of any differences between groups. Women randomised to a long acting progestogen underwent fewer surgical procedures or second line treatments compared with those randomised to the combined oral contraceptive pill group (73 v 97; hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative prescription of a long acting progestogen or the combined oral contraceptive pill results in similar levels of improvement in endometriosis related pain at three years, with both groups showing around a 40% improvement compared with preoperative levels. While women can be reassured that both options are effective, the reduced risk of repeat surgery for endometriosis and hysterectomy might make long acting reversible progestogens preferable for some. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN97865475.

Medical Management of Endometriosis in Adolescent and Young Adult Women: A Review of 91 Cases of Biopsy-Confirmed Endometriosis.

OBJECTIVES: To characterise contemporary trends in the hormonal management of endometriosis in adolescent and young adult patients with biopsy-proven endometriosis. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of women aged 14-25 years who underwent laparoscopy for pelvic pain with biopsy-proven endometriosis between January 2011 and September 2020 at an academic tertiary hospital system. The final sample included 91 patients with biopsy-confirmed endometriosis. RESULTS: Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) were the most common initial treatment (64% of patients). Progestin-only formulations (low- and high-dose norethindrone acetate) were offered to younger patients (age 15.9 ± 2.7 years) than those offered COCs (19.9 ± 3.3 years) and levonorgestrel intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs) (21.9 ± 1.7 years). Current treatments varied widely and included COCs (32%), LNG-IUDs (18%), oral progestins (low- and high-dose norethindrone, medroxyprogesterone) (14%), elagolix (9%), and leuprolide (8%). Oral adjuncts to LNG-IUD were common: usually low- or high-dose norethindrone (37% of patients with an LNG-IUD), but also included progesterone, COCs, and elagolix. CONCLUSIONS: Oral progestins, LNG-IUDs, and COCs were the mainstay of initial treatment. Subsequent treatments varied widely and included COCs, LNG-IUDs, oral progestins, elagolix, leuprolide, and combinations of these agents. We observed that most young women switched between therapies, suggesting that a personalised approach is often used to determine treatment plans among the wide range of options currently available. This study helps define the spectrum of treatment regimens for endometriosis in adolescent females.

Etonogestrel-releasing subdermal contraceptive implant: Budget impact analysis based on the Brazilian private healthcare system.

High rates of unplanned pregnancies persist despite pharmacological developments and advancements in contraceptive methods. Here, we demonstrate that the etonogestrel-releasing subdermal contraceptive implant (IMP-ETN) may be an appropriate and cost-effective alternative to levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUSs) for women in Brazil. For our pharmacoeconomic analysis, we reviewed the literature on IMP-ETN regarding its acceptance, eligibility criteria, choice, relations with age, adverse events and, finally, the unmet need in the fee-for-service private healthcare sector. We considered qualitative observations in combination with quantitative analysis and performed a deterministic sensitivity analysis to investigate whether this technology can be self-sustainable over a period of five years. The target population for this analysis comprised 158,696 women. Compared with the continued use of LNG-IUSs, adopting the IMP-ETN can result in a cost avoidance of $ 7.640.804,02 in the first year and $ 82,455,254.43 in five years. Disseminating information among physicians will promote this change and strengthen the potential cost avoided by private health system payers. These savings can be used to improve other healthcare programs and strategies. Moreover, the principles of care can be promoted by improving and adapting healthcare systems and expanding treatment and follow-up strategies. This would also provide support to women's reproductive rights and improve their quality of life. Our results suggest that the IMP-ETN has a favorable cost-effectiveness profile. Given all its advantages and negative incremental cost impact over a period of five years, the IMP-ETN may be a more favorable alternative to LNG-IUSs. Therefore, it should be offered to beneficiaries with a private healthcare plan. This analysis overcomes previous barriers to the use of cost-benefit models, and our results may help balance decision-making by policymakers, technical consultants, and researchers.

Assessing ovarian stimulation with letrozole and levonorgestrel intrauterine system after combined fertility-sparing approach for atypical endometrial lesions: a retrospective case-control study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is ovarian stimulation with levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in situ and co-treatment with letrozole safe and effective in patients undergoing fertility-sparing combined treatment for atypical endometrial hyperplasia (AEH) or early endometrial cancer limited to the endometrium? DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study recruiting women who had undergone fertility-sparing 'combined' treatment and ovarian stimulation with letrozole and LNG-IUS in situ. The 'three steps' hysteroscopic technique was used. Once complete response was achieved, the ovaries were stimulated, and mature oocytes cryopreserved. The LNG-IUS was removed, and embryos transferred. A comparative analysis was conducted between the two control groups of the initial outcomes of ART (number of oocytes and MII oocytes retrieved): healthy infertile women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI (control group A); and patients diagnosed with breast cancer who underwent ovarian stimulation with letrozole (control group B). RESULTS: Of the 75 patients analysed, 15 underwent oocyte cryopreservation after achieving a complete response to fertility-sparing treatment (study group); 30 patients in control group A and B, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in retrieved oocytes and mature oocytes between the study and control groups. In the nine patients who underwent embryo transfer, clinical pregnancy (55.6%), cumulative live birth (44.4%) and miscarriage (20%) rates were reported. In three patients with AEH, recurrence occurred (12%) at 3, 6 and 16 months after removing the LNG-IUS to attempt embryo transfer, respectively. CONCLUSION: Fertility-sparing hysteroscopic combined treatment and subsequent ovarian stimulation with letrozole and LNG-IUS in situ could be suggested to women with AEH or early endometrial cancer who ask for future fertility preservation.

Do COX-inhibitors improve emergency contraception efficacy?

Overview of: Li RHW, Lo SST, Gemzell-Danielsson K, et al. Oral emergency contraception with levonorgestrel plus piroxicam: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial [correction appears in Lancet 2023;402:850]. Lancet 2023;402:851-8.

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.

Laparoscopic adenomyomectomy combined with levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system is effective for long-term management of adenomyosis.

BACKGROUD: Laparoscopic adenomyomectomy combined with intraoperative placement of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUS) is a novel conservative surgical procedure for adenomyosis. Our study aimed to compare the efficacy of surgery with or without intraoperative placement of LNG-IUS treatment in adenomyosis. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of adenomyosis patients who received laparoscopic adenomyomectomy from January 2014 to April 2020, finally including 70 patients undergoing surgery-LNG-IUS as group A and 69 patients undegoing surgery only as group B. Risk factors for three-year relapse were analyzed using Cox's multivariate proportional hazard analysis. RESULTS: Visual analog scale and Mansfield-Voda-Jorgensen Menstrual Bleeding Scale scores of group A at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months were significantly lower than those of group B at the corresponding points (P < .001 for both scales). Individuals in both groups showed statistically significant symptom relief. The recurrence rate in group A was significantly lower than that in group B at 36 months after the surgery (2.94% vs. 32.84%, P < .001). A cox proportional hazard model showed that relapse was significantly associated with coexisting ovarian endometriosis (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-7.02, P = .015). Patients who received surgery-LNG-IUS had a lower risk of recurrence than those with surgery-alone (aHR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.016-0.31, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Conservative surgery with intraoperative placement of LNG-IUS is effective and well-accepted for long-term therapy with a lower recurrence rate for adenomyosis. Coexistent ovarian endometriosis is a major factor for adenomyosis relapse.

Feasibility and Effectiveness of Hysteroscopic Suture Fixation of the Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System in the Treatment of Adenomyosis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of hysteroscopic suture fixation of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) for the treatment of adenomyosis. DESIGN: A retrospective case series. SETTING: Two teaching hospitals with the technology of hysteroscopic suture fixation of the LNG-IUS. PATIENTS: The study reviewed 79 adenomyosis patients who received the hysteroscopic suture fixation of the LNG-IUS from January 2021 to May 2022. INTERVENTION: Hysteroscopic suture fixation of the LNG-IUS to the posterior uterine wall with nondissolvable suture. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All patients underwent one-year postoperative follow-up to evaluate the LNG-IUS expulsion rate, postoperative efficacy, and side effects. Two patients (2.6%) experienced expulsion of the LNG-IUS at 8 months and 12 months postoperatively, respectively. The visual analog pain scale, pictorial blood loss assessment chart score and carbohydrate antigen 125 markedly decreased after the suture fixation of the LNG-IUS compared with baseline in all patients (p <.001). Hemoglobin increased significantly (p <.001). The most common side effect was irregular bleeding, which accounted for 44.3%. The second common side effect was weight gain, which accounted for 29.2%. The composite effectiveness based on pain and bleeding showed that the effective treatment rates at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery were 92.4%, 97.4%, 96.2%, and 97.4% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Hysteroscopic suture fixation of the LNG-IUS to the uterine fundus was associated with low expulsion rates and significantly improved dysmenorrhea and bleeding.

Retail demand for emergency contraception in United States following New Year holiday: time series study.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the increase in sales of emergency contraception following the New Year's Eve/New Year's Day holiday. DESIGN: Time series analysis using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model. SETTING: Traditional (that is, "bricks and mortar") retail outlets-grocery stores, drug stores, mass merchandisers, club stores, dollar stores, and military outlets-in the United States from 2016 to 2022. DATA SOURCE: Marketing data on weekly aggregated sales of items classified as emergency contraception gathered between 2016 and 2022 (n=362). On the basis of dates, weeks were classified as following the New Year holiday (n=6) or not (n=356). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Weekly sales of levonorgestrel emergency contraception per 1000 women of reproductive age in the US population. RESULTS: Sales of levonorgestrel emergency contraception significantly increased after the New Year holiday (0.63 (95% confidence interval 0.58 to 0.69) unit increase per 1000 women aged 15-44). Holidays that share some aspects of the elevated risks of unprotected sexual intercourse with the New Year holiday (Valentine's Day, St Patrick's Day, US Independence Day) were associated with increased sales, albeit to a lesser degree, with respective sales increases per 1000 women aged 15-44 of 0.31 (0.25 to 0.38), 0.14 (0.06 to 0.23), and 0.20 (0.11 to 0.29). Holidays without these expectations (Easter, Mother's Day, Father's Day) were not significantly associated with sales of levonorgestrel emergency contraception. CONCLUSIONS: Increased sales of emergency contraception following the New Year's holiday suggest that this period is associated with increased risks of unprotected vaginal intercourse compared with other holidays. Targeting behavioral risks, prevention strategies to mitigate sexual violence, and improving access to contraception around holidays may limit the risks associated with unprotected vaginal intercourse.

Oral hormonal therapy as treatment option for abnormal uterine bleeding.

BACKGROUND: abnormal uterine bleeding is a very frequent reason for referral to gynaecologists and can deeply influence the quality of life. Once organic causes requiring surgical treatment are ruled out, clinicians should be able to manage these patients conservatively in the most effective way. MATERIALS AND METHODS: a search in PubMed/MEDLINE database was conducted in order to find relevant and recent meaningful sources for this narrative review. RESULTS: LNG-IUS 52 mg is the first-line treatment for non-organic causes. Nevertheless, it could be contraindicated or declined by the patient. Combined oral contraceptives (COC) and progestin-only pills inhibit the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis, preventing ovulation, and induce endometrial atrophy. Consequently, they are effective in treating AUB. Moreover, brand new pills containing a combination of oestrogens, progestins and GnRH antagonists are now available for the management of AUB related to uterine fibroids. CONCLUSIONS: In daily clinical practice, oral hormonal therapies are convenient and reversible tools to manage AUB when LNG-IUS 52 mg is contraindicated or turn down by the patient. Many oral hormonal therapies are prescribed to treat AUB, but only a few have been approved with this specific indication, therefore further large well-designed studies are necessary in order to compare the efficacy of different pills for treating AUB.

Even though LNG-IUS 52 mg is the first-line treatment for abnormal uterine bleeding, oral hormonal therapies should be effectively managed by gynaecologists in case of contraindications or patient's decline. Contraceptive pills are practical, but further studies are necessary to compare their efficacy and to approve them with the specific AUB indication.