Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding

M. C. Herman, J. P M Penninx, B. W. Mol, M. Y. Bongers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective Previously, we have reported that, at both 12 months and 5 years after treatment, bipolar endometrial ablation is superior to balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. In this article, we evaluate the results at 10 years after these interventions. Design Ten-year follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial. Setting A teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Population Premenopausal women suffering from heavy menstrual bleeding. Method A follow-up questionnaire was sent to women 10 yearsafter randomisation for bipolar ablation and balloon ablation (2: 1 ratio). Main outcome measures Amenorrhoea rates, re-intervention and patient satisfaction. Results At 10 years of follow-up, the response rate was 69/83 (83%) in the bipolar group and 35/43 (81%) in the balloon group. Amenorrhoea rates were 50/69 (73%) in the bipolar group and 23/35 (66%) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.83-1.5)]. Further treatment following initial ablation was reported in 21 cases, 14 in the bipolar group and nine in the balloon group [relative risk, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.63-1.3)]. Eight of these women required further treatment after 5 years, including two hysterectomies. Patient satisfaction in the bipolar group was 81% (56/69) compared with 77% (27/35) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.82-1.2)]. Conclusion Ten years after treatment, the superiority of bipolarablation over balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding was no longer evident.

LanguageEnglish
Pages966-970
Number of pages5
JournalBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Volume120
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2013

Keywords

  • Ablation
  • follow up
  • heavy menstrual bleeding
  • second-generation ablation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Cite this

@article{9d7c99fdcb1e42e59977ddbd66229ca7,
title = "Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding",
abstract = "Objective Previously, we have reported that, at both 12 months and 5 years after treatment, bipolar endometrial ablation is superior to balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. In this article, we evaluate the results at 10 years after these interventions. Design Ten-year follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial. Setting A teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Population Premenopausal women suffering from heavy menstrual bleeding. Method A follow-up questionnaire was sent to women 10 yearsafter randomisation for bipolar ablation and balloon ablation (2: 1 ratio). Main outcome measures Amenorrhoea rates, re-intervention and patient satisfaction. Results At 10 years of follow-up, the response rate was 69/83 (83{\%}) in the bipolar group and 35/43 (81{\%}) in the balloon group. Amenorrhoea rates were 50/69 (73{\%}) in the bipolar group and 23/35 (66{\%}) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95{\%} CI, 0.83-1.5)]. Further treatment following initial ablation was reported in 21 cases, 14 in the bipolar group and nine in the balloon group [relative risk, 0.9 (95{\%} CI, 0.63-1.3)]. Eight of these women required further treatment after 5 years, including two hysterectomies. Patient satisfaction in the bipolar group was 81{\%} (56/69) compared with 77{\%} (27/35) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95{\%} CI, 0.82-1.2)]. Conclusion Ten years after treatment, the superiority of bipolarablation over balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding was no longer evident.",
keywords = "Ablation, follow up, heavy menstrual bleeding, second-generation ablation",
author = "Herman, {M. C.} and Penninx, {J. P M} and Mol, {B. W.} and Bongers, {M. Y.}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1471-0528.12213",
language = "English",
volume = "120",
pages = "966--970",
journal = "BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology",
issn = "1470-0328",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "8",

}

Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding. / Herman, M. C.; Penninx, J. P M; Mol, B. W.; Bongers, M. Y.

In: BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 120, No. 8, 01.07.2013, p. 966-970.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ten-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar endometrial ablation with balloon ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding

AU - Herman, M. C.

AU - Penninx, J. P M

AU - Mol, B. W.

AU - Bongers, M. Y.

PY - 2013/7/1

Y1 - 2013/7/1

N2 - Objective Previously, we have reported that, at both 12 months and 5 years after treatment, bipolar endometrial ablation is superior to balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. In this article, we evaluate the results at 10 years after these interventions. Design Ten-year follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial. Setting A teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Population Premenopausal women suffering from heavy menstrual bleeding. Method A follow-up questionnaire was sent to women 10 yearsafter randomisation for bipolar ablation and balloon ablation (2: 1 ratio). Main outcome measures Amenorrhoea rates, re-intervention and patient satisfaction. Results At 10 years of follow-up, the response rate was 69/83 (83%) in the bipolar group and 35/43 (81%) in the balloon group. Amenorrhoea rates were 50/69 (73%) in the bipolar group and 23/35 (66%) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.83-1.5)]. Further treatment following initial ablation was reported in 21 cases, 14 in the bipolar group and nine in the balloon group [relative risk, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.63-1.3)]. Eight of these women required further treatment after 5 years, including two hysterectomies. Patient satisfaction in the bipolar group was 81% (56/69) compared with 77% (27/35) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.82-1.2)]. Conclusion Ten years after treatment, the superiority of bipolarablation over balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding was no longer evident.

AB - Objective Previously, we have reported that, at both 12 months and 5 years after treatment, bipolar endometrial ablation is superior to balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding. In this article, we evaluate the results at 10 years after these interventions. Design Ten-year follow-up of a double-blind randomised controlled trial. Setting A teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Population Premenopausal women suffering from heavy menstrual bleeding. Method A follow-up questionnaire was sent to women 10 yearsafter randomisation for bipolar ablation and balloon ablation (2: 1 ratio). Main outcome measures Amenorrhoea rates, re-intervention and patient satisfaction. Results At 10 years of follow-up, the response rate was 69/83 (83%) in the bipolar group and 35/43 (81%) in the balloon group. Amenorrhoea rates were 50/69 (73%) in the bipolar group and 23/35 (66%) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.83-1.5)]. Further treatment following initial ablation was reported in 21 cases, 14 in the bipolar group and nine in the balloon group [relative risk, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.63-1.3)]. Eight of these women required further treatment after 5 years, including two hysterectomies. Patient satisfaction in the bipolar group was 81% (56/69) compared with 77% (27/35) in the balloon group [relative risk, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.82-1.2)]. Conclusion Ten years after treatment, the superiority of bipolarablation over balloon ablation in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding was no longer evident.

KW - Ablation

KW - follow up

KW - heavy menstrual bleeding

KW - second-generation ablation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879217105&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1471-0528.12213

DO - 10.1111/1471-0528.12213

M3 - Article

VL - 120

SP - 966

EP - 970

JO - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

T2 - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

JF - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

SN - 1470-0328

IS - 8

ER -