Dataset Information

Naproxen or estradiol for bleeding and spotting with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether oral naproxen or transdermal estradiol decreases bleeding and spotting in women who are initiating the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system.

Study design

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of naproxen, estradiol, or placebo that was administered over the first 12 weeks of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system use. Participants completed a written bleeding diary. We imputed missing values and performed an intention-to-treat analysis.

Results

There were 129 women who were assigned randomly to naproxen (n = 42 women), estradiol (n = 44 women), or placebo (n = 43 women). The naproxen group was more likely to be in the lowest quartile of bleeding and spotting days compared with placebo (42.9% vs 16.3%; P = .03). In the multivariable analysis, the naproxen group had a 10% reduction in bleeding and spotting days (adjusted relative risk, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.97) compared with placebo. More frequent bleeding and spotting was observed in the estradiol group (adjusted relative risk, 1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-1.34).

Conclusion

The administration of naproxen resulted in a reduction in bleeding and spotting days compared with placebo.

SUBMITTER: Madden T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3268863 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Naproxen or estradiol for bleeding and spotting with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system: a randomized controlled trial.

Madden Tessa T Proehl Sarah S Allsworth Jenifer E JE Secura Gina M GM Peipert Jeffrey F JF

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 20110924 2

<h4>Objective</h4>The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether oral naproxen or transdermal estradiol decreases bleeding and spotting in women who are initiating the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system.<h4>Study design</h4>We conducted a randomized controlled trial of naproxen, estradiol, or placebo that was administered over the first 12 weeks of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system use. Participants completed a written bleeding diary. We imputed missing values and perform ...[more]

PMID: 22055339

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHeavy menstrual bleeding affects one in four women and negatively impacts quality of life. Ulipristal acetate is prescribed to treat symptoms associated with uterine fibroids. We compared the effectiveness of ulipristal acetate and the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system at reducing the burden of heavy menstrual bleeding, irrespective of the presence of fibroids.MethodsThis randomised, open-label, parallel group phase III trial enrolled women over 18 years with heavy menstrual bleeding from 10 UK hospitals. Participants were centrally randomised, in a 1:1 ratio, to either three, 12-week treatment cycles of 5 mg ulipristal acetate daily, separated by 4-week treatment-free intervals, or a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. The primary outcome, analysed by intention-to-treat, was quality of life measured by the Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included menstrual bleeding and liver function. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 20426843.FindingsBetween June 5th, 2015 and February 26th, 2020, 236 women were randomised, either side of a recruitment suspension due to concerns of ulipristal acetate hepatoxicity. Subsequent withdrawal of ulipristal acetate led to early cessation of recruitment but the trial continued in follow-up. The primary outcome substantially improved in both groups, and was 89, (interquartile range [IQR] 65 to 100, n = 53) and 94, (IQR 70 to 100, n = 50; adjusted odds ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-1.17; p = 0.12) in the ulipristal and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system groups. Rates of amenorrhoea at 12 months were higher in those allocated ulipristal acetate compared to levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (64% versus 25%, adjusted odds ratio 7.12, 95% CI 2.29-22.2). Other outcomes were similar between the two groups and there were no cases of endometrial malignancy or hepatotoxicity due to ulipristal acetate use.InterpretationOur findings suggested that both treatments improved quality of life. Ulipristal was more effective at inducing amenorrhoea. Ulipristal has been demonstrated to be an effective medical therapeutic option but currently its use has restrictions and requires liver function monitoring.FundingUK Medical Research Council and National Institute of Health Research EME Programme (12/206/52).

Project description:IntroductionRecently, the rate of caesarean sections (CS) worldwide has risen and CS-associated complications such as niche have increased substantially. Until now, evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of niche-related symptoms remain absent. In patients with postmenstrual spotting, it has not been studied if the effect of levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system (LNG-IUS 52 mg) is superior to that of hysteroscopy. This study will answer the question of whether LNG-IUS 52 mg is more effective in improving postmenstrual spotting than hysteroscopic niche resection in women with niche-related spotting at 6 months after randomisation.Methods and analysisThis is a randomised controlled trial. A total of 208 women with postmenstrual spotting related to niche in the caesarean uterine scar of at least 2 mm and residual myometrium of at least 2.2 mm evaluated by MRI will be included. Women desiring to conceive within 1 year, with contraindications for LNG-IUS 52 mg or hysteroscopic surgery will be excluded. After informed consent is obtained, eligible women will be randomly allocated to LNG-IUS 52 mg or hysteroscopic niche resection at 1:1. The primary outcome is the efficacy in reducing postmenstrual spotting at 6 months after randomisation. The secondary outcomes include menstrual pattern, total days of blood loss per month, rate of amenorrhoea, side effects and complications.We will use a Visual Analogue Scale for chronic pelvic pain, urological symptoms and women's satisfaction (five-point Likert scale).Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the local medical ethics committee and by the Institutional Review Board of the International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Shanghai, China (No. GKLW 2019-08). Participants will sign a written informed consent before participation. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.Trial registration numberChiCTR1900025677.

Project description:BackgroundImmediate postpartum levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion is increasing in frequency in the United States, but few studies have investigated the effect of early placement on breast-feeding outcomes.ObjectiveThis study examined the effect of immediate vs delayed postpartum levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion on breast-feeding outcomes.Study designWe conducted this noninferiority randomized controlled trial at the University of Utah and the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Centers from February 2014 through March 2016. Eligible women were pregnant and planned to breast-feed, spoke English or Spanish, were aged 18-40 years, and desired a levonorgestrel intrauterine device. Enrolled women were randomized 1:1 to immediate postpartum insertion or delayed insertion at 4-12 weeks' postpartum. Prespecified exclusion criteria included delivery <37.0 weeks' gestational age, chorioamnionitis, postpartum hemorrhage, contraindications to levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion, and medical complications of pregnancy that could affect breast-feeding. We conducted per-protocol analysis as the primary approach, as it is considered the standard for noninferiority studies; we also report the alternative intent-to-treat analysis. We powered the study for the primary outcome, breast-feeding continuation at 8 weeks, to detect a 15% noninferiority margin between groups, requiring 132 participants in each arm. The secondary study outcome, time to lactogenesis, used a validated measure, and was analyzed by survival analysis and log rank test. We followed up participants for ongoing data collection for 6 months. Only the data analysis team was blinded to the intervention.ResultsWe met the enrollment target with 319 participants, but lost 34 prior to randomization and excluded an additional 26 for medical complications prior to delivery. The final analytic sample included 132 in the immediate group and 127 in the delayed group. Report of any breast-feeding at 8 weeks in the immediate group (79%; 95% confidence interval, 70-86%) was noninferior to that of the delayed group (84%; 95% confidence interval, 76-91%). The 5% difference in breast-feeding continuation at 8 weeks between the groups fell within the noninferiority margin (95% confidence interval, -5.6 to 15%). Time to lactogenesis (mean ± SD) in the immediate group, 65.3 ± 25.7 hours, was noninferior to that of the delayed group, 63.6 ± 21.6 hours. The mean difference between groups was 1.7 hours (95% confidence interval, -4.8 to 8.2 hours), noninferior by log-rank test. A total of 24 intrauterine device expulsions occurred in the immediate group compared to 2 in the delayed group (19% vs 2%, P < .001), consistent with the known higher expulsion rate with immediate vs delayed postpartum intrauterine device insertion. No intrauterine device perforations occurred in either group.ConclusionOur results of noninferior breast-feeding outcomes between women with immediate and delayed postpartum levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion suggest that immediate postpartum intrauterine device insertion is an acceptable option for women planning to breast-feed and use the levonorgestrel intrauterine device. Expulsion rates are higher with immediate postpartum levonorgestrel intrauterine device insertion compared to delayed insertion, but this disadvantage may be outweighed by the advantages of immediate initiation of contraception. Providers should offer immediate postpartum intrauterine device insertion to breast-feeding women planning to use the levonorgestrel intrauterine device.

Project description: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. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12905-022-01843-6.

Project description:BackgroundHeavy menstrual bleeding affects as many as one in three women and has negative physical, economic, and psychosocial impacts including activity limitations and reduced quality of life. The goal of treatment is to make menstruation manageable, and options include medical therapy or surgery such as endometrial ablation or hysterectomy. This review examined the evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) as a treatment alternative for idiopathic heavy menstrual bleeding.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the clinical and economic evidence comparing LNG-IUS with usual medical therapy, endometrial ablation, or hysterectomy. Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, and the Centres for Reviews and Dissemination were searched from inception to August 2015. The quality of the evidence was assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We also completed an economic evaluation to determine the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the LNG-IUS compared with endometrial ablation and with hysterectomy. The economic evaluation was conducted from the perspective the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.ResultsRelevant systematic reviews (n = 18) returned from the literature search were used to identify eligible randomized controlled trials, and 16 trials were included. The LNG-IUS improved quality of life and reduced menstrual blood loss better than usual medical therapy. There was no evidence of a significant difference in these outcomes compared with the improvements offered by endometrial ablation or hysterectomy. Mild hormonal side effects were the most commonly reported. The quality of the evidence varied from very low to moderate across outcomes. Results from the economic evaluation showed the LNG-IUS was less costly (incremental saving of $372 per person) and more effective providing higher quality-adjusted life years (incremental value of 0.05) compared with endometrial ablation. Similarly, the LNG-IUS costs less (incremental saving of $3,138 per person) and yields higher quality-adjusted life-years (incremental value of 0.04) compared with hysterectomy. Publicly funding LNG-IUS as an alternative to endometrial ablation and hysterectomy would result in annual cost savings of $3 million to $9 million and $0.1 million to $23 million, respectively, over the first 5 years.ConclusionsThe 52-mg LNG-IUS is an effective and cost-effective treatment option for idiopathic heavy menstrual bleeding. It improves quality of life and menstrual blood loss, and is well tolerated compared with endometrial ablation, hysterectomy, or usual medical therapies.

Dataset Information

Naproxen or estradiol for bleeding and spotting with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system: a randomized controlled trial.

Objective

Study design

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Naproxen or estradiol for bleeding and spotting with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system: a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets