Dataset Information

Estimation of menstrual blood loss volume based on menstrual diary and laboratory data.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Abnormal uterine bleeding is often investigated in clinical studies and critical to identify during gynecological consultation. The current standard for quantification of menstrual blood loss is the alkaline-hematin-method. However, this method is expensive and inconvenient for patients. Bleeding diaries, although widely used, provide only qualitative information on menstrual blood loss. Other methods have been developed, but still do not provide reliable quantitative data. METHODS: We estimated blood loss volume using data from two clinical studies in women suffering abnormal menstrual bleeding. These estimations were derived from mixed linear models based on diary data, hematological parameters and age. To validate the models, we applied our results to data from a third study with a similar patient population. RESULTS: The resulting best fitting model uses diary entries on bleeding intensity at a particular day, information on occurrence and frequency of single bleeding intensities in defined time windows, hemoglobin and ferritin values and age of the patient all as predictors of menstrual blood loss volume. Sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of excessive bleeding were 87% and 70%, respectively. Our model-based estimates reflect the subjective assessment by physicians and patients in the same way as the measured values do.When applying the model to an independent study, we found a correlation of 0.73 between estimated and measured values for the blood loss in a single day. Further models with reduced number of parameters (simplified for easier practical use) still showed correlation values between 0.69 and 0.73. CONCLUSIONS: We present a method for estimating menstrual blood loss volume in women suffering from prolonged or excessive menstrual bleeding. Our statistical model includes entries from bleeding diaries, laboratory parameters and age and produces results which correlate well with data derived by the alkaline-hematin-method. Therefore, this model may be used to estimate menstrual blood loss volume in both routine gynecological counseling and clinical studies.

SUBMITTER: Schumacher U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3554478 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Estimation of menstrual blood loss volume based on menstrual diary and laboratory data.

Schumacher Ulrike U Schumacher Jens J Mellinger Uwe U Gerlinger Christoph C Wienke Andreas A Endrikat Jan J

BMC women's health 20120820

<h4>Background</h4>Abnormal uterine bleeding is often investigated in clinical studies and critical to identify during gynecological consultation. The current standard for quantification of menstrual blood loss is the alkaline-hematin-method. However, this method is expensive and inconvenient for patients. Bleeding diaries, although widely used, provide only qualitative information on menstrual blood loss. Other methods have been developed, but still do not provide reliable quantitative data.<h4 ...[more]

PMID: 22906181

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Since the publication over 50 years ago of the alkaline hematin method for quantifying menstrual blood loss (MBL) many new approaches have been developed to assess MBL. The aim of this systematic review is to determine for methods of measuring MBL: ability to distinguish between normal and heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB); practicalities and limitations in the research setting; and suitability for diagnosing HMB in routine clinical practice. METHODS:Embase®™, MEDLINE®, and ClinicalTrials.gov were screened for studies on the development/validation of MBL assessment methods in women with self-perceived HMB, actual HMB or uterine fibroids, or patients undergoing treatment for HMB. Studies using simulated menstrual fluid and those that included women with normal MBL as controls were also eligible for inclusion. Extracted data included study population, results of validation, and advantages/disadvantages of the technique. RESULTS:Seventy-one studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The sensitivity and/or specificity of diagnosing HMB were calculated in 16 studies of methods involving self-perception of MBL (11 pictorial), and in one analysis of the menstrual-fluid-loss (MFL) method; in 13 of these studies the comparator was the gold standard alkaline hematin technique. Sensitivity and specificity values by method were, respectively: MFL model, 89, 98%; pictorial blood loss assessment chart (PBAC), 58-99%, 7.5-89%; menstrual pictogram, 82-96%, 88-94%; models/questionnaires, 59-87%, 62-86%, and complaint of HMB, 74, 74%. The power of methods to identify HMB was also assessed using other analyses such as comparison of average measurements: statistical significance was reported for the PBAC, MFL, subjective complaint, and six questionnaires. In addition, PBAC scores, menstrual pictogram volumes, MFL, pad/tampon count, iron loss, and output from three questionnaires correlated significantly with values from a reference method in at least one study. In general, pictorial methods have been more comprehensively validated than questionnaires and models. CONCLUSIONS:Every method to assess MBL has limitations. Pictorial methods strike a good balance between ease of use and validated accuracy of MBL determination, and could complement assessment of HMB using quality of life (QoL) in the clinical and research setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PRISMA registration number: CRD42016032956 .

Project description:Menstruation is the expulsion of the endometrial lining of the uterus following a nearly month long preparation for embryo implantation and pregnancy. Increasingly, the health of the endometrium is being recognized as a critical factor in female fertility, and proteomes and transcriptomes from endometrial biopsies at different stages of the menstrual cycle have been studied for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes (1 Kao, L. C., et al. 2003 Endocrinology 144, 2870-2881; Strowitzki, Tet al. 2006 Hum. Reprod. Update 12, 617-630; DeSouza, L., et al. 2005 Proteomics 5, 270-281). Disorders of the uterus ranging from benign to malignant tumors, as well as endometriosis, can cause abnormal menstrual bleeding and are frequently diagnosed through endometrial biopsy (Strowitzki, Tet al. 2006 Hum. Reprod. Update 12, 617-630; Ferenczy, A. 2003 Maturitas 45, 1-14). Yet the proteome of menstrual blood, an easily available noninvasive source of endometrial tissue, has yet to be examined for possible causes or diagnoses of infertility or endometrial pathology. This study employed five different methods to define the menstrual blood proteome. A total of 1061 proteins were identified, 361 were found by at least two methods and 678 were identified by at least two peptides. When the menstrual blood proteome was compared with those of circulating blood (1774 proteins) and vaginal fluid (823 proteins), 385 proteins were found unique to menstrual blood. Gene ontology analysis and evaluation of these specific menstrual blood proteins identified pathways consistent with the processes of the normal endometrial cycle. Several of the proteins unique to menstrual blood suggest that extramedullary uterine hematopoiesis or parenchymal hemoglobin synthesis may be occurring in late endometrial tissue. The establishment of a normal menstrual blood proteome is necessary for the evaluation of its usefulness as a diagnostic tool for infertility and uterine pathologies. Identification of unique menstrual blood proteins should aid the forensic community in distinguishing menstrual blood from circulating blood.

Dataset Information

Estimation of menstrual blood loss volume based on menstrual diary and laboratory data.

Publications

Estimation of menstrual blood loss volume based on menstrual diary and laboratory data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets