Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess efficacy of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) for treatment of complex atypical hyperplasia or low-grade endometrial cancer. METHODS:This retrospective case series included all patients treated with the LNG-IUD for complex atypical hyperplasia or early-grade endometrial cancer from January 2003 to June 2013. Response rates were calculated and the association of response with clinicopathologic factors, including age, body mass index, and uterine size, was determined. RESULTS:Forty-six patients diagnosed with complex atypical hyperplasia or early-grade endometrial cancer were treated with the LNG-IUD. Of 32 evaluable patients at the 6-month time point, 15 had complex atypical hyperplasia (47%), nine had G1 endometrial cancer (28%), and eight had grade 2 endometrial cancer (25%). Overall response rate was 75% (95% CI 57-89) at 6 months; 80% (95% CI 52-96) in complex atypical hyperplasia, 67% (95% CI 30-93) in grade 1 endometrial cancer, and 75% (CI 35-97) in grade 2 endometrial cancer. Of the clinicopathologic features evaluated, there was a trend toward the association of lack of exogenous progesterone effect in the pathology specimen with nonresponse to the IUD (P=.05). Median uterine diameter was 1.3 cm larger in women who did not respond to the IUD (P=.04). CONCLUSION:Levonorgestrel-releasing IUD therapy for the conservative treatment of complex atypical hyperplasia or early-grade endometrial cancer resulted in return to normal histology in a majority of patients.
Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate relapse rates after the successful treatment of patients with non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia who were randomised to either a levonorgestrel-impregnated intrauterine system (LNG-IUS; Mirena(®) ) or two regimens of oral medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) after primary histological response.DesignA multicentre randomised trial.SettingTen different outpatient clinics localised in hospitals and seven gynaecological private practices in Norway.PopulationOne hundred and fifty-three women aged 30-70 years with low- or medium-risk endometrial hyperplasia met the inclusion criteria, and 153 completed the therapy.MethodsPatients were randomly assigned to one of the following three treatment arms: LNG-IUS; 10 mg of oral MPA administered for 10 days per cycle for 6 months; or 10 mg of oral MPA administered daily for 6 months. The women were followed for 24 months after ending therapy.Main outcome measuresHistological relapse of endometrial hyperplasia.ResultsHistological relapse was observed in 55/135 (41%) women who had an initial complete treatment response. The relapse rates were similar in the three therapy groups (P = 0.66). In the multivariable analyses relapse was dependent on menopausal status (P = 0.0005) and estrogen level (P = 0.0007).ConclusionsThe risk of histological relapse of non-atypical endometrial hyperplasia is high within 24 months of ceasing therapy with either the LNG-IUS or oral MPA. Continued endometrial surveillance and prolonging progestogen therapy should be considered.Tweetable abstractRelapse of endometrial hyperplasia after successful treatment is independent of therapy regime.
Project description:ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating the oncological and fertility outcomes of early-stage endometrial cancer (EC) treated with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LIUS)-based regimens.MethodsThe Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement for meta-analyses was followed. Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Preprints, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1990 to August 4, 2022. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used for quality assessment. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate and the secondary endpoints were relapse, pregnancy, and live birth rate.ResultsA total of 25 studies (821 women) were included. The CR rate of LIUS-based regimens was 63.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]=52.3%-73.2%), with 29.6% (95% CI=23.3%-36.8%) of cases experiencing recurrence during follow-up. In sensitivity analyses, patients younger than 45 years of age with a body mass index <30 kg/m² who were treated with LIUS-based regimens achieved a high CR rate of 84.6% (95% CI=80.3%-88.1%) over a median follow-up of more than 24 months. Overall pregnancy and live birth rates were 37.9% (95% CI=24.1%-53.9%) and 39.3% (95% CI=24.0%-57.0%), respectively. No statistical differences were apparent in CR or relapse rates among the LIUS+GnRH agonist, LIUS+oral progesterone, or hysteroscopic resection followed by LIUS subgroups.ConclusionLIUS-based therapies are viable for the conservative management of early-stage endometrioid EC on CR and fertility outcome.Trial registrationPROSPERO Identifier: CRD42022352890.
Project description:The purpose of this study was to investigate if the levonorgestrel-impregnated intrauterine device (LNG-IUS, Mirena(®) ) is safe and effective as therapy for low-risk and medium-risk endometrial hyperplasia compared with oral medroxyprogesterone (MPA).A multicentre randomised trial.Norway.In all, 170 women aged 30-70 years with low- or medium-risk endometrial hyperplasia who met inclusion criteria.Patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment arms: LNG-IUS; oral MPA 10 mg administered for 10 days per cycle, or continuous oral MPA 10 mg daily, for 6 months.The primary outcome measure was normalisation or persisting hyperplasia.After 6 months all three treatment regimens showed significant effect when the outcome was evaluated as therapy response or not (P < 0.001). Responses were obtained for all the women in the LNG-IUS group (53/53, 95% CI 0.93-1.0) and for 96% of the women in the continuous oral group (46/48, 95% CI 0.86-0.99). Only 69% of the women in the cyclic oral group were responders (36/52, 95% CI 0.55-0.81). Adverse effects were relatively common with minimal differences between therapy groups.In the first trial of its kind, women treated with the LNG-IUS showed histologically normal endometrium after 6 months of therapy for endometrial hyperplasia. Cyclical progestogens are found to be less effective compared with continuous oral therapy and LNG-IUS and should not be used for this purpose.
Project description:BackgroundThough hysterectomy remains the standard treatment for complex atypical hyperplasia, patients who desire fertility or who are poor surgical candidates may opt for progestin therapy. However, the effectiveness of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device compared to systemic therapy in the treatment of complex atypical hyperplasia has not been well studied.ObjectiveWe sought to examine differences in treatment response between local progestin therapy with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and systemic progestin therapy in women with complex atypical hyperplasia.MethodsThis single-institution retrospective study examined women with complex atypical hyperplasia who received progestin therapy between 2003 and 2018. Treatment response was assessed by histopathology on subsequent biopsies. Time-dependent analyses of complete response and progression to cancer were performed comparing the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device and systemic therapy. A propensity score inverse probability of treatment weighting model was used to create a weighted cohort that differed based on treatment type but was similar with respect to other characteristics. An interaction-term analysis was performed to examine the impact of body habitus on treatment response, and an interrupted time-series analysis was employed to assess if changes in treatment patterns correlated with outcomes over time.ResultsA total of 245 women with complex atypical hyperplasia received progestin therapy (levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device n = 69 and systemic therapy n = 176). The mean age and body mass index were 36.9 years and 40.0 kg/m2, respectively. In the patient-level analysis, women who received the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device had higher rates of complete response (78.7% vs 46.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 3.32; 95% confidence interval, 2.39-4.62) and a lower likelihood of progression to cancer (4.5% vs 15.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.73) compared to those who received systemic therapy. In particular, women with class III obesity derived a higher relative benefit from levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device therapy in achieving complete response compared to systemic therapy: class III obesity, adjusted hazard ratio 4.72, 95% confidence interval 2.83-7.89; class I-II obesity, adjusted hazard ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.09-3.09; and nonobese, adjusted hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.40-3.95. In the cohort-level analysis, the obesity rate increased during the study period (77.8% to 88.2%, 13.4% relative increase, P = .033) and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use significantly increased after 2007 (6.3% to 82.7%, 13.2-fold increase, P < .001), both concomitant with a higher proportion of women achieving complete response (32.9% to 81.4%, 2.5-fold increase, P = .005).ConclusionOur study suggests that local therapy with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device may be more effective than systemic therapy for women with complex atypical hyperplasia who opt for nonsurgical treatment, particularly in morbidly obese women. Shifts in treatment paradigm during the study period toward increased levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device use also led to improved complete response rates despite increasing rates of obesity.
Project description:The aim of this review was to summarize the available evidence about the use of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) as a contraceptive method in nulliparous women. For this purpose, studies evaluating the efficacy, safety, bleeding pattern, satisfaction and discontinuation of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in nulliparous women were analyzed. Only original research articles published in English between 1990-27th March 2020 were considered eligible. Reviews, book chapters, case studies, conference papers, opinions, editorials and letters were excluded. The systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase and Cochrane Library databases identified 816 articles, 23 of which were analyzed. The available evidence indicates that LNG-IUS is an effective and safe contraceptive method for nulliparous women that achieves high levels of satisfaction among patients. Moreover, nulliparous women seem to experience fewer expulsions than parous ones. Bleeding pattern is acceptable for the majority of patients, and bleeding disorders mainly occur in the first months after the insertion. More in-depth, long-term prospective studies are needed in this patient group to determine risk factors for the occurrence of side effects and associated discontinuations, which should not, however, delay the wider use of the method in this group, given the number of advantages.
Project description:ObjectiveTo simulate hysteroscopic suturing in vitro and analyze the learning curve of gynecologists with different experience levels.MethodsThree gynecologists were trained on uterine models in a circulating water box. The posterior uterine wall was sutured 10 times under hysteroscopy for 5 consecutive days, and the time of each suture procedure was recorded.ResultsDoctors A, B, and C completed 50 posterior uterine sutures. After Dr. C completed 50 sutures on the posterior wall, he added 50 sutures on the anterior wall (Group D). The mean suturing time was 71.54 ± 68.158 s in Group A, 50.10 ± 28.060 s in Group B, 34.04 ± 10.457 s in Group C, and 30.38 ± 8.734 s in Group D. The difference between Groups C and B and between Groups B and A was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference between Groups C and D. Simulation curves were created using the number of features as the abscissa and cumulative sum as the coordinate, with peak curves of 19, 27, and 18 cases for Group A, B, and C, respectively.ConclusionDoctors with experience in single-hole laparoscopic surgery or hysteroscopic suture surgery can significantly shorten the hysteroscopic suturing time.
Project description:BackgroundEndometrial adenocarcinoma (EC) is the fifth most common cancer in women worldwide, standard treatment for EC includes hysterectomy, but it results in the loss of reproductive function. Thus, conservative treatment for these patients is strongly demanded, progestin therapy is widely accepted as the main fertility-sparing treatment for young women with endometrial hyperplasia with atypia (EHA) and well-differentiated endometrioid endometrial cancer. This trial will investigate the effectiveness of conservative treatment for obese women with early-stage EC.Method and designThis will be an open-label, 2-armed, randomized, phase-II single-center trial of LNG-IUD plus metformin or megestrol acetate (MA) plus metformin. A total of 88 participants will be randomly assigned into 2 treatment arms in a 1:1 ratio. Clinical, laboratory, ultrasound and radiology data, will be collected at baseline, and then at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months. EC biomarkers will be collected at baseline. The primary aim is to determine the efficacy of a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device (LNG-IUD) plus metformin, or megestrol acetate (MA) plus metformin in achieving pathological complete response (pCR) at 12 months, as well as post-treatment pregnancy outcomes and recurrence rate. The secondary aims are to predict the response to an LNG-IUD plus metformin and MA plus metformin via clinical, blood, and tissue predictive biomarkers.ConclusionsProspective evidence for conservative treatment of EC is limited. New methods to achieve better CR rates with fewer side effects are needed. This trial will investigate the effectiveness of LNG-IUD plus metformin, and MA plus metformin, in obese women with early-stage EC, providing a non-surgical treatment option for these patients. Trial registration ChiCTR2200055624. The trial was registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn/listbycreater.aspx on January 15, 2022.
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the relative effectiveness of hysterectomy, endometrial destruction (both "first generation" hysteroscopic and "second generation" non-hysteroscopic techniques), and the levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (Mirena) in the treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding.DesignMeta-analysis of data from individual patients, with direct and indirect comparisons made on the primary outcome measure of patients' dissatisfaction.Data sourcesData were sought from the 30 randomised controlled trials identified after a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases, reference lists, and contact with experts. Raw data were available from 2814 women randomised into 17 trials (seven trials including 1359 women for first v second generation endometrial destruction; six trials including 1042 women for hysterectomy v first generation endometrial destruction; one trial including 236 women for hysterectomy v Mirena; three trials including 177 women for second generation endometrial destruction v Mirena). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials comparing hysterectomy, first and second generation endometrial destruction, and Mirena for women with heavy menstrual bleeding unresponsive to other medical treatment.ResultsAt around 12 months, more women were dissatisfied with outcome with first generation hysteroscopic techniques than with hysterectomy (13% v 5%; odds ratio 2.46, 95% confidence interval 1.54 to 3.9, P<0.001), but hospital stay (weighted mean difference 3.0 days, 2.9 to 3.1 days, P<0.001) and time to resumption of normal activities (5.2 days, 4.7 to 5.7 days, P<0.001) were longer for hysterectomy. Unsatisfactory outcomes were comparable with first and second generation techniques (odds ratio 1.2, 0.9 to 1.6, P=0.2), although second generation techniques were quicker (weighted mean difference 14.5 minutes, 13.7 to 15.3 minutes, P<0.001) and women recovered sooner (0.48 days, 0.20 to 0.75 days, P<0.001), with fewer procedural complications. Indirect comparison suggested more unsatisfactory outcomes with second generation techniques than with hysterectomy (11% v 5%; odds ratio 2.3, 1.3 to 4.2, P=0.006). Similar estimates were seen when Mirena was indirectly compared with hysterectomy (17% v 5%; odds ratio 2.2, 0.9 to 5.3, P=0.07), although this comparison lacked power because of the limited amount of data available for analysis.ConclusionsMore women are dissatisfied after endometrial destruction than after hysterectomy. Dissatisfaction rates are low after all treatments, and hysterectomy is associated with increased length of stay in hospital and a longer recovery period. Definitive evidence on effectiveness of Mirena compared with more invasive procedures is lacking.