Dataset Information

Comparing levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus hysteroscopic resection in patients with postmenstrual spotting related to a niche in the caesarean scar (MIHYS NICHE trial): protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Recently, 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 analysis

This 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 dissemination

The 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 number

ChiCTR1900025677.

SUBMITTER: He C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8407223 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCaesarean scar pregnancy (CSP) is a type of ectopic pregnancy where the fertilised egg is implanted in the muscle or fibrous tissue of the scar after a previous caesarean section. Management options for women who opted for termination of CSP include sharp curettage, dilation and evacuation (D&E), excision of trophoblastic tissues, local or systemic administration of methotrexate, bilateral hypogastric artery ligation, and selective uterine artery embolisation with curettage and/or methotrexate administration. Recently hysteroscopic resection has also been proposed as an alternative option.ObjectiveTo compare the surgical outcome of hysteroscopic resection with dilation and evacuation (D&E) for the treatment of caesarean scar pregnancy (CSP).MethodsParallel-group, non-blinded, randomised clinical trial conducted at a single centre in Italy. Eligible women are those with singleton gestations at less than 9 weeks of gestation, and with thickness of myometrial layer ≥1 mm at the level of the ectopic. Inclusion criteria are women with CSP with positive embryonic/fetal heart activity who opted for termination of pregnancy. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to receive either hysteroscopic resection (i.e. intervention group) or D&E (i.e. control group). In both groups, 50 mg/m2 (based on DuBois formula for body surface area) of methotrexate (MTX) will be injected intramuscularly at the time of randomisation (day 1) and another dose at day 3. A third dose of MTX is planned in case of persistence of fetal heart activity on day 5. Participants will receive either D&E or hysteroscopic resection from 3 to 7 days after the last dose of MTX. A sample size of 54 women is planned.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome is the success rate of the treatment protocol, defined as no requirement for further treatment until complete resolution of the CSP as demonstrated by negative beta hCG levels and absence of residual gestational material on ultrasound examination..Study hypothesisHysteroscopic surgery is superior to D&E for the treatment of CSP.What is new?The results of the trial will provide information on the best treatment for CSP.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of double-layer compared with single-layer uterine closure after a first caesarean section (CS) from a societal and healthcare perspective.DesignEconomic evaluation alongside a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.Setting32 hospitals in the Netherlands, 2016-2018.Participants2292 women ≥18 years undergoing a first CS were randomly assigned (1:1). Exclusion criteria were: inability for counselling, previous uterine surgery, known menstrual disorder, placenta increta or percreta, pregnant with three or more fetuses. 1144 women were assigned to single-layer and 1148 to double-layer closure. We included 1620 women with a menstrual cycle in the main analysis.InterventionsSingle-layer unlocked uterine closure and double-layer unlocked uterine closure with the second layer imbricating the first.Main outcome measuresSpotting days, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and societal costs at 9 months of follow-up. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation.ResultsNo significant differences were found between single-layer versus double-layer closure in mean spotting days (1.44 and 1.39 days; mean difference (md) -0.056, 95% CI -0.374 to 0.263), QALYs (0.663 and 0.658; md -0.005, 95% CI -0.015 to 0.005), total healthcare costs (€744 and €727; md €-17, 95% CI -273 to 143), and total societal costs (€5689 and €5927; md €238, 95% CI -624 to 1108). The probability of the intervention being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay of €0, €10 000 and €20 000/QALY gained was 0.30, 0.27 and 0.25, respectively, (societal perspective), and 0.55, 0.41 and 0.32, respectively, (healthcare perspective).ConclusionDouble-layer uterine closure is not cost-effective compared with single-layer uterine closure from both perspectives. If this is confirmed by our long-term reproductive follow-up, we suggest to adjust uterine closure technique guidelines.Trial registration numberNTR5480/NL5380.

Project description:IntroductionA uterine niche is a defect at the site of the uterine caesarean scar that is associated with gynaecological symptoms and infertility. Promising results are reported in cohort studies after a laparoscopic niche resection concerning reduction of gynaecological symptoms in relation to baseline and concerning pregnancy outcomes. However, randomised controlled trials to study the effect of a laparoscopic niche resection on reproductive outcomes in infertile women are lacking. This study will answer the question if laparoscopic niche resection in comparison to expectant management improves reproductive outcomes in infertile women with a large uterine niche.Methods and analysisThe LAPRES study is a randomised, non-blinded, controlled trial, including 200 infertile women with a total follow-up of 2 years. Women with the presence of a large niche in the uterine caesarean scar and unexplained infertility of at least 1 year or failed IVF will be randomly allocated to a laparoscopic niche resection within 6 weeks or to expectant management for at least 9 months. A large niche is defined as a niche with a depth of >50% of the myometrial thickness and a residual myometrium of ≤3 mm on transvaginal ultrasound. Those receiving expectant management will be allowed to receive fertility therapies, including assisted reproductive techniques, if indicated. The primary outcome is time to ongoing pregnancy, defined as a viable intrauterine pregnancy at 12 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcome measures are time to conception leading to a live birth, other pregnancy outcomes, received fertility therapies after randomisation, menstruation characteristics, patient satisfaction, quality of life, additional interventions, and surgical and ultrasound outcomes (intervention group). Questionnaires will be filled out at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months after randomisation. Ultrasound evaluation will be performed at baseline and at 3 months after surgery.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol was approved by the medical ethics committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Centre. (Ref. No. 2017.030). 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 NUMBER DUTCH TRIAL REGISTER REF NO NL6350 : http://www.trialregister.nl.

Project description:The electrothermal effect of hysteroscopic bipolar electrosurgical resection may cause damage to the endometrium, leading to intrauterine adhesion (IUA). Although some studies have demonstrated the efficacy and feasibility of auto-cross-linked hyaluronic (ACP) gel in preventing IUAs, controversy over its use continues. In this randomized controlled multi-center 2-arm parallel trial, we aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of ACP gel in preventing IUA after hysteroscopic electrosurgical resection and facilitate pregnancy in patients. Patients from 4 centers in China were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an intrauterine infusion of ACP gel or nothing after hysteroscopic electrosurgical resection. The randomization assignment was generated by computer and kept in a sealed envelope. A second-look hysteroscopy was performed within 3 months of the surgery. From June 2018 to May 2021, 200 patients were recruited. Ultimately, 82 patients in both groups were included in the result analysis. The baseline characteristics were comparable. The outcomes were assessed by using per-protocol analysis. The incidence of IUA in the ACP gel group was lower than that in the control group [3.66% vs. 10.98%, risk ratio (RR) =0.333, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.094-1.187, P=0.072], and the planned pregnancy rate was higher than that of the control group (60.98% vs. 40.54%, RR =1.504, 95% CI: 0.949-2.384, P=0.071), but the difference was not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in menstruation change. Menstrual volume remained unchanged in most cases (86.59% in ACP gel group vs. 89.02% in the control group, RR =0.877, 95% CI: 0.877-1.109, P=0.815). Menstrual volume decreased in 10 women in the ACP gel group and 8 in the control group (12.20% vs. 9.76%, RR =1.250, 95% CI: 0.520-3.007, P=0.617). No adverse effects were observed after the ACP administration. The present study showed that the use of ACP gel appeared to reduce both the tendency of IUA and American Fertility Society (AFS) scores and improve the subsequent pregnancy rate during hysteroscopic electrosurgical resection when treating polyps, fibroids, and uterine septum. ACP might be recommended to prevent IUA after such surgery. Further studies should be conducted with larger numbers of participants. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2100047165.