首页> 外文期刊>Obstetrics and Gynecology: Journal of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists >Hysterectomy compared with endometrial ablation for dysfunctional uterine bleeding: a randomized controlled trial.
【24h】

Hysterectomy compared with endometrial ablation for dysfunctional uterine bleeding: a randomized controlled trial.

机译:子宫切除术与子宫内膜切除术治疗功能失调性子宫出血的比较:一项随机对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of hysterectomy and endometrial ablation in women with dysfunctional uterine bleeding. METHODS: The Surgical Treatments Outcomes Project for Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Eligible women were premenopausal with dysfunctional uterine bleeding and aged 18 years or older. Primary outcomes were problems that led the woman to seek care solved, bleeding, pain, and fatigue at 12 months. Additional outcomes included quality of life, adverse events, reoperation, and others at 24 months and up to 5 years. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 237 women between January 1998 and June 2001. Follow-up ended in June 2003. We completed 24 months of follow-up on 114 of 123 women assigned to endometrial ablation and 111 of 114 assigned to hysterectomy. Approximately 85% of women were aged younger than 45 years; 76.4% classified themselves as white, 18.6% as African American, less than 1% as Asian, 4.6% as American Indian, and 8.4% as Hispanic (classification within more than one category possible). Both endometrial ablation and hysterectomy were effective at 24 months in solving the problem that led women to seek care (84.9% compared with 94.4%), and in relieving bleeding, pain, fatigue, and other symptoms, although hysterectomy was more effective for bleeding. By 48 months, 32 of the 110 women initially receiving endometrial ablation required reoperation. Adverse events were more frequent with hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: Both endometrial ablation and hysterectomy are effective treatments in women with dysfunctional uterine bleeding. Hysterectomy (as the index surgery) was associated with more adverse events and a substantial number of patients receiving endometrial ablation had reoperation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00114088 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
机译:目的:比较子宫切除术和子宫内膜切除术对功能异常子宫出血妇女的有效性。方法:功能失调性子宫出血的手术治疗结果项目是一项多中心,随机对照试验。符合条件的妇女在绝经前患有子宫功能异常,年龄在18岁以上。主要结局是导致妇女在12个月内寻求解决的问题,出血,疼痛和疲劳的问题。其他结果包括生活质量,不良事件,再次手术以及其他在24个月至5年内的结果。结果:我们在1998年1月至2001年6月之间随机分配了237名妇女。随访于2003年6月结束。我们完成了对123例子宫内膜切除术中的114名妇女和114例子宫切除术中的111名妇女的24个月随访。大约85%的妇女年龄小于45岁;有76.4%的人将自己归为白人,非裔美国人为18.6%,亚裔为不到1%,美洲印第安人为4.6%,西班牙裔为8.4%(可能分类为多个类别)。子宫内膜切除术和子宫切除术均能在24个月内有效地解决导致女性寻求护理的问题(84.9%比94.4%),并且可缓解出血,疼痛,疲劳和其他症状,尽管子宫切除术对于出血更有效。到48个月时,最初接受子宫内膜切除术的110名妇女中有32名需要再次手术。子宫切除术的不良事件更为频繁。结论:子宫内膜切除术和子宫切除术都是治疗功能异常子宫出血妇女的有效方法。子宫切除术(作为索引手术)与更多的不良事件相关,并且大量接受子宫内膜切除术的患者再次手术。临床试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov,www.clinicaltrials.gov,NCT00114088证据级别:I.

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号