Supracervical hysterectomy versus endometrial ablation
A laparoscopic technique for treating heavy menstrual bleeding is more effective and just as safe as a non-invasive alternative.
This is the main conclusion of a UK study, results were published in the Lancet.
600 women participated in the study.
Those who had a laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy, removing part of the uterus, were more satisfied than a group that had endometrial ablation. And they were less likely to have pelvic pain and pain during sex, BBC reported.
laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy offered a more effective option
The two most common surgical treatments for heavy menstrual bleeding are endometrial ablation, where the endometrium is thermally destroyed but the uterus is preserved, and hysterectomy, where the uterus is removed.
The new study showed laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy offered a more effective option than endometrial ablation, without any increased risks, writes in Lancet prof Kevin Cooper, consultant gynecologist and study author from the University of Aberdeen.
A similar level of complications
Fifteen months after surgery, there was a similar level of complications in both groups.
And the women who had the modified hysterectomy technique did tend to have longer hospital stays and a slower return to work.
Most women having this procedure get home within 24 hours and there are no restrictive rules for recovery, unlike traditional hysterectomy", Prof Cooper said.