Medical therapy versus radiofrequency endometrial ablation in the initial treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (iTOM Trial): A clinical and economic analysis
- PMID: 29141040
- PMCID: PMC5687740
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188176
Medical therapy versus radiofrequency endometrial ablation in the initial treatment of heavy menstrual bleeding (iTOM Trial): A clinical and economic analysis
Abstract
Background: Radiofrequency endometrial ablation (REA) is currently a second line treatment in women with heavy menstrual bleeding (MHB) if medical therapy (MTP) is contraindicated or unsatisfactory. Our objective is to compare the effectiveness and cost burden of MTP and REA in the initial treatment of HMB.
Methods: We performed a randomized trial at Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota. The planned sample size was 60 patients per arm. A total of 67 women with HMB were randomly allocated to receive oral contraceptive pills (Nordette ®) or Naproxen (Naprosyn®) (n = 33) or REA (n = 34). Primary 12-month outcome measures included menstrual blood loss using pictorial blood loss assessment chart (PBLAC), patients' satisfaction, and Menorrhagia Multi-Attribute Scale (MMAS). Secondary outcomes were total costs including direct medical and indirect costs associated with healthcare use, patient out-of-pocket costs, and lost work days and activity limitations over 12 months.
Results: Compared to MTP arm, women who received REA had a significantly lower PBLAC score (median [Interquartile range, IQR]: 0 [0-4] vs. 15 [0-131], p = 0.003), higher satisfaction rates (96.8%vs.63.2%, p = 0.003) and higher MMAS (median [IQR]: 100 [100-100] vs. 100 [87-100], p = 0.12) at 12 months. Direct medical costs were higher for REA ($5,331vs.$2,901, 95% confidence interval (CI) of mean difference:$727,$4,852), however, when indirect costs are included, the difference did not reach statistical significance ($5,469 vs. $3,869, 95% CI of mean difference:-$339, $4,089).
Conclusion: For women with heavy menstrual bleeding, initial radiofrequency endometrial ablation compared to medical therapy offered superior reduction in menstrual blood loss and improvement in quality of life without significant differences in total costs of care.
Clinical trial registration: NCT01165307.
Conflict of interest statement
Figures



Similar articles
-
Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Aug 29;8(8):CD000329. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 23;2:CD000329. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub4. PMID: 31463964 Free PMC article. Updated.
-
Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system versus endometrial ablation for heavy menstrual bleeding.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Feb;224(2):187.e1-187.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.016. Epub 2020 Aug 12. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021. PMID: 32795428 Clinical Trial.
-
A 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system vs bipolar radiofrequency nonresectoscopic endometrial ablation in women with heavy menstrual bleeding: long-term follow-up of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024 May;230(5):542.e1-542.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2024.01.016. Epub 2024 Jan 26. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024. PMID: 38280433 Clinical Trial.
-
Endometrial resection and ablation versus hysterectomy for heavy menstrual bleeding.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 23;2(2):CD000329. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000329.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021. PMID: 33619722 Free PMC article.
-
Radiofrequency endometrial ablation - new possibility of heavy menstrual bleeding conservative treatment.Ceska Gynekol. 2018 Winter;83(6):418-423. Ceska Gynekol. 2018. PMID: 30848146 English.
Cited by
-
First and second-generation endometrial ablation devices: A network meta-analysis.BMJ Open. 2024 May 28;14(5):e065966. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-065966. BMJ Open. 2024. PMID: 38806429 Free PMC article.
-
Menstrual problems in chronic immune thrombocytopenia: A monthly challenge - a cohort study and review.Br J Haematol. 2022 Aug;198(4):753-764. doi: 10.1111/bjh.18291. Epub 2022 Jun 3. Br J Haematol. 2022. PMID: 35662003 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Endometrial ablation; less is more? Historical cohort study comparing long-term outcomes from two time periods and two treatment modalities for 854 women.PLoS One. 2019 Jul 10;14(7):e0219294. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219294. eCollection 2019. PLoS One. 2019. PMID: 31291298 Free PMC article.
-
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for heavy menstrual bleeding.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Sep 19;9(9):CD000400. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000400.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31535715 Free PMC article.
-
Pictorial methods to assess heavy menstrual bleeding in research and clinical practice: a systematic literature review.BMC Womens Health. 2020 Feb 10;20(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s12905-020-0887-y. BMC Womens Health. 2020. PMID: 32041594 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Côté I, Jacobs P, Cumming D. Work loss associated with increased menstrual loss in the United States. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2002;100(4):683–7. - PubMed
-
- Côté I, Jacobs P, Cumming DC. Use of health services associated with increased menstrual loss in the United States. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 2003;188(2):343–8. - PubMed
-
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Endometrial ablation: ACOG practice bulletin no. 81. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:1233–48. - PubMed
-
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 110: noncontraceptive uses of hormonal contraceptives. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(1):206–18. - PubMed
-
- Cravello L, Agostini A, Beerli M, Roger V, Bretelle F, Blanc B. [Results of hysteroscopic myomectomy]. Gynecologie, obstetrique & fertilite. 2004;32(9):825–8. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical