Endometrial ablation by rollerball electrocoagulation compared to uterine balloon thermal ablation: Technical and safety aspects
Objective: To compare two methods of endometrial ablation, hysteroscopic rollerball electrocoagulation (RBE) and non-hysteroscopic uterine balloon thermal (UBT) ablation (Thermachoice™), regarding intra- and post-operative technical complications and safety aspects. Study design: A randomised contro...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology 2003-10, Vol.110 (2), p.220-223 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective: To compare two methods of endometrial ablation, hysteroscopic rollerball electrocoagulation (RBE) and non-hysteroscopic uterine balloon thermal (UBT) ablation (Thermachoice™), regarding intra- and post-operative technical complications and safety aspects.
Study design: A randomised controlled study in a teaching hospital, 139 pre-menopausal women with dysfunctional uterine bleeding proved by a validated menstrual score list were enclosed. Endometrial ablation by a hysteroscopic or non-hysteroscopic method was performed.
Results: Rollerball electrocoagulation carries a significantly higher risk of intra-operative complications compared to uterine balloon thermal ablation and is a significantly more time consuming procedure. Post-operative complication rates in both groups were low, but post-operative analgesics were prescribed significantly more in the uterine balloon group.
Conclusion: Endometrial ablation by uterine balloon thermal ablation (Thermachoice™) is a safe and simple non-hysteroscopic procedure. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0301-2115 1872-7654 |
DOI: | 10.1016/S0301-2115(03)00160-X |