Hysteroscopic Endometrial Resection Versus Laparoscopic Supracervical Hysterectomy for Abnormal Uterine Bleeding: Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Trial

Study objective: To compare long-term efficacy of laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy (LSH) and hysteroscopic endometrial ablation (HEA) in treating persistent abnormal uterine bleeding.

Design: Canadian Task Force II-2.

Setting: University hospital.

Patients: One hundred fifty-three women treated for abnormal uterine bleeding by LSH or HEA.

Intervention: Long-term follow-up assessment of reintervention rate and quality of life (QoL) using the Quality Metric's Health Survey Short Form 12.

Measurement and main results: This study is the long-term follow-up of a randomized control trial conducted in 2003 comparing LSH and HEA in terms of reoperation rate and QoL. Starting from November 2010 all patients included in the first trial were invited to participate in this study and clinically evaluated through vaginal examination and transvaginal ultrasound. After a mean follow-up of 14.4 years, 29% of patients (20/71) treated with HEA underwent further surgery, whereas no patients after LSH had symptom recurrence. The reintervention rate was significantly higher in the HEA group (p < .0001), with a relative risk of 1.39 (95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.61). The assessment of QoL demonstrated a higher score, in both physical and mental components, in the LSH group (p < .0001).

Conclusion: The lower reintervention rate and the better physical and mental health scores make LSH a more suitable procedure to treat recurrent abnormal uterine bleeding when compared with HEA.