|
|||||
|
|
Endometrial ablation by rollerball electrocoagulation compared to uterine balloon thermal ablation. Technical and safety aspects |
|
| Authors: | van Zon-Rabelink Ingrid A A Vleugels Michel P H Merkus Hans M W M de Graaf Ruurd |
| Institution: | a Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical Spectrum Twente, P.O. Box 50 000, 7500 KA, Enschede, The Netherlands b Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Riverland Hospital, Tiel, The Netherlands c Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Medical Centre St. Radboud, Nijmegen, The Netherlands d Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Medical Centre St. Radboud, Nijmegen, The Netherlands |
| Abstract: | 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. |
| Keywords: | Endometrial ablation Rollerball electrocoagulation Thermachoice™ Safety |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect PubMed 等数据库收录！ | |